Samsung 990 EVO vs 990 EVO Plus: What is the Difference?

Samsung’s EVO and EVO Plus SSD series are designed to strike the optimal balance between price and performance. Some popular SSDs from these categories include the Samsung 970 EVO Plus, 870 EVO, and 970 EVO. The 990 EVO was launched in January 2024, while the 990 EVO Plus was launched in September 2024. Now, in this series, Samsung has removed the DRAM from both drives. A faster cache is employed to compensate for the slow write speed, thereby keeping prices low.

Another new feature is that these drives come with two interfaces: PCIe Gen 5.0 x2 and PCIe Gen 4.0 x4. The bandwidth remains the same, but this dual interface enables wider compatibility with various motherboard ports.

The 990 EVO is available in just two capacities: 1TB and 2TB, while the 990 EVO Plus also comes in a 4TB variant. Regarding NAND flash, the 990 EVO features the updated V6 V-NAND, known as V6 Prime. However, the 990 EVO Plus has the very popular V8 V-NAND.

The same controller (Piccolo S4LY022) with the same configurations is used in both, with HMB (Host Memory Buffer) support. Most other features are the same except for the performance. Also, there are some price differences. Let’s compare both and see which one suits you best.

Note: Most DRAM-Less SSDs (including 990 EVO and 990 EVO Plus) with NVMe 1.3 or later use HMB for critical tasks, such as handling the Flash Translation Layer. In this, an SSD is allowed access to the system RAM through DMA (Direct Memory Access). Modern HMB SSDs have become so effective that you can hardly tell any difference between a DRAM and DRAM-Less SSD in the real world.

Theoretical Specifications

As we discussed above, most of the features and specifications of both SSDs are the same, except for the NAND flash and performance. The V8 V-NAND is much faster and denser compared to the 990 EVO’s V6 V-NAND. The raw speed of the V8 is almost double that of the V6. The same controller, i.e., Samsung Piccolo, is used in both.

Now, the difference in the random performance numbers is enormous, while the sequential numbers are also pretty good in the 990 EVO Plus.

Benchmark Scores Comparison

All the benchmarks are of the 2TB variants of both drives.

PCMark 10 Full Storage Benchmark

PCMark 10 is a widely used trace-based performance benchmark for storage devices. It simulates real-world scenarios to check a drive’s performance in the day-to-day tasks. There are two types of tests, i.e., quick and full storage benchmark. We are comparing the full drive benchmark results, which run a wide range of tasks and tests on the drive as the primary OS drive.

The Samsung 990 EVO Plus clearly outperforms the standard 990 EVO across all metrics in the PCMark 10 Full Drive Benchmark. The overall score jumps from 4,016 to 4,514, indicating noticeably better real-world system performance and responsiveness. Bandwidth also improves from 646 MB/s to 719 MB/s, reflecting faster data transfer capabilities that can make a tangible difference in heavy workloads, such as large file handling or content creation. Latency drops from 42 to 37, meaning the Plus model responds more quickly to requests. This can be helpful in both gaming and productivity tasks. In short, the 990 EVO Plus is going to perform better in the day-to-day productivity, gaming, and creative tasks.

3DMark Storage Test for Gamers

This test focuses on evaluating the drive’s performance in various gaming scenarios. This includes loading, installing, saving, streaming, and recording games.

The 3DMark storage benchmark further highlights the performance gap between the two drives. The 990 EVO Plus outperforms the standard 990 EVO with a score of 4,753, demonstrating a notable improvement in storage performance. Bandwidth increases from 756 MB/s to 818 MB/s, resulting in faster read/write operations. Latency drops slightly from 40 µs to 38 µs, meaning the Plus model can access data more quickly, shaving precious milliseconds off load times. Overall, while both drives perform well, the 990 EVO Plus consistently delivers faster, more responsive storage, reinforcing its position as the higher-performance option.

Transfer Rate – DiskBench

The 990 EVO Plus significantly outpaces the standard 990 EVO in every category: copy speeds jump from 1,077 MB/s to 1,541 MB/s, write speeds rise from 2,098 MB/s to 2,348 MB/s, and read speeds surge from 3,084 MB/s to a hefty 3,984 MB/s. These aren’t small, incremental improvements. They’re substantial boosts that translate to noticeably faster file handling, quicker system boot times, and smoother workflows for large datasets or media projects. In practical terms, the Plus model is going to be significantly faster in day-to-day tasks and is clearly the better performer for anyone who demands speed.

CrystalDiskMark Peak Sequential Score

Here, the sequential 1M Q8T1 benchmark shows an interesting nuance. The 990 EVO Plus slightly outperforms the standard 990 EVO in read speed, moving from 7,060 MB/s to 7,273 MB/s, which gives it a slight edge in large, sequential read operations. However, the write speed surprised me a little: the standard 990 EVO actually outperforms the Plus, with a write speed of 6,039 MB/s versus 5,337 MB/s. This suggests that under sustained sequential write loads, the 990 EVO may hold a slight advantage, likely due to thermal or caching behavior in the Plus model.

CrystalDiskMark Peak Random Scores

The 4K QD1 random IOPS results highlight another subtle difference between these drives. The 990 EVO Plus slightly improves on the read side, 23,221 IOPS versus 22,614 IOPS for the standard 990 EVO, giving it a slight advantage in small, random read operations. However, the write IOPS tell the opposite story: the standard 990 EVO posts 99,423 IOPS, noticeably higher than the Plus’s 84,468 IOPS. This indicates that for random, small-block write tasks, such as frequent file saves, database operations, or transactional workloads, the standard 990 EVO may actually perform better. So while the Plus generally excels in throughput, the original EVO can still edge it out in certain write-intensive, random-access scenarios.

The 990 EVO has higher sequential and random write scores. The V8 NAND flash in the 990 EVO Plus is surely faster, but it requires higher I/O to perform at its best. The flash inside the 990 EVO Plus has performance benefits in concurrency and overall bandwidth (suitable for higher queue depths), but it can be slower at small or single-queue-depth writes. This is the primary reason for lower performance in writing tests. However, this isn’t something to worry about, as these are peak numbers. In real-world applications, you would likely see any performance drops in the 990 EVO Plus.

Sustained Write Performance

Both the drives showed us the same pseudo-SLC write cache performance. Additionally, the sustained write performance after the cache was exhausted was nearly identical. The Samsung 990 EVO Plus averaged at around 1777 MB/s after cache exhaustion, while the 990 EVO averaged at around 1776 MB/s.

Power Consumption

The power efficiency numbers give a decisive win to the 990 EVO Plus. It achieves 524 MB/s per watt, compared to 330 MB/s per watt for the standard 990 EVO, showing a significant improvement in performance-per-watt during a 50 GB file copy. Interestingly, the average and peak power consumption remain the same for both drives: 3 W average and 5 W maximum, meaning the Plus delivers significantly more throughput without drawing extra power. In practical terms, this makes the 990 EVO Plus not only faster but also far more energy-efficient, which is especially relevant for sustained workloads, laptops, or systems where thermal management is a concern.

Technical Specifications

Looking at the technical specifications, the 990 EVO Plus clearly has an architectural edge over the standard 990 EVO. The Plus uses Samsung’s V8 TLC 3D NAND with 236 layers running at 2,400 MT/s, compared to the 990 EVO’s V6 Prime V-NAND with 133 layers at 1,200 MT/s, essentially doubling the raw NAND speed and density.

This is paired with a significantly larger SLC cache (226 GB vs. 114 GB on the 2 TB model), which explains the substantial increases in burst performance and sequential throughput we observed in the benchmarks. Features like AES-256 encryption, TRIM, and SMART support are identical, and neither offers power-loss protection. Therefore, the Plus’s advantage lies purely in raw speed and efficiency, rather than reliability or feature set. In short, the Plus is a next-generation NAND upgrade that enhances performance while using similar other specifications.

TBW, MTBF, DWPD, and Warranty

Know more about TBW, MTBF, and DWPD.

Price Difference

By the time I am writing this article, the Samsung 990 EVO Plus is running on a discount, which it generally does. So, the price for the 1TB variant of both drives is 74.99$. The 2TB variant of both is available for 129.99$. The 4TB 990 EVO Plus is available for 268$.

However, the 990 EVO Plus is expensive when not on sale. The 1TB variant is sold for 109.99$ while the 2TB is sold for 184.99$. The 4TB 990 EVO Plus, without sale, can be purchased for 344.99. So, if you are lucky, you can get both at the same price. Otherwise, the 990 EVO Plus would be expensive.

Which one to choose: Samsung 990 EVO or 990 EVO Plus?

The Samsung 990 EVO Plus clearly has better performance and will serve you well for almost everything, ranging from normal tasks to gaming to content creation. The NAND flash is faster; however, its endurance is the same as that of the NOR flash. Now, if you get the 990 EVO Plus at a discount, you should go for it.

The 990 EVO, on the other hand, didn’t disappoint us with its performance. In fact, I would not mind saving $35 on the 1TB variant and $20 on the 2TB variant, opting for the 990 EVO instead of the 990 EVO Plus.

Ultimately, it comes down to the price, as the performance difference isn’t very significant, as noted in the benchmark comparisons. So, if you can get your hands on the 990 EVO Plus for a similar price as the 990 EVO, you should definitely go for it. Otherwise, the 990 EVO Plus can give you competitive performance while saving a good amount of money, especially in the 1TB variant.

Additionally, I would recommend considering other DRAM options, such as the Samsung 990 Pro or WD Black SN850X, if you can afford to spend a little more. I hope this helps!