Samsung Releases 4TB T7 Shield Portable SSD

[bradman83]

I can understand the ram thing more as thats all on one chip. So there will be production issues that you would need to factor in for each cpu/memory configuration which could demand a premium in price.

But the HD is just an installation job. The core hardware is the same as any company is using. I dont get how they justify the cost of HD upgrades at all.

The only way it makes sense is that they are selling the entry level units at a loss and use the pricing of higher level models to make up for the loss. There seems no way that apple pricing on higher tier models is reflective of how much it cost to build the higher tier model.

This is partly a design choice by Apple. Starting with Intel Macs equipped with a T2 security chip the storage controller was built into the T2 chip (and later directly into the M-series chips). The storage soldered to the logic board are raw flash storage chips that talk to the T2/Mn controller. By contrast an M.2 SSD or a SATA drive have their own controllers on the drive itself. Even in systems with modular storage like the Mac Pro and Mac Studio the storage modules themselves are just an assembly of raw flash storage chips without a controller. Swapping these out will cause the T2/Mn controller to not recognize the new storage. M-series chips take it a step further - if the internal SSD fails you can no longer boot from an external drive. (There are some tools that can force the T2 in a Mac Pro to recognize the new storage chips built into xCode but it’s difficult to use and not user friendly).

Officially this is all in the name of security. The M-series locked down boot process requires a Signed System Volume on the main SSD that is cryptographically sealed by Apple and can’t be replicated on an external drive, making it harder for malware to hijack the boot sequence. This is also why Boot Camp with ARM versions of Linux or Windows are off the table unless Apple changes stance on the boot sequence. The fact that it makes upgrading the internal storage next to impossible is, of course, a happy coincidence for Apple.

 

[rui no onna]

The crucial isn’t quite as ruggedized, but for $249 at the same speed, I can glue some rubber bumpers on it.

I’ve been happy with my Crucial externals and they’re plenty fast for all my consumer uses.

https://a.co/d/0XiGrDc

I try to stick to 3D TLC and avoid cheaper, less reliable 3D QLC as much as possible.

As far as I recall when I was researching SSDs, majority of Crucial’s offerings use QLC.

 

[julianps]

Why aren't they making these USB4/TB compliant? USB-C on Macs is only 10gbps, but they've all supported Thunderbolt 3 for a long time.

Samsung's page tells us "Performance may vary depending on host configuration. To reach maximum read/write speeds of up to 1,050/1,000 MB/s, respectively, the host device and connection cables must support USB 3.2 Gen 2 and the UASP mode must be enabled. Test system configuration: ASUS Z270 ROG MAXIMUS IX HERO (USB 3.2 Gen2 Type-C), Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-7700K CPU @ 4.20GHz, OS- Windows 10 19H2."

AFAIK this mode did not operate on M1 models, so users were unlikely t see these speeds. Anyone know about M2; does M@ support "UASP mode"?

 

[FasterQuieter]

Samsung’s much lower prices for top-tier quality SSDs show just how much that greedy scumbag Tim Cook is ripping off customers with his unreasonably high SSD prices.

And what makes things even worse is when you consider that external SSDs are supposed to be higher priced than internal SSDs (due to external drives requiring more parts). Tim Cook’s high prices are hostile, especially towards lower income people.

This seems a bit harsh. The cheapest Mac mini is only $599 and if you have very little money it has high speed connections for external storage. The RAM pricing is more problematic as you can't upgrade that. Still, for $799 you can get a Mac with enough RAM for almost anybody. Or you could buy an M1 for even less. The insane upgrade prices make the lower-end config pricing possible. Whilst allowing Apple to keep their crazy high margins overall of course.

 

[oldwatery]

"The T7 Shield offers read speeds of up to 1,050 MB/s, and write speeds of up to 1,000 MB/s."

I guess if you really need the rugged protection then this is appealing. It's half as fast as the SanDisk 4TB Extreme PRO.

Yes it might be. If the Sandisk actually ran at that speed for most people and worked reliably with a Mac. Unfortunately neither is the case. Just returned my second one. Apple and sandisk are aware of the issue btw.

 

[oldwatery]

The sandisk pro extreme is a very problematic drive though. Lots of complaints about reliability

Just sent back my second Sandisk pro 4TB. It does not work with a Mac and apple and Sandisk know it.

 

[threesixty360]

This is partly a design choice by Apple. Starting with Intel Macs equipped with a T2 security chip the storage controller was built into the T2 chip (and later directly into the M-series chips). The storage soldered to the logic board are raw flash storage chips that talk to the T2/Mn controller. By contrast an M.2 SSD or a SATA drive have their own controllers on the drive itself. Even in systems with modular storage like the Mac Pro and Mac Studio the storage modules themselves are just an assembly of raw flash storage chips without a controller. Swapping these out will cause the T2/Mn controller to not recognize the new storage. M-series chips take it a step further - if the internal SSD fails you can no longer boot from an external drive. (There are some tools that can force the T2 in a Mac Pro to recognize the new storage chips built into xCode but it’s difficult to use and not user friendly).

Officially this is all in the name of security. The M-series locked down boot process requires a Signed System Volume on the main SSD that is cryptographically sealed by Apple and can’t be replicated on an external drive, making it harder for malware to hijack the boot sequence. This is also why Boot Camp with ARM versions of Linux or Windows are off the table unless Apple changes stance on the boot sequence. The fact that it makes upgrading the internal storage next to impossible is, of course, a happy coincidence for Apple.

Who asked for this level of security?
And at that price?
If the controller is actually on the m chip itself and the chips are just soldered onto the board, what exactly is being paid for in this process? The “signing” of the drive is $400??

The fact that the process of integrating a HD is different and more secure because of that difference doesn’t necessarily make it more expensive to integrate. That’s what’s baffling.

They seem to be pricing these upgrades at the points they do because they can, not because it reflects how much it costs.

 

[triton100]

Just sent back my second Sandisk pro 4TB. It does not work with a Mac and apple and Sandisk know

Just sent back my second Sandisk pro 4TB. It does not work with a Mac and apple and Sandisk know it.

I’m in exactly the same boat. First sandisk drive ever. Broke on the second day. I sent it off for a replacement three months ago and haven’t heard anything since. Sandisk support don’t reply to any of my emails. I think I’ve lost 450 euros.

 

[poematik13]

This is wrong. The normal t7 uses V-NAND v5, the T7 Shield uses V-NAND v6. This means around 15% faster speed and less power usage and more reliability. There is more comparisons and tests which prove this.

Define "speed" lol. Like read or write? Read is a marketing scam, it's always higher and advertised on spec sheets and never consistent

The average enduser won't notice

 

[bradman83]

Why aren't they making these USB4/TB compliant? USB-C on Macs is only 10gbps, but they've all supported Thunderbolt 3 for a long time.

Thunderbolt devices require relatively expensive controllers and higher quality cabling, which is a big reason why these devices are so expensive (there are no licensing costs, Intel did away with royalties to try to drive Thunderbolt adoption). While Thunderbolt 3 has been standard on Macs for ages it’s still hit or miss in the PC world; few PC desktops use Thunderbolt and it requires an expansion card to operate on AMD-based systems.

 

[davidf18]

Samsung Portable SSD T7 Shield 4TB Review: IP65 PSSD Gets a Capacity Upgrade

www.anandtech.com

 

[JamesMay82]

I was hoping that the price of SSDs would drop a bit faster than they have. I'd like to replace my mechanical external drive, but I'd have to take out second mortgage to afford one with a 16 tb capacity.

Yeah the same for internal storage upgrades with Apple. I get it was expensive when it was new tech but it’s been out over 10 years +

 

[BigKahunaBurguer]

"The T7 Shield offers read speeds of up to 1,050 MB/s, and write speeds of up to 1,000 MB/s."

I guess if you really need the rugged protection then this is appealing. It's half as fast as the SanDisk 4TB Extreme PRO.

SanDisk it‘s not especially reliable. They overheat too much. On mac they don't have that much speed. and the samsung T series is really good in my experience for any situation. Very reliable ssd. If you really, really need +2000mb/s just look in another direction with some thunderbolt 4 ssd. Obviously.

 

[stanleystf]

I really hope and pray they come out with an 8TB version soon.

 

[samplez]

Hostile towards lower income people?
Are you serious?
I don't feel offended about not being able to buy a Ferrari but you don't hear me complaining about a brand's hostility towards little old me.
If you can't afford it, don't buy it.

Do you work for apple or something... There's a difference between ripping people off and a product justifying it's value.

 

[holisticrunner]

These are bottlenecked by the USB interface. The internal components should be capable of 3.5/3GB/s read/write (burst). Higher end PCIe 4 SSDs capable of similar read/write to Apple's SSDs cost a lot cheaper than what Apple charges.

Mind, afaik the storage controller is part of the M1/M2 chipset so it's pretty much impossible to beat latency on those.

They are not ... these aren't NVMe drives. Check the chipset they use.

Besides, it's irrelevant. If you can't tap into the performance, it's useless to you anyhow.

So I don't really know what you are trying to say aside from the fact that something else (not this product) can achieve better throughput ... but also at much higher wattages. Not something a laptop user wants as it eats into their battery life.

That's the problem with extUSBc drives. They are great until it sucks up 20% of your battery over a period of a day. Not so much with the internal SSD and they get much higher throughput and much lower latency.

So you really aren't comparing apples to apples.

 

[compwiz1202]

Do you work for apple or something... There's a difference between ripping people off and a product justifying it's value.

Agree with that, but somewhat agree with the other except I'd say if you don't think it's worth it don't buy it. As long as people keep laying down the money, they have no reason to lower anything.

 

[rui no onna]

They are not ... these aren't NVMe drives. Check the chipset they use.

Besides, it's irrelevant. If you can't tap into the performance, it's useless to you anyhow.

So I don't really know what you are trying to say aside from the fact that something else (not this product) can achieve better throughput ... but also at much higher wattages. Not something a laptop user wants as it eats into their battery life.

That's the problem with extUSBc drives. They are great until it sucks up 20% of your battery over a period of a day. Not so much with the internal SSD and they get much higher throughput and much lower latency.

So you really aren't comparing apples to apples.

The controller used in the Samsung T7 is the same Pablo controller used in their non-Pro Samsung 980 M.2 NVMe SSDs.

I believe you can get Thunderbolt SSDs (either pre-built or DIY) with the same sequential performance as Apple internal storage for not much more than the Samsung T7 Shield (at least less than the $333/TB that Apple charges). Granted, as you mentioned, much higher power draw.

The special sauce for Apple "SSDs" is in the M1/M2 chipset and unified memory architecture.

As far as raw NAND flash goes, the chips Apple is using aren't really better/more expensive than the ones used on the T7. Apple's premium pricing for storage and RAM upgrades is simply because they can and their customers are willing to pay the premium.

 

[stanleystf]

SanDisk it‘s not especially reliable. They overheat too much. On mac they don't have that much speed. and the samsung T series is really good in my experience for any situation. Very reliable ssd. If you really, really need +2000mb/s just look in another direction with some thunderbolt 4 ssd. Obviously.

When you say they are not reliable, has a Sandisk drive even failed on you, resulting in loss?
Which model have you been using?

 

[FrameBreather]

Even in Steve Jobs days, upgrading your computer’s RAM and HD from Apple was always more expensive than going 3rd party. The 64GB SSD in the original Steve Jobs MBA was double what 80GB SSDs were going for. Even iPhones and iPads under Steve Jobs had SSD pricing far above 3rd party.

But do you feel better now that you got to call TC a greedy scumbag?

Back in the days you could upgrade the HD and RAM yourself. Now this is not possible anymore and therefore Cook is highjacking his customers. Who wants a 8 GB / 256 GB macbook these days? If you only use it for internet and writing a letter you could also buy a chromebook instead of an 1500€ ENTRY Air.

 

[stanleystf]

Has anyone bought the 4TB version? What's it like?

 

[cubbie5150]

Awaiting mine. Amazon US currently has a sweet deal for *black* 4TB T7 Shield marked down to $279.99USD (initially priced at $429.99 at first release). Was planning to get one of these sometime next Fall, but had to jump at this price. Have been using a 2TB non-Shield T7 for about 20 months; been a unremarkable (for me this is great) experience.

 

[stanleystf]

Awaiting mine. Amazon US currently has a sweet deal for *black* 4TB T7 Shield marked down to $279.99USD (initially priced at $429.99 at first release). Was planning to get one of these sometime next Fall, but had to jump at this price. Have been using a 2TB non-Shield T7 for about 20 months; been a unremarkable (for me this is great) experience.

Great price! If I could get an 8TB version for like $500, I'd be very happy.

 

[Big Bad D]

Today Amazon France, so not sure about other countries, has 5% off 4TB T7 Shield. So now under 400 Euros. Order placed, delivery due in 1-2 weeks.

 

[stanleystf]

Today Amazon France, so not sure about other countries, has 5% off 8TB T7 Shield. So now under 400 Euros. Order placed, delivery due in 1-2 weeks.

I think that's 4TB, not 8TB.