WD Blue SN570 M.2 NVMe SSD Review: Bleeding-Edge Bargain

BiCS5 rears its head

WD Blue SN570
Editor's Choice
(Image credit: © Tom's Hardware)

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Comparison Products

We tested WD’s Blue SN570 against some of the best PCIe 3.0 SSDs available today. These include DRAM-equipped SSDs such as the Samsung 970 EVO Plus, WD Black SN750, Crucial P5, and SK hynix Gold P31. We also included similarly-designed DRAM-less SSDs like the Samsung 980, Acer FA100, and of course, the WD Blue SN550 for added perspective.

Sean Webster
Storage Reviewer

Sean is a Contributing Editor at Tom’s Hardware US, covering storage hardware.

  • Why is "Single-sided PCB" a plus? Is it because of thermals? Or for some other reason?
    Reply
  • salgado18
    Isn't there something wrong with the Black SN750? In these benchmarks it looks like one of the worst tested, but in the sole review it is one of the two best PCIe 3.0 on the market. It shouldn't be behind the SN550 in almost any metric on the sole review, yet all the comparison reviews show it as a very bad drive. Where did these numbers come from?
    Reply
  • Soaptrail
    I wish the graphs would call out PCIE 3 or 4 for each drive, even if it is only one graph, it would really help.
    Reply
  • dalauder
    Wow, at this price I was really expecting QLC.
    Reply
  • dalauder
    Why isn't it benchmarked against a single 4.0 drive? I'd like to see a performance comparison, just so that we could consider whether any NVME 3.0 drives are worth the savings (since this is probably the best one).
    Reply
  • seanwebster
    Nolonar said:
    Why is "Single-sided PCB" a plus? Is it because of thermals? Or for some other reason?
    For those upgrading their ultrabooks - many only accept single-sided M.2s.

    salgado18 said:
    Isn't there something wrong with the Black SN750? In these benchmarks it looks like one of the worst tested, but in the sole review it is one of the two best PCIe 3.0 on the market. It shouldn't be behind the SN550 in almost any metric on the sole review, yet all the comparison reviews show it as a very bad drive. Where did these numbers come from?
    Nothing is wrong with the SN750 other than its architecture being a little laggy compared to the latest SSDs on the market. In these benches the SN750 also has the latest firmware and was set to Game Mode in WD SSD Dashboard for better performance (disables lower power states). In its review from two years ago, it was compared to different drives. Times have changed and so have the drives it's compared against. Newer flash is faster, controllers and firmware are more capable than ever. They are very responsive to small requests in client usage. The SN750 was built for sustained write performance with content creator use cases in mind, but its latency profile in regards to reading is a little high because of that.

    Soaptrail said:
    I wish the graphs would call out PCIE 3 or 4 for each drive, even if it is only one graph, it would really help.
    You can compare these numbers to any of the charts in other recent reviews. I'll be sure to include the blue with some gen4 SSDs in a few of my future reviews, too.

    dalauder said:
    Why isn't it benchmarked against a single 4.0 drive? I'd like to see a performance comparison, just so that we could consider whether any NVME 3.0 drives are worth the savings (since this is probably the best one).
    Because Gen4 SSDs don't compete against it for market share and vice versa. If you are looking to buy this, a Gen4 SSD shouldn't be on your mind. However, as mentioned, you can compare these numbers with my recent reviews to compare to whichever SSDs you like. A few of my future reviews will include the new Blue with some Gen4 SSDs.
    Reply
  • alceryes
    dalauder said:
    Why isn't it benchmarked against a single 4.0 drive? I'd like to see a performance comparison, just so that we could consider whether any NVME 3.0 drives are worth the savings (since this is probably the best one).
    There's a good bit of performance room within just the PCIe 3.0 realm between these economical drives and performance ones. A performance PCIe 3.0 drive will beat these more economical ones by a substantial margin and, if you can find a holiday bargain, can be almost as cheap.
    You won't see much difference between performance PCIe 3.0 drives and PCIe 4.0 in most daily tasks with the exception of working with or moving large amounts of data/files (or in benchmarks).
    Reply
  • seanwebster said:
    For those upgrading their ultrabooks - many only accept single-sided M.2s.
    I see, makes sense. Thanks for the clarification.
    Reply
  • salgado18
    seanwebster said:
    Nothing is wrong with the SN750 other than its architecture being a little laggy compared to the latest SSDs on the market. In these benches the SN750 also has the latest firmware and was set to Game Mode in WD SSD Dashboard for better performance (disables lower power states). In its review from two years ago, it was compared to different drives. Times have changed and so have the drives it's compared against. Newer flash is faster, controllers and firmware are more capable than ever. They are very responsive to small requests in client usage. The SN750 was built for sustained write performance with content creator use cases in mind, but its latency profile in regards to reading is a little high because of that.
    I understand your argument, but it's not quite right. Comparing both reviews is not easy, since the benchmark tools use different versions, but ATTO is the same. In the Black review, it reaches the advertised speed of ~3,500 MB/s, but in the SN570 review it barely tops the SN550, staying behind it for most of the time. The SN750 should be better than the SN550 in every metric, but instead it lags in everything. That's not right, especially since both are from similar generations.

    I also checked the tests of the SN550 review, and it seems the tests come from there. So is the SN750 worse in many metrics than the DRAM-less drive? I mean, it is below the advertised speed of 3,500 MB/s.

    Were the tests of the original SN750 review performed in a different lab? Is it a different version? How come the better drive is worse?

    Link to the SN750 review:
    https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd-black-sn750-ssd,5957-3.html
    Link to the SN550 review (40 days later):
    https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/wd-blue-sn550-m2-nvme-ssd-review-best-dramless-ssd-yet/3
    Reply
  • plateLunch
    Wow. Look at all the empty space on the board. I wonder if they could have fit the whole drive into a 2242 form factor. Would the drive have the same appeal?

    Also, just noticed that the 500 GB SN570 and SN 750 SE are selling for the same price on Amazon and Newegg. $49.99. Something must be going on.
    Reply