Samsung 970 EVO 500GB vs Western Digital WD Green SN350 500GB
At least one of these has no price the site currently tracks, so what follows weighs specifications alone.
| Specification | Samsung970 EVO 500GB | Western DigitalWD Green SN350 500GB |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity (GB) | 500 | 500 |
| Sequential read (MB/s) | 3400better | 2400 |
| Sequential write (MB/s) | 2300better | 1500 |
| Current best price | — | 152,95 €at Amazon.de · captured 2026-09-13 |
| Price per TB | — | 305,90 € |
| DRAM cache | Yes | No |
| NAND type | tlc | tlc |
| Controller | Samsung Phoenix controller | WD Polaris MP16 |
How these two compare
Sequential throughput
Samsung 970 EVO 500GB states 3400 MB/s read and 2300 MB/s write; Western Digital WD Green SN350 500GB states 2400 MB/s read and 1500 MB/s write, both over PCIe. Sequential numbers like these describe large sustained transfers; the responsiveness you notice day to day tracks random access more closely than the peak figures do.
DRAM cache
On the cache question: Samsung 970 EVO 500GB carries a DRAM cache, and Western Digital WD Green SN350 500GB is DRAM-less. The DRAM keeps the flash-translation table close, sparing a lookup on nearly every access; a drive without it leans on host memory or its own flash, which usually shows as slower sustained random writes rather than in the headline sequential numbers.
NAND, controller and warranty
On the flash itself: Samsung 970 EVO 500GB uses TLC, and Western Digital WD Green SN350 500GB uses TLC. NAND tiers count bits per cell — more bits pack more capacity into the same silicon but shorten write endurance and slow sustained writes, which is why QLC sits below TLC on lasting performance even when the sequential numbers match. Controller: Samsung 970 EVO 500GB uses the Samsung Phoenix controller and Western Digital WD Green SN350 500GB uses the WD Polaris MP16. The controller runs wear-levelling, error correction and the mapping table, so it shapes sustained and random behaviour as much as the flash does — though the model name alone predicts little without testing. Samsung 970 EVO 500GB carries a 5-year warranty and Western Digital WD Green SN350 500GB does not state one — the length the maker will stand behind the drive, and usually a proxy for the endurance it is rated to.
Which to buy
The site holds no current price for at least one of these, so it cannot call the buy on cost. Judge them on the specifications above — at the same capacity and interface, two drives usually part on things like the DRAM cache, the NAND tier, endurance and warranty, so weigh whichever of those the sections above report.
Common questions about this pair
- Which is faster, Samsung 970 EVO 500GB or Western Digital WD Green SN350 500GB?
- Samsung 970 EVO 500GB states 3400 MB/s read and 2300 MB/s write; Western Digital WD Green SN350 500GB states 2400 MB/s read and 1500 MB/s write, both over PCIe. Sequential numbers like these describe large sustained transfers; the responsiveness you notice day to day tracks random access more closely than the peak figures do.
- Should you buy Samsung 970 EVO 500GB or Western Digital WD Green SN350 500GB?
- The site holds no current price for at least one of these, so it cannot call the buy on cost. Judge them on the specifications above — at the same capacity and interface, two drives usually part on things like the DRAM cache, the NAND tier, endurance and warranty, so weigh whichever of those the sections above report.