Samsung 870 EVO 500GB vs Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB
The site holds no current price for at least one of these, so what follows compares specifications alone.
| Specification | Samsung870 EVO 500GB | SeagateBarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity (GB) | 500 | 500 |
| Sequential read (MB/s) | 560 | 560 |
| Sequential write (MB/s) | 530 | 540better |
| Current best price | — | — |
| Price per TB | — | — |
| Endurance (TBW) | 300 | 300 |
| Warranty (years) | 5 | 5 |
| DRAM cache | Yes | — |
| NAND type | tlc | tlc |
| Controller | Samsung MKX controller | — |
How these two compare
Sequential throughput
Samsung 870 EVO 500GB is rated 560 MB/s read and 530 MB/s write; Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB, 560 MB/s read and 540 MB/s write. The SATA link tops out around 550 MB/s each way, and both work against that ceiling; the more telling differences between SATA drives are how each holds up under sustained load, whether it carries a DRAM cache, and how much writing it is rated to take.
Random access
On random 4K access — the small, scattered reads and writes behind boot, app launches and general responsiveness — Samsung 870 EVO 500GB is rated 98.000 read and 88.000 write IOPS, Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB 90.000 read and 90.000 write. This is the figure that follows everyday feel, where the sequential rates above follow big-file copies.
Endurance
The makers warrant 300 TBW on Samsung 870 EVO 500GB and 300 TBW on Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB — how much writing each is rated to take before the endurance clause lapses. Most desktop workloads never come close, so read the two against each other rather than as a limit you are likely to reach.
DRAM cache
Samsung 870 EVO 500GB carries a DRAM cache; the catalog does not state whether Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB carries a DRAM cache. A DRAM cache holds the drive's mapping table — the index of where each block physically sits — so the controller places and finds data without an extra flash lookup. A DRAM-less drive borrows a little system memory (HMB) or a slice of its own flash instead, and is likelier to slow once a long run of random writes outlasts its fast cache.
NAND, controller and warranty
NAND: Samsung 870 EVO 500GB uses TLC and Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB uses TLC. The tier is bits per cell — SLC, MLC, TLC and QLC from one to four — trading density against endurance and sustained-write speed: QLC is cheapest per gigabyte, TLC the mainstream balance, and the denser the cell the sooner sustained writes taper. On the controller: Samsung 870 EVO 500GB uses the Samsung MKX controller, and Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB's controller is not stated. It is the chip handling error correction, wear-levelling and where each write lands — much of how a drive holds up under load — even if the part number on its own tells you little. On the cover: Samsung 870 EVO 500GB carries a 5-year warranty, Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB carries a 5-year warranty. The length is the maker's own vote of confidence, and on an SSD it tends to track the endurance rating — a longer warranty usually meaning more rated writes.
Which to buy
With a price missing for at least one side, there is no cost verdict to give. What separates two otherwise-similar drives is up in the sections above — sustained and random behaviour, whether there is a DRAM cache, the flash tier and the warranty — so weigh those against what your build needs.
Common questions about this pair
- Which is faster, Samsung 870 EVO 500GB or Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB?
- Samsung 870 EVO 500GB is rated 560 MB/s read and 530 MB/s write; Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB, 560 MB/s read and 540 MB/s write. The SATA link tops out around 550 MB/s each way, and both work against that ceiling; the more telling differences between SATA drives are how each holds up under sustained load, whether it carries a DRAM cache, and how much writing it is rated to take.
- How do Samsung 870 EVO 500GB and Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB compare on random access?
- On random 4K access — the small, scattered reads and writes behind boot, app launches and general responsiveness — Samsung 870 EVO 500GB is rated 98.000 read and 88.000 write IOPS, Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB 90.000 read and 90.000 write. This is the figure that follows everyday feel, where the sequential rates above follow big-file copies.
- Should you buy Samsung 870 EVO 500GB or Seagate BarraCuda 120 SSD 500GB?
- With a price missing for at least one side, there is no cost verdict to give. What separates two otherwise-similar drives is up in the sections above — sustained and random behaviour, whether there is a DRAM cache, the flash tier and the warranty — so weigh those against what your build needs.