Skip to content

I get commissions for purchases made through links in this article.

Seagate Firecuda 530 vs Samsung 980 Pro: Which one should you go for?

    Seagate Firecuda 530 and Samsung 980 Pro both are very popular Gen 4 NVMe SSDs. These both SSDs are focused on gamers, overclockers, tech enthusiasts, video editors, developers, and other high-end users. Lots of people prefer upgrading their PS5 storage with these SSDs.

    But, is there a better or best SSD between the both. Well, it is hard to say. But, if you look at the theoretical specifications, the Seagate Firecuda 530 looks better in all terms. The top variant i.e. 4TB of Firecuda 530 can reach up to 7,300 MB/s data read speed while Samsung 980’s 2TB variant has just 7,000 MB/s write speed. But, 980 has got Intelligent Turbowrite 2.0 which Firecuda 530 doesn’t have. So, both of these are very tough competitors to each other.

    So, I can understand your confusion because these SSDs are not cheap. However, making a decision between the both should be very easy. By the end of this article, you will know how,

    There are various areas which should be covered in order to reach a perfect decision. So, in this comparison, I am going to do a brief breakdown and comparison of all the specifications of these SSDs. So, without any further delays, let’s get started.

    First of all, let’s compare the theoretical specifications of both these SSDs and see which one has better things to offer to you.

    SpecificationsSeagate Firecuda 530Samsung 980 Pro
    Storage Variants500GB, 1TB, 2TB, 4TB250GB, 500GB, 1TB, 2TB
    InterfacePCIe 4.0 x4 LanesPCIe 4.0 x4 Lanes
    Form FactorM.2 2280M.2 2280
    Heatsink OptionAvailableAvailable
    Sequential Read SpeedUp to 7,300 MB/sUp to 7,000 MB/s
    Sequential Write SpeedUp to 6,900 MB/sUp to 5,000 MB/s
    Random Read (4K, QD32)Up to 1,000KUp to 1,000K
    Random Write Speed (4K, QD32)Up to 1,000K Up to 1,000K
    TBWUp to 5,100 TBWUp to 1,200 TBW
    NAND Flash TypeTLCTLC
    NVMe CategoryProsumer NVMe SSDProsumer NVMe SSD
    Warranty5- Years Limited Warranty5- Years Guarantee
    PriceCheck AmazonCheck Amazon

    You can clearly see that the Seagate Firecuda 530 has better specifications. It has better sequential and random read/write speeds. Also, you get great endurance (TBW) rating with Firecuda 530.

    The test bench is equipped with an Intel Core i5 12600K CPU along with a 16GB DDR4 4800MHz RAM kit. The motherboard is MSI Pro Z690-A DDR5. Both the SSDs are 100% empty during the tests and 1TB variants are utilized to run the benchmark tests. Other variants may have different performance results.

    For these tests, I have used the CrystalDiskMark software. For the sequential read/write tests, I have used 1 MB I/O size and 1GB file size at Q8T1. For sequential read/write tests, the I/O size is 4KB, and 1GB file size at Q8T1.

    CDM sequential benchmark scores bar graph
    CDM sequential benchmark scores bar graph

    This test is made specifically to test any game’s capability to handle gaming tasks. For this test, I have used the 2TB variants.

    3DMark SSD Test for Gamers Bar Graph Comparison

    AS SSD is another very popular storage benchmarking software. It again runs multiple tests to test sequential and random performance. You can set the test size from 1GB to 10GB. It will give you a score that can be helpful to compare the performance of two different SSDs.

    We have used the 1GB Test size here for our benchmarks.

    AS SSD Benchmark Scores Bar Graph (Seagate Firecuda 530 vs Samsung 980 Pro)

    Anvil’s Storage Utilities Benchmark Software runs a wide array of tests including Seq 4MB, 4K, 4K QD4, 4K QD16, 32K, and 128K, in both read and write formats. The test size here in this case is 8GB.

    Anvil's Storage Utilities Bar Graph (Samsung 980 Pro vs Seagate Firecuda 530)
    PCMark10 Full System Drive Benchmark Scores Bar Graph

    I am using 1920×1080 HD 1080i resolution for this test. The Test size is 1GB and the Codec is 10bit YUV.

    Samsung 980 Pro (1TB)Seagate Firecuda 530 (1TB)

    Also Read: WD Black SN850 vs Samsung 980 Pro

    Here, we are going to compare the performance of both these SSDs when we use them in real-time applications to run some software and games. Again, the test system used here has Intel i5 8th generation processor. So, the better your overall specifications, the better will be the results. But, still, you can have an idea of the differences you can see while running any software through these SSDs.

    Software/OS/GameSeagate Firecuda 530 (1TB)Samsung 980 Pro (1TB)
    Windows 10 Home~10 Seconds~11 Seconds
    Adobe Premiere Pro21 Seconds24 Seconds
    Adobe Photoshop CC11 Seconds12 Seconds
    Blender (Animation Software)27 Seconds29 Seconds
    Fortnite26 Seconds28 Seconds
    GTA-V20 Seconds19 Seconds

    You can again see that the Seagate Firecuda 530 is winning the game. But, this difference is clearly not that huge because all Gen4 SSDs tend to offer great performance when it comes to random data read/write performance.

    Both these SSDs come with 5-Years Warranty periods. But, there are some other things to check when you want to confirm the reliability of your SSD. Let’s compare the TBW of both. TBW actually stands for Total Terabytes Written. This is the total amount of data you can write on your SSD during its lifetime.

    VariantSeagate Firecuda 530Samsung 980 Pro
    250 GB150 TBW
    500 GB640 TBW300 TBW
    1 TB1,275 TBW600 TBW
    2 TB2,550 TBW1,200 TBW
    4 TB5,100 TBW

    I am really impressed with the massive 5,100 TBW that you get with the 4TB variant of Firecuda 530. Literally, this number isn’t achievable by any normal user. Clearly, this thing is made for real computer enthusiasts.

    Let’s compare all the other important things which are left to complete this article.

    Technical SpecificationSeagate Firecuda 530Samsung 980 Pro
    NAND Flash TypeMicron’s TLC NANDSamsung 3-bit MLC V-NAND
    NAND Flash Layers176128/136
    ControllerPhison E18Samsung Elpis Controller
    Controller ConfigurationsTriple-R5, 8-ChannelsNot Specified
    CacheDDR4 DRAMDDR4 SDRAM
    Heatsink OptionAvailableAvailable
    T.R.I.M.AvailableAvailable
    S.M.A.R.T.AvailableAvailable
    EncryptionXTS-AES 256-bit encryptionAES 256-bit Encryption (Class 0)

    The best and perhaps the extra thing you get with the Samsung 980 Pro is its SLC cache. Turbowrite SLC caching allows you to do write operations at a faster pace. With the 2TB variant of Samsung 980 Pro, you get a total of 42GB SLC cache. So, if you want to move this size of the file to your SSD, it will write at a constant speed of 3,300 MBps. This feature is not available with the Seagate Firecuda 530. But, still, the 530 has everything else ready to compete with the 980.

    The controllers in both SSDs are just impressive. Also, the DDR4 DRAM is there to help your SSDs work much more efficiently.

    Generally, you will find that the price of 500GB and 1TB variants of both these SSDs are the same. But, the 2TB variant of the Seagate Firecuda 530 is going to be higher as compared to the 980 Pro.

    If you are looking for industry-leading NVMe performance from your SSD, just go for the Seagate Firecuda 530. However, if you want to save some money and not looking for that much speed, Samsung 980 Pro is also a good option.

    Both these SSDs are focused on hardcore users, professional gamers, overclockers, etc. So, none of these is going to disappoint you in any way. But, still, you have seen which one has better features to offer. So, now, you can just check the price and availability and go for the one you want to buy.

    Thanks for reading!

    References:

    Seagate Firecuda 530 Product DatasheetSamsung 980 Pro Product Datasheet
    Seagate Firecuda 530 ReviewSamsung 980 Pro Review
    Subscribe
    Notify of
    guest
    3 Comments
    Oldest
    Newest Most Voted
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    nice post
    nice post
    9 months ago

    I love the fact that you tested a pair of PCIe 4.0 SSDs on an Intel 8th gen platform, which is PCIe 3.0
    well played

    John
    John
    27 days ago

    Great article, thanks!