SSD comparison · Updated May 14, 2026

Crucial T705 2TB vs Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB

Compare Crucial T705 2TB and Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB: prices, speeds, $/TB. Which to buy in May 2026? Full spec breakdown.

Crucial T705 2TB Gen 5

Crucial · Phison E26
$399
$199.50/TB
View on Amazon →

Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB Gen 5

Samsung · Samsung Piccolo
$419
$104.75/TB
View on Amazon →
Generation
Gen 5
Gen 5
Price (USD)
$399
$419
Capacity
2 TB
4 TB
$/TB
$199.50
$104.75
Sequential read
14,500 MB/s
7,250 MB/s
Sequential write
12,700 MB/s
6,300 MB/s
Interface
PCIe 5.0 x4
PCIe 4.0x4/5.0x2
Controller
Phison E26
Samsung Piccolo
DRAM cache
Yes
No (HMB)
TBW endurance
1,200 TBW
2,400 TBW
Warranty
5 years
5 years
PS5 compatible
Yes
Yes

Verdict: Crucial T705 2TB vs Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB

Both run on Gen 5 hardware but at different capacities: 2 TB for the Crucial T705 2TB versus 4 TB for the Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB. Whether the larger drive's $/TB advantage justifies the higher upfront cost depends on how much you actually need.

Hardware-wise, the Crucial T705 2TB runs on an original Phison E26 chip that defined the Gen 5 reference design. The Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB pairs Samsung's Piccolo — a DRAM-less controller with flexible PCIe generation support.

Price separates these two meaningfully. The Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB costs $104.75/TB versus $199.50/TB for the Crucial T705 2TB — a 47% premium that needs justification in real benchmarks, not just spec-sheet bragging.

In the read department, the Crucial T705 2TB leads by roughly 7 GB/s. The difference is more academic than practical for typical use, but it does matter for video editors moving multi-GB project files.

Write performance separates them too. The Crucial T705 2TB sustains 12,700 MB/s writes versus 6,300 MB/s for the Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB — a real advantage for video editors and anyone doing heavy file operations.

The Crucial T705 2TB carries a dedicated DRAM chip for FTL (Flash Translation Layer) mapping; the Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB relies on HMB (Host Memory Buffer), borrowing 64 MB from system RAM. The practical gap shows up only under sustained random write loads.

Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB earns higher TBW ratings (2,400 vs 1,200 TBW) — relevant for sustained write workloads, irrelevant for everything else.

Real-world use cases

If this purchase is for a PS5 storage expansion, the comparison flattens — Sony's PCIe Gen 4 controller normalizes both Crucial T705 2TB and Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB to roughly equal in-game load times. The cheaper drive is the smart pick. For content creators routinely rendering 4K or 8K video, the Crucial T705 2TB's 12,700 MB/s sustained write is the deciding factor — multi-GB project files land noticeably faster than on the alternative. Note for handheld gamers: M.2 2280 is the desktop/laptop standard. Steam Deck and the ROG Ally line need 2230 drives — neither Crucial T705 2TB nor Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB fits without modification.

Pick the Crucial T705 2TB if...

Pick the Crucial T705 2TB if you value the lower retail price ($399 vs $419), meaningfully faster reads (14,500 MB/s), higher sustained writes (12,700 MB/s), and a dedicated DRAM cache chip. Crucial typically delivers the best $/TB among DRAM-equipped NVMes because Micron sells direct rather than going through brand licensing.

Pick the Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB if...

Pick the Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB if you value better $/TB economics ($104.75/TB), and a higher TBW endurance rating (2,400 TBW). Samsung designed the 990 EVO Plus around the Piccolo controller's dual-PCIe support — a hedge against both Gen 4 holdouts and Gen 5 early adopters.

Best value for money

Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB
$104.75/TB beats the alternative by 47%

Best for gaming

Crucial T705 2TB
Strong $/MB-s ratio for game loads, and fits the PS5 expansion slot

Best for content creators

Crucial T705 2TB
Best write-heavy profile here: 12,700 MB/s sustained, 1,200 TBW

Best for PS5

Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB
PS5-compatible Gen 4 at $104.75/TB

Crucial T705 2TB vs Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB — common questions

What's the price difference between Crucial T705 2TB and Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB?

The Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB costs $419 (104.75 per TB), while the Crucial T705 2TB runs $399 (199.50 per TB). The gap is $20, equivalent to about 47% per TB. Prices change weekly; check current Amazon listings before deciding.

Does the Crucial T705 2TB's read advantage matter in practice?

Specs say yes (14,500 MB/s versus 7,250 MB/s). Real-world testing says rarely. Game load times and OS boots saturate well below either drive's peak read speed. The advantage shows up in sustained sequential reads — large file copies, raw video reads, dataset loads.

Is the Crucial T705 2TB or Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB better for PS5?

Both are PCIe Gen 4 NVMe M.2 2280 — both meet Sony's expansion requirements. The PS5's M.2 controller caps sustained speeds at ~5,500 MB/s, so both drives saturate it equally. Pick on price — the Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB at $104.75/TB is the better value. Add a heatsink (the PS5 cover provides minimal cooling) for thermal headroom.

Should I pay more for the DRAM in the Crucial T705 2TB?

Only if your workload includes sustained random writes — databases, source-code compilation against large repos, 4K-and-up video editing on long projects. For the majority of consumer use, the DRAM-less Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB performs identically while saving money.

Which has better endurance, the Crucial T705 2TB or Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB?

The Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB carries the higher rating: 2,400 TBW versus 1,200 TBW on the Crucial T705 2TB. For typical consumer use this rarely matters — even 600 TBW takes 10+ years of normal writes to consume. Content creators writing 50+ GB daily should weight TBW more heavily.

Bottom line: Crucial T705 2TB or Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB?

Default recommendation: Samsung 990 EVO Plus 4TB. It hits the right balance of price ($104.75/TB), Gen 5 performance, and brand support for the average buyer. The Crucial T705 2TB has its place if you need higher sustained write speeds, but that's a narrower use case.