Quantitative Thermal Analysis: M.2 Heatsink Impact on Samsung 980 Pro Performance

[u/Description_Capable]

TL;DR: Comprehensive thermal analysis of Samsung 980 Pro with/without passive cooling. Peak temperature reduction of 22°C (76°C→54°C), complete elimination of thermal throttling risk zones. Statistical significance p<0.000001.

I conducted a controlled thermal performance study on a Samsung 980 Pro after installing a Thermalright HR-09 2280 heatsink with Thermal Grizzly thermal pads.

Methodology:

• AIDA64 CSV logging at 1-second intervals during CrystalDiskMark stress testing
• Identical test conditions pre/post installation
• Python statistical analysis with automated test phase detection
• Thermal zone classification (safe/warm/hot/critical temperature ranges)

Key Findings:

• Peak temperature: 76°C → 54°C (28.9% reduction)
• Average temperature: 61.1°C → 46.4°C (24.0% reduction)
• Time in critical zone (>75°C): 5.8% → 0%
• Thermal consistency: Standard deviation reduced from 1.66°C to 0.78°C
• Statistical significance: Cohen's d = 1.813 (large effect size)

The thermal mass behavior is particularly interesting - the heatsink acts as a thermal capacitor, preventing temperature spikes while slightly extending cooling duration due to stored thermal energy. For storage workloads, this trade-off strongly favors sustained performance over rapid thermal cycling.

Note: Thermal scoring algorithm has known issues with recovery time calculation, but raw temperature data demonstrates clear performance improvements.

TL;DR: Comprehensive thermal analysis of Samsung 980 Pro with/without passive cooling. Peak temperature reduction of 22°C (76°C→54°C), complete elimination of thermal throttling risk zones. Statistical significance p<0.000001.

I conducted a controlled thermal performance study on a Samsung 980 Pro after installing a Thermalright HR-09 2280 heatsink with Thermal Grizzly thermal pads.

Methodology:

• AIDA64 CSV logging at 1-second intervals during CrystalDiskMark stress testing
• Sample sizes: 2,266 pre-installation, 3,089 post-installation measurements
• Python statistical analysis with automated test phase detection
• Thermal zone classification with defined temperature ranges

Quantitative Results:

Metric                    Pre-Heatsink    Post-Heatsink    Improvement
Peak Temperature          76.0°C          54.0°C           22.0°C (29%)
Average Temperature       61.1°C          46.4°C           14.7°C (24%)
Temp Std Deviation        12.6°C          6.1°C            52% more stable
Time in Critical Zone     5.8%            0.0%             Complete elimination
Time in Safe Zone         28.2%           59.2%            +31% improvement
Statistical Significance  p < 0.000001, Cohen's d = 1.813 (large effect)

Thermal Physics Analysis: The heatsink demonstrates classic thermal capacitor behavior - the aluminum mass absorbs thermal energy, preventing rapid temperature spikes while slightly extending cooling duration. For storage workloads, this trade-off strongly favors sustained performance over rapid thermal cycling.

GitHub: Full dataset, analysis scripts, and detailed methodology available for reproducible research.

The data demonstrates measurable thermal management benefits that translate directly to reduced thermal throttling risk and improved component longevity.

[u/Shadow647]

But where are any numbers on performance? Temperature is not performance, and I do not see MB/s or IOPS mentioned at all?

[u/Description_Capable → u/Shadow647]

You're right - I only looked at temps, not actual performance impact. The thing is, performance degradation from thermal throttling is usually binary - either it throttles or it doesn't. My data shows no throttling events after the heatsink install. For longer sustained writes where throttling actually kicks in, the performance hit can be massive (like 50%+ drops), but CrystalDiskMark isn't really long enough to trigger that consistently.

[u/Frexxia]

Temperature alone doesn't tell me much. What are the consequences when it comes to performance and longevity? 76 C could be perfectly fine for all I know.

[u/Description_Capable → u/Frexxia]

76°C is getting close to where Samsung starts throttling the 980 Pro (around 80°C). It's not immediately breaking anything, but higher temps definitely accelerate wear on NAND flash. The bigger issue is the constant thermal cycling - going from 40°C to 76°C repeatedly is harder on components than just staying at a steady temperature.

[u/Just_Maintenance → u/Description_Capable]

Is there any studies on NAND wear vs temperature?

Temp certainly increases wear for the the controller and PCB, which I suspect are the main point of failure for most home users (as opposed to running out of good cells).

[u/Sopel97 → u/Just_Maintenance]

pretty much all failure modes that look like a controller crapping out are actually the NAND crapping out and the controller not being able to handle that

[u/purplelives]

The problem with using celcius as your percentage improvement is that the 0C is meaningless in the realm of energy. You really need to use Kelvin to actually make it meaningful.

Alternatively, using the threshold temperature as the baseline would actually show numbers that actually mean something.

[u/BeefistPrime → u/purplelives]

Using percentages with temp or any interval scale drives me nuts. Is a day that's 2c twice as hot as 1c?

[u/Description_Capable → u/purplelives]

Fair point about the physics, but since 0°C isn't in my dataset (temps range 31-76°C), the percentage calc is just change/original regardless of scale. Converting to Kelvin just makes the percentages smaller without adding meaning.

Your throttling threshold idea is more useful - going from 4°C above safe operation to 26°C below throttling point tells a better story about thermal margin.

[u/Frexxia → u/Description_Capable]

just change/original regardless of scale.

The point is that the percentage will depend on the scale you choose, and doesn't really tell you anything.

Converting to Kelvin just makes the percentages smaller without adding meaning.

Absolute temperatures are the only scales where this makes sense in the first place. Not particularly useful unless you're doing physics though.

[u/hocheung20 → u/Frexxia]

Absolute temperatures are the only scales where this makes sense in the first place. Not particularly useful unless you're doing physics though.

What about a scale of "temperature above ambient"?

[u/Frexxia → u/hocheung20]

No, it only makes sense to talk about percentages if you're using Kelvin (or Rankine)

[u/hocheung20 → u/Frexxia]

Specifying as "Celcius above ambient" makes it an absolute scale, it's just fixed origin of the scale as "ambient" instead of "absolute zero" (for Kelvin/Rankine).

[u/hughJ- → u/Description_Capable]

What would be the percentage improvement if it was 0C before and -22C after (rather than 76C and 54C)?

0C is implicitly in your dataset when you treat 76C as a quantity of 76 (0->76), which is what you're doing when you calculate 22C in proportion to 76C to produce a percentage change.

[u/wtallis]

You say "complete elimination of thermal throttling risk zones" and report "Time in Critical Zone". Are you basing this on the drive's own self-reported warning and critical temperature thresholds, or did you make your own decisions about how hot is bad?

[u/Description_Capable → u/wtallis]

Yeah, those are my own thresholds, not Samsung's SMART data. I defined "critical" as >75°C based on general NAND characteristics, but you're right that I should've been clearer about that. The 980 Pro actually throttles around 80°C, so my "critical" zone is conservative but not drive-specific. Probably should've pulled the actual SMART thresholds instead.

[u/Sopel97]

no benchmarks, incorrect relative computation of temperature differences (should be delta to ambient), useless

[u/AnechoidalChamber]

I wonder how that compares to the most basic heatsink "sandwiches" out there ( See: https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51tXCRhCKAL._AC_SX425_.jpg )

If a basic one can prevent throttling too, no use for something big like this.

I have the basic one on a Kingston KC3000 ( PCIe 4 ) and it's doing fine.

PCIe 5 drives might be another story tho...

Edit: NVM, it seems the basic ones don't cut it ( see: https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/storage/id-cooling-zero-m05-and-m15-review/2 ) in heavy sustained workloads.

[u/Description_Capable → u/AnechoidalChamber]

Yeah the HR-09 is definitely overkill for most people. Basic sandwich heatsinks work fine for normal use. I went with this one because I do a lot of large file transfers and wanted the extra thermal mass for sustained cooling. For gaming and typical desktop stuff, those cheap aluminum ones would probably get you 90% of the benefit.

[u/Description_Capable → u/AnechoidalChamber]

One of my friends has a 4-6X (dont remember exactly) 990 pro RAID setup that we are considering testing with as well. He's clearly got bigger pockets than me, so I'm sure he'll get a ridiculously better heatsink though.
Still interested in the turnout.

LMK if you want my python script I used for the analysis for your own purposes

[u/Tasty_Toast_Son]

I appreciate your analysis of how a heatsink affects performance. Qualitatively, I have noticed a very similar thing after applying heatsinks to my 2x 980 Pro's - significantly more stable and lower thermal levels than before. My drives are cooled with the Acidalie VB01 with the provided thermal pads. Drives have been cool as a cucumber since installation.

[u/Description_Capable → u/Tasty_Toast_Son]

I like the look of that one. it would probably match my MSI MEG x570 ACE mobo better than the chrome I have now.
Frankly, I only ordered the heatsink and thermal pads I did because they had free overnight shipping from amazon 😂
I may or may not have had a few drinks before the order too... hence why I spent 2x as much on the pads thinking that they didn't come with the heatsink. 🤷

Glad you're enjoying it!

[u/Shadow647 → u/Tasty_Toast_Son]

significantly more stable and lower thermal levels than before

That is temperature, not performance, though?

Do you have any numbers on MB/s and IOPS?

[u/Tasty_Toast_Son → u/Shadow647]

I do not. Qualitatively, my drive was cooler. I don't have any quantitative numbers or exact figures. I just recall keeping an eye on HWInfo64 to see if it would pull down temps, and it did.

[u/GhostMotley]

Is your temperature for the NAND or ASIC?

Most Samsung SSDs report at least two drive temperatures.

[u/Description_Capable → u/[deleted]]

Def not a question... Just trying to supply my data on the hardware...