Samsung drives have not been worth the price premium for a while. Hell, the day after Samsung announced the 980 Pro, Sabrent announced their new PCIe 4 NVMe Rocket 4 Plus drive that is faster, and comes in 2TB.
amusing. they were asked what they expected and mostly the right answers, that the loading of levels or loading a map would be faster. however tl;dw they were all wrong anyway :p
buy a 512 or 1 tb ssd (dunno current pricing) because the biggest waste of time is uninstalling a game on your backlog to add another game from your backlog.
stusser
5474
No particular brand is far ahead these days. Basically you want TLC with cache and there are only a couple companies making the controllers, and tons of companies rebranding them, just like monitor LCDs.
I wouldnāt buy anything smaller than 1TB these days. NVMe is nice because it eliminates two cables from your case, otherwise SATA is perfectly fine. (Unless directstorage becomes a thing.)
Yeah, and 2TB drives are nicely affordable now. I have a 2TB Pioneer drive that I paid $210 for.
But what if I have a 2TB SSD full of backlog games, and need moar space. :P
who has time to install all those games?!?!!
i have ā¦ 1 tb used on my game ssd.
My 2TB is full, so are my 2 512GBsā¦
I think QLC is fine for a read-heavy scenario like PC gaming.
You can write roughly 300GB a day for five years before the Sabrents wear out, which seems like a reasonable tradeoff for the increased capacity they provide. Especially since you would be uninstalling/installing games less frequently on them.
stusser
5480
Itās perfectly fine, I just wouldnāt buy one myself yet.
MichaelD
5481
Re: 10GB ā I have a temporary card in my gaming rig (5700xt) and Ark uses all 8GB the card has. Not an efficient game, thoughā¦ for all I know it would use all of whatever you have.
Editer
5482
Gotta call BS on that one, sir.
After some discussion in the MS Flight Sim topic I decided to time the Crucial MX300 SATA SSD loading Flight Sim against the Sabrent 2TB Rocket NVMe M.2 drive I added to the system to give more room for sims.
| Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020) tests |
Crucial MX300 1TB |
Sabrent Rocket 2TB |
| Load to āPress Any Keyā |
1:45 |
1:10 |
| Load to āPress Any Keyā skipping videos |
1:12 |
0:39 |
| Load to opening menu* |
4:36 |
2:17 |
| Load Courcheval challenge |
0:45 |
0:39 |
There are two improvements here: Much newer SSD technology, and going from SATA to M.2. But together they make a very noticeable difference, and definitely refute āSSD speed is completely meaninglessā as a blanket statement.
Also, good lord, is MSFS an argument for DirectStorage or what? I should time it against loading Sublogic Flight Simulator II from a 1541 floppy drive.
. * The āload to opening menuā numbers may not be directly comparable because the sim does an online check for updates and that time might have varied slightly between the two tests.
Yeah, I thought @stusser was saying SSD speeds, while vastly superior to mechanical, werenāt a huge difference between the various SSD techs, outside of benchmarking. I agree with that. But if heās saying a spinning disk and an SSD is the same for gaming thatās quite the hot take.
I mentioned above, but I was just building a PC for someone and it took a good 90 seconds to load Arena. It takes around 20 seconds on my normal (SSD) rig to do that. Let alone things like installation times for Windows updates or simply restarting the PC. I donāt agree with him at all on that one.
SATA/AHCI only has one command queue with up to 32 commands.
NVMe has 64K command queues, with up to 64K commands in each.
Editer
5485
Did my chart not show up for you? :-)
I mean, MSFS probably takes 20 minutes to load off a mechanical hard drive. Iām not going to spend my time testing that. :) But I still saw some loading times drop to almost half with better SSD tech.
Oh yeah, sorry, I got busy and forgot to finish my thought.
I think for your particular example, MSFS is sort of a different animal. I imagine that for the large/vast majority of normal games youād see something like this:
When spinning disk is - 90-120 secondsā¦
Then SATA will be like 25-35 secondsā¦
and M.2 will be aroundā¦ 22-34 secondsā¦
and maybe PCI-4 is likeā¦ 20-25 seconds.
In other words, you picked like maybe the only game that is so crazy it actually can display the speeds faster because % work better with such big numbers.
mono
5487
Lol, about an hour before you posted this I ordered the same Sabrent, and Iām also coming from a Crucial MX300.
Mine arrived 2 days ago. Second one Iāve bought but new build for this one.
@Editer you guys talking about the 4.0 drive (copper) or the blue one?
mono
5490
I actually ended up w/ this one. Itās the exact same drive as the Rocket 4.0, but rebadged so I saved $35 bucks.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0899F3MWB/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&th=1
I just updated my SSD setup in my laptop recently.
Iām vaguely amused the Thunderbolt 3 external SSD is 5x faster than the internal SATA connected one.
Originally I went from a 512GB manufacturer SSD to a Samsung 2TB for Windows. The move went fine. I couldnāt successfully clone to go from the 2TB to the 8TB though. Had to disable Intel Optane caching in the EFI and re-install Windows.
