Kioxia a dévoilé un prototype de SSD NVMe PCIe 5.0 x4. Ses performances sont prometteuses avec des débits capables d’atteindre les 14 Go/s en séquentiel.
The post SSD NVMe PCIe 5.0 x4 de Kioxia, des débits de 14 Go/s ! appeared first on GinjFo.
Le lancement Windows 11 approche. L’application PC Health Check fait se grand retour. Elle détermine si votre PC est éligible à la mise à niveau gratuite.
The post Windows 11, votre PC est-il compatible ? PC Health Check de Microsoft est disponible en téléchargement appeared first on GinjFo.
Continuing their reputation for bringing new media releases to the market before everyone else, Seagate seemingly has a PCIe Gen 4.0 NVMe SSD in the pipeline for NAS/SAN server use in their Ironwolf series, known as the Seagate Ironwolf 525. Although little is publically know about this new SSD, the Ironwolf 525 has already begun to appear on numerous stock management and distribution sites in Europe, so this seems to indicate a likely release before the end of 2021. Seagate was one of the first brands in storage media to introduce a server dedicated class of SSDs for home and prosumer users (with a U.2/SAS series already in place for enterprise in their Nytro series of course) in both SATA and NVMe m.2, however even in this early leak of information, a few unique or interesting details have already emerged. So, let’s go through everything that we know so far and whether the Seagate Ironwolf 525 SSD will deserve your cache* later in 2021/2022
Seagate Firecuda 530 PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD Review Here – https://nascompares.com/2021/08/09/seagate-firecuda-530-ssd-review-the-score-to-beat
*I’ll get my coat…..
Click to view slideshow.As mentioned, details on specifications of the Seagate Ironwolf 525 NVMe SSD are remarkably thin on the ground. Clearly, release and a formal reveal should not be too far ahead, as even a casual search online reveals that a number of European sites are listing the drive:
As it stands, there are no official datasheets for the Seagate Ironwolf 525 SSD available, but a lot of the specifications that ARE available (across all listing sites), as well as going by the Seagate model ID naming convention used in the Ironwolf 510 and Firecuda seemingly indicate the following:
Of course, these should be taken with a huge grain of salt until a formal release is made, but even tentatively, compared against the Seagate Ironwolf 510 Gen 3 SSD, the Ironwolf 525 is much more comparable to the Firecuda 520 in architecture and almost certainly will feature the Pison E16 controller. A VERY important factor to keep in mind right now is that in Autumn 2021, there are very, VERY few PCIe Gen 4.0 equipped servers (and practically zero M.2 PCIe 4×4 equipped systems). PCIe Gen 4 upgrade cards are very gradually appearing, but this seemingly looks like it will be a much later winter 2021/2022 hardware change from the big names in NAS, SAN and custom servers. Therefore, as appealing as the Seagate Ironwolf 525 PCIe Gen 4×4 SSD sounds right now, it is worth remembering that very few server systems will be able to fully unlock its potential and if you are considering the Ironwolf 525 for a NAS/Server released before Summer 2021, then you would likely be better off opting for the current Seagate Ironwolf 510 NAS SSD which is PCIe Gen 3×4 and has incredibly high durability taken into account.
Details regarding when this drive will be available to buy are incredibly thin on the ground. As mentioned, the low number of PCIe Gen 4.0 server systems, the continued high suitability of the Ironwolf 510 and the storage media market that is only starting to bounce back from over a year of shortages (at least!) all add up to the Seagate Ironwolf 525 not being a drive that needs to arrive in a hurry! The current PCIe Gen 4.0 favourite SSD, the Seagate Firecuda 530 and 520 still continue to support the existing PCIe4 client market in desktop and laptop forms, but for NAS (and indeed all server types) this switch is still very much ‘in progress’. Prices however seem to be a little clearer, with individual distributions sites appearing to agree on the pricing for each capacity at the moment of 500GB being €104 (€125 inc.TAX) 1TB at €173 (€208 inc.TAX) and 2TB arriving at €359 (€430 inc.TAX). Of course, these prices are subject to change, but do serve as an early guide on the pricing of the Seagate Ironwolf 525 and how that price sits with the Ironwolf 510 and Firecuda 520 that are currently available. We will keep an eye on this and update you on the Ironwolf 525 as we learn more, so stay subscribed! If you want to learn more about Seagate NVMe SSDs and how each drive in their current portfolio compares, have a look at the guide below:
Guide to Seagate SSDs HERE –
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.
Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
Terms and Conditions
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Tags de l’article
I think it would be fair to say that over the last few weeks I have seen ALOT of SSDs. Because of a myriad of industry affecting events in the last 18 months (Covid, Chia, Trade Wars, Component shortages) the usually regimented and carefully planned release schedules of the SSD brands have been thrown into utter chaos, leading to a huge number of high performing SSDs all landing into the market in the usually quiet summer period. All of these SSDs have been loud and proud about their performance, brash and shouty in proclaiming their superiority over their competitors – all except one. Titanium Micro and their TH7175 PCIe 4.0 SSD is one that you could oh so easily have missed. There is not a hugely well-known brand in the home/commercial sector and are all too often seen in business and enterprise bundled solutions. However, despite their rather modest stance on promoting their products in more consumer-friendly sectors and even the retail packaging of their drives being less number heavy, the Titanium Micro TH7175 is possibly one of the highest performing PCIe 4.0 NMe SSDs that I have reviewed on NASCompares so far in 2021/2022. However is the Titanium Micro TH7175 SSD a little too good to be true? Are there any hidden compromises and does it deserve your data/ Let’s find out in today’s SSD review.
When it comes to the overall performance of the Titanium TH7175, you cannot help but be impressed, as it absolutely delivers on each of it’s claims online. Plus, the fact that the brand is so fantastically understated in its approach compared with other brands in its online marketing and product presentation is pleasingly rare. The physical drive itself is pretty underwhelming and avoids a number of the snazzy labelling for good or bad, so you really only have the performance and stats to go by on this drive, which holds up well. The Price tag, though not as low as some mid/late 2020 released PCIe4 NVMe SSD, is still quite affordable, especially when compared against some of the other Phison E18 enabled SSDs available right now. The availability of this drive is nowhere near as widespread as others tough and this may likely hurt how well it fares in an increasingly busy SSD marketplace! If you are looking for a solid, honest and reliable NVMe SSD for your PCIe 4.0 enabled system, this ticks a lot of boxes for gamers and even has a dependable write speed for those content creators and editors upgrading their storage in 2021/2022. Plus the inclusion of an especially rare yet highly reassuring 7-year warranty is not to be ignored.
| PROs of the Titanium Micro TH7175 | CONs of the Titanium Micro TH7175 |
| Genuinely Impressive Performance
PS5 Compatibility Confirmed 7 Year Warranty (with Registration) Available in up to 4TB 1.2 Million Read IOPS (4TB model) Modest Presentation is a rare treat! |
Particularly powerful PC required to crack 7,000MB/s
No Inclusive Heatsink Option Availability is lower than the bigger brands |
As already mentioned, Titanium Micro are NOT a particularly loud or over-sharing kind of brand. Indeed, the retail packaging of the TH7175 SSD is fantastically understated, arriving in a simple plastic shell as you might find hanging on a rack of your local grocery store. This kind of packaging is not new in computer components, but is usually found in memory modules and less commercially desirable parts. I query the protection this kind of retail packaging provides to such a delicate component, but am still just a bit surprised at the complete lack of ANYTHING related to the 7,200MB/s+ Sequential Read, 6850MB/s Sequential Write, 1.2M IOPS or anything even remotely boastful (as found in EVERY SINGLE PCIe SSD I have reviewed lately). I cannot decide if this is a good or bad thing yet!
In fact, the ONLY thing I can find on this retail packaging for the Titanium Micro TH7175 SSD that I would describe as boastful/loud is the brand highlighting that this SSD arrives with a 7-year warranty available to the buyer. Yes, SEVEN years, comprising of a 5yr standard warranty and then (if you register online) an additional 2 more years. I have criticised brands like Sabrent previously that have offered 1yr standard warranty and 5years IF you register, but this is very different with the TH7175, as you do genuinely feel like you are getting something ‘extra’ for registering, rather than the registration being required for the 5yr warranty as you find in practically ALL other SSD brands. I can see why they would make a point of highlighting this ‘longer than most’ warranty period.
Unboxing the Titanium Micro TH7175 SSD is a rather brief affair! Inside the plastic shell casing, we only find the SSD itself. The display card has all the information regarding warranty and product information links and this SSD does not feature any 1st party inclusive heatsink. NOTE – I removed the SSD label during the YouTube review to display the on-board components, so although I have attempted to re-apply it carefully/accurately, the slight blemish on the sticker was caused by myself during the reapplication.
The SSD for today’s review is the 1TB version of this series and (again) it is very understated. Lacking the metal top plate of the Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus or the inclusive heatsink of the Gigabyte Aorus 7000s, what we find is a small label that simply denotes the model ID and logo.
Indeed, the label barely covers the NAND/Controller, not that this matters as you would 100% need to use a heatsink of a drive like this! The 1TB model of the Titanium Micro TH7175 is a single-sided SSD and does not suffer from any kind of cramming on the PCB.
The rear side of the Titanium Micro TH7175 has a little more information on the SSD, as well as the clear bocks that the 2 sided 2TB and 4TB models would utilize.
Just before we conducted the full PC benchmark testing, we took the time to test the Titanium Micro TH7175 NVMe m.2 inside the PS5 SSD expansion bay to check it’s compatibility. I am pleased to confirm that the SSD fits like a glove with plenty of room for a standard heatsink (the Eluteng m.2 2-part heatsink was used for the PS5 performance testing coming soon on NASCompares).
Performance testing of the Titanium Micro TH7175 inside the PS5 (using Beta Software 3.1) showed that this SSD benchmarked 6,557.08MB/s Read on the Playstation’s own testing. This puts it more than 1,000MB/s over the recommended minimum for a PS5 storage upgrade and faster in Read and Write than the PS5’s own internal SSD. Impressive.
So that is the physical design and PS5 testing of the Titanium Micro TH7175 SSD. But what about the hardware components themselves and how they perform in further PC testing? Does the Titanium Micro TH7175 cut the mustard in terms of current generation hardware and protocols? Let’s find out.
As you might expect from an M.2 NVMe SSD that boldly promises performance of over 7,000MB/s sequential read (ie BIG data), the hardware specifications and architecture of the Titanium Micro TH7175 are quite modern. Indeed, for all the big talk of the Seagate Firecuda 530 hardware (still currently the ‘score to beat’ PCIE Gen4 m.2 NVMe right now) being top tier, the Titanium Micro TH7175 is pretty darn similar on the spec sheet! Below is how it looks:
| Titanium Micro TH7175
|
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | 3D TLC 96L NAND |
| Max Capacity | 4TB – Double Sided |
| Controller | Phison E18-PS5018 |
| Warranty | 7yr (5+2YR with Reg.) |
I know a lot of the above will seem needlessly technical, so below we can bring the most important considerations into sharper focus.
The first big, BIG thing to remember here is the controller, that Phison E18. An SSD is much like a microcosm version of a whole computer. The Controller is equivalent to the CPU, and Phison are one of the bigger 3rd party SSD controller manufacturers in the world! I say 3rd party, because some long-running storage brands like Samsung and WD have most of their development and hardware engineering ‘in-house’ and use their own branded controllers. Whereas some brands source some/all components for their SSDs from 3rd parties – which is not necessarily a bad thing for both them and the industry (there are pros and cons on either side). Phison has been at the cutting edge of this subject for years now and the E18 was first revealed last year in 2020, but due to the pandemic making storage trends unpredictable and semi-conductor shortages, most SSDs that utilized the Phison E18 eventually arrived in 2021. This controller is one of the biggest reasons that the Titanium Micro TH7175 can actually back up it’s promises about the 7,000MB/s+ Sequential Read (sequential data = big chunks of data). However, that is not the only reason.
The NAND on the Titanium Micro TH7175 is where the data lives! SSDs (as you no doubt know) do not use moving parts as found in traditional hard drives and instead uses cells that are charged and data is read/written to them in this process. The quality of the NAND and the layers used will make a big difference to the durability and performance of an SSD and although the Titanium Micro TH7175 does not provide the best SSD in the industry at this tier right now (that, once again, goes to the Seagate Firecuda 530 at 176 layer 3D TLC NAND), it is bigger than most, arriving at 96 Layers of 3D TLC NAND. Although the majority of modern PCIe M.2 SSD use 3D TLC NAND (avoid QLC NAND like the PLAGUE btw!), most are still at 64 layers or so, so this is a big jump up for theTitanium Micro TH7175 SSD.
Much like the Controller on the Titanium Micro TH7175 being the ‘CPU’, it also has an area of memory. The Titanium Micro TH7175 SSD uses 1GB DDR4 memory on board and this in conjunction with the SSD provides a massive body of data handling resources for getting your data moving through the SSD and out of the m.2 NVMe PCIe 4 interface. The amount of memory scales in conjunction with the 1TB or 2TB SSD you use, with 2GB of DDR4 at the on the 2TB tier, 1GB DDR4 on the 1TB, etc.
As mentioned, all available capacities of the Titanium Micro TH7175 arrive at 2280 in length. This is quite normal for the 1TB and 2TB versions, but the fact that the 2TB can arrive on single-sided SSD boards is very impressive. Physical storage NAND is distributed evenly in order to space out the storage and allow even cooling, NAND wear and performance.
Finally, there is the M.2 NVMe connection. Not all m.2 SSDs are created equal and although M.2 SATA and M.2 NVMe look similar, they provide massively different performance and connectivity. However, the Titanium Micro TH7175 takes it one step further, by using a newer generation of PCIe Connectivity. In short, M.2 NVMe SSDs are connected to the host PC/Console system via PCIe protocol (think of those slots that you almost always use for your graphics cards, but a much, MUCH smaller connector). These allow much larger bandwidth (ie maximum speed) for the connected storage media, Much like regular PCIe slots, they have different versions (i.E PCIe Gen 1, 2, 3, 4, etc) and also a multiplying factor (x1, x2, x4, etc). Up until around 18 months ago, the best M.2 NVMes were M.2 PCIe Gen 3×4 (so a maximum 4,000MB/s possible). However, never generation SSD like the Titanium Micro TH7175 use PCIe Gen 4×4 (a potential 8,000MB/s possible) and it is only now that SSD controllers and NAND production has reached a point where it can catch up and fully saturate (i.e fill) this connection.
Overall, you really cannot fault the hardware inside/onboard the Titanium Micro TH7175, as it is still (2-3 months after release) higher performing in sequential Read and Write than many other M.2 NVMe PCIe 4 SSDs released in that time. Before we go into the full testing, however, it is worth taking a moment to look closely at the reported performance benchmarks of the Titanium Micro TH7175, as although the performance seems stellar, there are areas such as IOPS and endurance when compared with its main rivals that are worth taking into consideration.
Before we conduct our own testing on this SSD, Let’s take a closer look at the reported specifications and benchmarks first. The Titanium Micro TH7175 SSD arrives in multiple capacities (below). The Prices currently are a little inconsistent (with each higher capacity tier actually having a higher price per GB – quite unusual) likely due to the hardware shortages, the Pandemic, Chia has affected SSD availability in the last 12 months and most recently the announcement that PS5 supports this SSD and it has increased the current price of both models around 20-30%!. Below is a breakdown of how each Titanium Micro TH7175 SSD compares:
| Brand/Series | Titanium Micro TH7175
|
Seagate Firecuda 530
500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99 |
WD Black SN850
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | 3D TLC 96L NAND | 3D TLC Micron B47R 176L | BiCS4 96L TLC |
| Max Capacity | 4TB – Double Sided | 4TB – Double Sided | 2TB |
| Controller | Phison E18-PS5018 | Phison E18-PS5018 | WD_BLACK G2 |
| Warranty | 7yr (5+2YR with Reg.) | 5yr | 5yr |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | N/A | $139 / £119 | $119 / £99 |
| 1TB Model | 850028113318 | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | $259 / £215 | $239 / £199 | $249 / £169 |
| 2TB Model | 850028113325 | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | $499 / £419 | $419 / £379 | $399 / £339 |
| 4TB Model | 850028113967 | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Price in $ and $ | $999 / £820 | $949 / £789 | N/A |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | N/A | 640TB | 300TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | N/A | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | N/A | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 1TB Model | 850028113318 | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 700TB | 1275TB | 600TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1600000 | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | 0.3DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 2TB Model | 850028113325 | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 1400TB | 2550TB | 1200TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1600000 | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | 0.3DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 4TB Model | 850028113967 | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 3000TB | 5100TB | N/A |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1600000 | 1,800,000 | N/A |
| DWPD | 0.3DWPD | 0.7DWPD | N/A |
There are clear throughput improvements as you rise through the capacity tiers (not unusual), as does the rated 4K IOPS. Though one area worth focusing on a little is that TBW (terabytes Written) and DWPD (Drive writes per day), as this drive is rated a pinch higher than the Samsung 980 Pro and WD Black SN850 in terms of NAND lifespan on daily writes, likely down to that Micron 96 Layer 3D TLC NAND used, rather than t used by those used by competitors. This is an important point because the brand has significantly less pedigree in-home/business SSD media than the likes of Samsung, WD and Seagate and people will want to know they are going to get a product that lasts!
However, despite the use of the Phison E18 controller and 96 layer NAND, the reported IOPS on each capacity is actually a noticeable degree lower than those reported by their competitors. Indeed, the Titanium Micro TH7175 is one of the few E18 SSDs that does not cross into the reported 1 Million IOPS mark, maxing out at 700k. This is still very impressive anyway, but it does make me wonder where the disparity stems from. Indeed, when you look at the bulk of PCIe 4×4 M.2 NVMe 1.4 SSD, that feature the E18 controller and 96L (or higher) on board, it really only leaves about 4 other SSDs in the market today that this can be compared against. The Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus, the MSI Spatium M480, the ADATA Gammix S70 and (current leader) the Seagate Firecuda 530. Of those, the only one that seemingly ‘out specs’ the Titanium Micro TH7175 is the Seagate Firecuda 530. However, the Titanium Micro TH7175 SSD has been available in the market for almost 3-4 months longer and has certainly embedded itself in the market at that time a fraction more. Below is how these two drives compare:
| Brand/Series | Titanium Micro TH7175
|
Seagate Firecuda 530
500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99 |
WD Black SN850
|
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 7000MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 3000MB | 4100MB |
| 1TB Model | 850028113318 | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7150MB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 5600MB | 6000MB | 5300MB |
| 2TB Model | 850028113325 | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7175MB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6800MB | 6900MB | 5100MB |
| 4TB Model | 850028113967 | ZP4000GM3A013 | |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7200MB | 7300MB | N/A |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6890MB | 6900MB | N/A |
| Brand/Series | Titanium Micro TH7175 | Seagate Firecuda 530 | WD Black SN850 |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 400,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 700,000 | 680,000 |
| 1TB Model | 850028113318 | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 360000 | 800000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 645000 | 1000000 | 720,000 |
| 2TB Model | 850028113325 | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 640,000 | 1,000,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 630,000 | 1,000,000 | 710,000 |
| 4TB Model | 850028113967 | ZP4000GM3A013 | |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 660,000 | 1,000,000 | N/A |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1,250,000 | 1,000,000 | N/A |
Yes, that is a LONG table, but you can immediately see that the Seagate Firecuda 530 raises the stakes on all of the key specifications. Although there are a number of micro reasons for this, the 176L NAND is the biggest factor here. Yes, that is why the Firecuda 530 commands the higher price tag. Additionally, the WD Black arriving at a better price point, higher IOPS in most tiers and the fact it does this whilst still hitting that 7,000MB/s certainly gives pause for thought. However, for many, the additional cost for higher durability they may never need, peak performance their core system will not reach and IOPS rating that their larger file handling will never utilize will mean that holding out for the Firecuda or WD Black SN850 is not in their interest. Both SSDs (on paper at this stage!) are fantastic examples of where consumer and prosumer SSDs are evolving towards. Let’s get the Titanium Micro TH7175 on the test machine!
The Titanium Micro TH7175 was selected for this test and it was tested using multiple benchmark tools, from a cold boot, in the 2nd storage slot (i.e not the OS drive). Each test was conducted three times (full details of this are shown in the YouTube Review of the Titanium Micro TH7175 over on NASCompares):
Test Machine:
Using CrystalDisk, we got a good measure of the drive and verified that this PCIe Gen 4 x4 SSD was indeed using the 4×4 lane. Additionally, the temp averaged out around 38C between each test being conducted.
The first tests were conducted using the ATTO disk benchmark software. The first was a 256MB test file size and below is a breakdown of the transfer rates and IOPS. The 2nd Test was a 1GB test file and finally, the last test was with a 4GB test file. The system was given 1-minute cool downtime between tests, no screen recording software was used (remove overhead) and a heatsink was used throughout (no reboots)
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #1
256MB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.58GB/s
256MB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.08GB/s
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #2
1GB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.57GB/s
1GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.12GB/s
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #3
4GB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.52GB/s
4GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.12GB/s
Next, although the ATTO tests were quite good, but not what I would have hoped from this SSD, so I moved on to the Crystal Disk Mark testing to see how well it would handle our lasts barrage of tests. The first test was the 1GB file testing, which measured both sequential and random, as well as the read and write IOPS. Test were conducted on a 1GB, 4GB and 16GB Test File. I also included a mixed 70/30 read and write task to give a little bit more of a realistic balanced workload. These tests were conducted with 1-minute cooling break in between
CRYSTALDISK MARK 1GB TEST
CRYSTALDISK MARK 4GB TEST
CRYSTALDISK MARK 16GB TEST
Next, I switched to AS SSD benchmark. A much more thorough test through, I used 1GB, 3GB and 5GB test files. Each test includes throughput benchmarks and IOPS that are respective to the larger file sizes (important, if you are reading this and trying to compare against the reported 4K IOPS from the manufacturer).
AS SSD Benchmark Test #1
|
|
AS SSD Benchmark Test #2
|
|
AS SSD Benchmark Test #3
|
|
Ordinarily, I would introduce tests like BlackMagic and AJA into the mix here, but even a short burst of testing on an NVMe like this would over saturate the cache memory on board. Nevertheless, in the short term we still could ascertain the reported performance on 1GB, 4GB and 16GB file testing was:
1GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5907MB/s Read & 5433MB/s Write
4GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5874MB/s Read & 5389MB/s Write
16GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5874MB/s Read & 5411MB/s Write
Overall, the Titanium Micro TH7175 was certainly able to provide some solid performance, as well as potentially exceed the test figures here on a more powerful machine. Given the reported Read and Write statistics that the brand has stated publically, I think there is enough evidence here to back up those claims. IOPs were a little lower than I expected, but again, we were testing very large file types, so this would have to be taken in context.
When it comes to the overall performance of the Titanium TH7175, you cannot help but be impressed, as it absolutely delivers on each of it’s claims online. Plus, the fact that the brand is so fantastically understated in it’s approach compared with other brands in it’s online marketing and product presentation is pleasingly rare. The physical drive itself is pretty underwhelming and ashews a number of the snazzy labelling for good or bad, so you really only have the performance and stats to go by on this drive, which hold up well. The Price tag, though not as low as some mid/late 2020 released PCIe4 NVMe SSD, is still quite affordable, especially when compared against some of the other Phison E18 enabled SSDs available right now. The availability of this drive is no where near as wide spread as others tough and this may likely hurt how well it fares in an increasingly busy SSD marketplace! If you are looking for a solid, honest and reliable NVMe SSD for your PCIe 4.0 enabled system, this ticks a lot of boxes for gamers and even has a dependable write speed for those content creators and editors upgrading their storage in 2021/2022. Plus the inclusion of an especially rare yet highly reassuring 7 year warranty is not to be ignored.
| PROs of the Titanium Micro TH7175 | CONs of the Titanium Micro TH7175 |
| Genuinely Impressive Performance
PS5 Compatibility Confirmed 7 Year Warranty (with Registration) Available in up to 4TB 1.2 Million Read IOPS (4TB model) Modest Presentation is a rare treat! |
Particularly powerful PC required to crack 7,000MB/s
No Inclusive Heatsink Option Availability is lower than the bigger brands |
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
SEARCH IN THE BOX BELOW FOR NAS DEALS
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.
Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
Terms and Conditions
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Tags de l’article
Voitures, vélos, scooters... : la mobilité de demain se lit sur Vroom ! https://www.numerama.com/vroom/vroom//
L'article Quels sont les meilleurs joysticks, yoke et manettes des gaz ? est apparu en premier sur Numerama.
Sur le segment des ventirads haut de gamme, DeepCool annoncé l’AK620. L’engin est imposant avec sa structure à double tours et ses deux ventilateurs. L’AK620 est un ventirad musclé signé DeepCool. Son architecture capable de dissiper 260W propose une structure à double tours. Elle demande de la prudence en raison de dimensions généreuses. Par exemple ...
The post Ventirad AK620, du double tours imposant et lourd ! appeared first on GinjFo.
2021/2022 has been an unbelievable fruitful year for NVMe SSDs! After the initial reveal of a small handful of PCIe4 enabled drives, the sheer onslaught of brands and models that have arrived on the scene to tempt the commercial and prosumer sector has been particularly heavy. With this deluge of releases, the consumer confusion as so many incredibly similar SSDs arrive at once was going to be inevitable and when so many brands and their drives are making similar promises on similar hardware, it is going to take something special for any one particular SSD to stand out. However, that is exactly what the XPG GAMMIX S70 from ADATA has managed to do. Most users who have pre-built devices in their homes or offices stand a better than average chance of having it feature ADATA memory inside and although it is not a big/known name in the conventional sense as Samsung or Seagate, they ARE an incredibly well established and implemented brand in the background. They have supplied numerous SSD devices over the years, but their PCIe 4.0 NVMe M.2 SSD is the one that has really, REALLY got peoples attention. Arriving with a very unique controller that challenges the Phison E18 that most competitors have opted for, along with an inclusive heatsink, advanced LDPC and a price tag that is noticeably lower than its competitors, straight off the bat it has made a significant impact. Then you see that the performance benchmarks supplied from ADATA seemingly indicate that this drive is one of, if not THE highest-performing SSD in the market right now within its tier. Is the ADATA XPG GAMMIX S70 SSD too good to be true? Or does it live up to it’ bold reputation? Let’s find out.
Is the ADATA GAMMIX S70 NVMe SSD the best PCIe SSD to buy right now? It is really hard not to think so! Arriving at a price point that is a noticeable degree lower in price than its competitors, arriving with a higher sequential Read and Write than most of its competitors AND arriving with an included and high-quality heatsink – it is REALLY tough to argue with that! It is by no means perfect, with reported IOPS appearing only a pinch higher than average and fairly standard durability, but these are always going to be factors that are of a specific concern to VERY specific types of buyer. With impressive temperature control, enough architectural differences to stand out from an increasingly busy crowd of PCIe 4 SSDs right now, I think this and the Seagate Firecuda 530 come to an incredibly tied first place for me and even then, the GAMMIX S70 from ADATA still gains an upper hand by virtue of being the better all-round choice for the majority of buyers in 2021/2022. If you are considering buying the ADATA GAMMIX s70 – stop considering and just buy it already!
| PROs of the XPG GAMMIX S70 | CONs of the XPG GAMMIX S70 |
| Genuinely Impressive Performance
Excellent Value (Especially With the Reported Performance) PS5 Compatibility Confirmed Inclusive Heatsink is high quality AND expertly applied Innogrit Controller is Unique vs the many Phison E18 SSDs out there Excellent on-board Temp Control August ’21 Update Increased Performance Further |
The heatsink is 15mm high and uniquely shaped, so physical installation should be checked first
Only two capacities are available
|
The retail box that the Gammix S70 arrives in is shiny. No, that is not enough. It’s REALLY shiny, covered in holographic sheen and is oozing with gamer focus branding! The box makes a bold impact and although the majority of PCIe 4.0 SSDs in 2021/2022 are quite loud and brash in their presentation, this is a big step up still., especially given that ADATA is generally quite a ‘background’ company in most other components.
The top left of the retail box highlights a number of the drive’s key features that, although fairly standard in PCIe4 M.2 NVMes of late in most cases, still has a few stand out specs.
Opening up this retail gives us JUST the XPG GAMMIX S70 SSD. No instructions, warranty information (displayed on the rear of the box) or screws, just the SSD+1st party pre-attached heatsink in a plastic shell.
it certainly is a beefy looking SSD in that heatsink, measuring 15mm in height, maybe check the location of where you plan on installing this SSD, as in some cases the height of the heatsink can interfere with your CPU FAN/Heatink physically. It’s a wonderfully unique looking heatsink though and given its inclusion in the price, whilst still remaining competitively prices vs other M.2 PCIe 4 NVMe SSDs, it is a very positive mark in their favour.
Getting a closer look at this SSD and Heatsink, the ADATA XPG GAMMIX S70 is a chunky drive indeed. Unlike most heatsinks that form a single solid rectangular mass of shaped metal formed for vertical vents, this official heatsink is designed in a far more angular fashion, as well as utilizing a closed vent structure.
Looking at the heatsink ‘down the barrel’ and you can see that 1, that heat is directed in a curve from the base and 2, it is then fanned out over a shingled layer curve so that each tier is unobstructed in its heat dissipation. In testing the result was that although the heat of the drive was a pinch warmer than most in idle (measured by CrystalDisk), it never hit the same height as other heatsinks in the most intense tests. This might even be arguable more beneficial, as it will keep the NAND warm but not keep the controller hot (temp graph further blow in the tests)
Nonetheless, this IS a very tall heatsink and can certainly see it being problematic in shuttle/mini-ATX setups.
The base of the heatsink is quite basic, featuring the model IS/Manufacturer details, as well as the usual certification stamps. Additionally, you can make out a thermal pad under the SSD, despite the drive being single-sided.
For those of you who have been considering the ADATA XPG GAMMIX S70 for installation in the PS5 SSD expansion slot to increase storage, I am pleased to confirm that this SSD is 100% supported by the system (currently in software beta, but the Gammix S70 will definitely be on the compatibility list of the full software update release. However, the physical installation needs highlighting.
That unique, inclusive and highlight effective is certainly a nice unit, but in terms of PS5 installation – a bit OTT! Completely filling the slot up to the 2280 mark, it protrudes from the bay and although you can still attach the consoles external panels, you cannot apply the metal bay cover.
Installing the ADATA Gammix S70 in the PS5 M.2 SSD bay at startup allows you to run a benchmark on the drive. Oddly, despite the high performance of this SSD, the PS5 rated the drive at 6,235MB/s in its initial benchmark. Later testing brought this figure much higher to 6,651MB/s, however in the spirit of fairness against other SSD, I am recording the first attempt.
The included heatsink on the XPG Gammix S70 is held in place by 2 SSDs on one side (locked in under a metal lip on the other side) and is very firmly held in place.
Removing the top part of the heatsink revealed the assortment of onboard chips that I will touch on later, but it is definitely worth revisiting the subject of heatsinks and the advantages of ones that are applied by the same manufacturer as the SSD.
As you can see from the thermal pad shape and placement below, it has been specifically made to cover the most important components in their precise location (rather than a general large strip of thermal padding that is much less efficient at the expense of trying to cover everything!
The fact that ADATA includes the heatsink with your purchase of the XPG GAMMIX S70 will always be attractive to buyers who want hassle from installation, as well as doing so at no additional cost and STILL arriving at a lower price point than many competitors is inarguably appealing. So that is the physical design of the XPG GAMMIX S70 SSD. But what about the hardware components themselves? Does the XPG GAMMIX S70 cut the mustard in terms of current generation hardware and protocols? Let’s find out.
As you might expect from an M.2 NVMe SSD that boldly promises performance of over 7,000MB/s sequential read (ie BIG data), the hardware specifications and architecture of the XPG GAMMIX S70 are quite modern. Indeed, for all the big talk of the Seagate Firecuda 530 hardware (still currently the ‘score to beat’ PCIE Gen4 m.2 NVMe right now) being top tier, the XPG GAMMIX S70 is pretty darn similar on the spec sheet! Below is how it looks:
| ADATA GAMMIX S70
|
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | 3D TLC Micron 96L |
| Max Capacity | 2TB – Single Sided |
| Controller | Innogrit IG5236 |
| Warranty | 5yr |
I know a lot of the above will seem needlessly technical, so below we can bring the most important considerations into sharper focus.
The first big, BIG thing to remember here is the controller, that Innogrit RainIer IG5236. An SSD is much like a microcosm version of a whole computer. The Controller is equivalent to the CPU, and although Inoogrit has produced several high profile SSD controllers in the last few years, this is their first PCIe 4.0 controller. This is a particularly big deal when most reports and measurements seemingly indicate that the Innogrit IG2536 is higher in performance than the Phison E18 controller used by most other recent PCIe 4 M.2 NVMe SSD, as well as because some long-running storage brands like Samsung and WD have most of their development and hardware engineering ‘in-house’ and use their own branded controllers. Indeed, the XPG Gammix S70 is one of very, VERY few SSDs that are using this controller in the home/prosumer gamer sector.
Earlier in 2021, CDRLabs ran performance testing with CrystalDisk on the Gammix S70 SSD, comparing against a Phison E18 SSD of similar architecture (96L 3D TLC NAND, DDR4 RAM, NVMe 1.4, etc) and largely surpassed it by hundreds of Megabytes in Sequential Read and Write performance. So these results tend to back up the increased performance benchmarks that ADATA provide on the XPG S70. This is further improved with a recent software/firmware update for this drive released in August 2021 that further improved the write performance.
The NAND on the XPG GAMMIX S70 is where the data lives! SSDs (as you no doubt know) do not use moving parts as found in traditional hard drives and instead uses cells that are charged and data is read/written to them in this process. The quality of the NAND and the layers used will make a big difference to the durability and performance of an SSD and although the XPG GAMMIX S70 does not provide the best SSD in the industry at this tier right now (that, once again, goes to the Seagate Firecuda 530 at 176 layer 3D TLC NAND), it is bigger than most, arriving at 96 Layers of 3D TLC NAND. Although the majority of modern PCIe M.2 SSD use 3D TLC NAND (avoid QLC NAND like the PLAGUE btw!), most are still at 64 layers or so, so this is a big jump up for the XPG GAMMIX S70 SSD. Although detailed information on the NAND used is not readily available online, we observed that the XPG GAMMIX S70 featured two blocks of ADATA NAND modules.
Much like the Controller on the XPG GAMMIX S70 being the ‘CPU’, it also has an area of memory. The XPG GAMMIX S70 SSD uses DDR4 memory on board and this in conjunction with the SSD controller provides a massive body of data handling resources for getting your data moving through the SSD and out of the m.2 NVMe PCIe 4 interface. The amount of memory scales in conjunction with the 1TB or 2TB SSD you use, with 2GB of DDR4 at the on the 2TB tier, 1GB DDR4 on the 1TB, etc.
As mentioned, all available capacities of the XPG GAMMIX S70 arrive at 2280 in length. This is quite normal for the 1TB and 2TB versions, but the fact that the 2TB can arrive on single-sided SSD boards is very impressive. Physical storage NAND is distributed evenly in order to space out the storage and allow even cooling, NAND wear and performance.
Finally, there is the M.2 NVMe connection. Not all m.2 SSDs are created equal and although M.2 SATA and M.2 NVMe look similar, they provide massively different performance and connectivity. However, the XPG GAMMIX S70 takes it one step further, by using a newer generation of PCIe Connectivity. In short, M.2 NVMe SSDs are connected to the host PC/Console system via PCIe protocol (think of those slots that you almost always use for your graphics cards, but a much, MUCH smaller connector). These allow much larger bandwidth (ie maximum speed) for the connected storage media, Much like regular PCIe slots, they have different versions (i.E PCIe Gen 1, 2, 3, 4, etc) and also a multiplying factor (x1, x2, x4, etc). Up until around 18 months ago, the best M.2 NVMes were M.2 PCIe Gen 3×4 (so a maximum 4,000MB/s possible). However, never generation SSD like the XPG GAMMIX S70 use PCIe Gen 4×4 (a potential 8,000MB/s possible) and it is only now that SSD controllers and NAND production has reached a point where it can catch up and fully saturate (i.e fill) this connection.
Overall, you really cannot fault the hardware inside/onboard the XPG GAMMIX S70, as it is still (2-3 months after release) higher performing in sequential Read and Write than many other M.2 NVMe PCIe 4 SSDs released in that time. Before we go into the full testing, however, it is worth taking a moment to look closely at the reported performance benchmarks of the XPG GAMMIX S70, as although the performance seems stellar, there are areas such as IOPS and endurance when compared with its main rivals that are worth taking into consideration.
Before we conduct our own testing on this SSD, Let’s take a closer look at the reported specifications and benchmarks first. The XPG GAMMIX S70 SSD arrives in multiple capacities (below). The Prices currently are a little inconsistent (with each higher capacity tier actually having a higher price per GB – quite unusual) likely due to the hardware shortages, the Pandemic, Chia has affected SSD availability in the last 12 months and most recently the announcement that PS5 supports this SSD and it has increased the current price of both models around 10-20%!. Below is a breakdown of how each competitor drive and the XPG GAMMIX S70 SSD compare:
| Brand/Series | ADATA GAMMIX S70
|
Seagate Firecuda 530
500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99 |
WD Black SN850
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | 3D TLC Micron 96L | 3D TLC Micron B47R 176L | BiCS4 96L TLC |
| Max Capacity | 2TB – Single Sided | 4TB – Double Sided | 2TB |
| Controller | Innogrit IG5236 | Phison E18-PS5018 | WD_BLACK G2 |
| Warranty | 5yr | 5yr | 5yr |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | N/A | $139 / £119 | $119 / £99 |
| 1TB Model | AGAMMIXS70-1T-C | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | $199 / £175 | $239 / £199 | $249 / £169 |
| 2TB Model | AGAMMIXS70-2T-C | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | $399 / £355 | $419 / £379 | $399 / £339 |
| 4TB Model | N/A | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Price in $ and $ | N/A | $949 / £789 | N/A |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | N/A | 640TB | 300TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | N/A | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | N/A | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 1TB Model | AGAMMIXS70-1T-C | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 740TB | 1275TB | 600TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 2,000,000 | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | 0.4DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 2TB Model | AGAMMIXS70-2T-C | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 1480TB | 2550TB | 1200TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 2,000,000 | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | 0.4DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 4TB Model | N/A | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | N/A | 5100TB | N/A |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | N/A | 1,800,000 | N/A |
| DWPD | N/A | 0.7DWPD | N/A |
There are clear throughput improvements as you rise through the capacity tiers (not unusual), as does the rated 4K IOPS. Though one area worth focusing on a little is that TBW (terabytes Written) and DWPD (Drive writes per day), as this drive is rated a pinch higher than the Samsung 980 Pro and WD Black SN850 in terms of NAND lifespan on daily writes, likely down to that 96 Layer 3D TLC NAND used, rather than t used by those used by competitors. This is an important point because the brand has significantly less ‘end user’ recognition in-home/business SSD media than the likes of Samsung, WD and Seagate and people will want to know they are going to get a product from a brand that they have heard of.
However, despite the use of the Innogrit Rainier IG5236 controller and 96 layer NAND, the reported IOPS on each capacity is actually a noticeable degree lower (for the most part) than those reported by their competitors. Indeed, the XPG GAMMIX S70 is one of the few SSD/Memory focused brands with a PCIe 4.0 SSD that does not cross into the reported 1 Million IOPS mark, maxing out at 740k. This is still very impressive anyway, but it does make me wonder where the disparity stems from. Indeed, when you look at the bulk of PCIe 4×4 M.2 NVMe 1.4 SSD that feature the E18 controller and 96L (or higher) on board, it really only leaves about 4 other SSDs in the market today that this can be compared against. The Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus, the MSI Spatium M480, the Gigabyte Aorus 7000s and (current leader) the Seagate Firecuda 530. Of those, the only one that seemingly ‘out specs’ the XPG GAMMIX S70 is the Seagate Firecuda 530. However, the XPG GAMMIX S70 SSD has been available in the market for longer and has certainly embedded itself in the minds and budget’s of PC/PS5 gamers who think the Firecuda 530 is too expensive and the others are less impress – it makes a very appealing middle ground. Below is how these drives compare in terms of throughput and IOPS:
| Brand/Series | ADATA GAMMIX S70
|
Seagate Firecuda 530
500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99 |
WD Black SN850
|
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 7000MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 3000MB | 4100MB |
| 1TB Model | AGAMMIXS70-1T-C | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7400MB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 5500MB | 6000MB | 5300MB |
| 2TB Model | AGAMMIXS70-2T-C | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7450MB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6800MB | 6900MB | 5100MB |
| 4TB Model | N/A | ZP4000GM3A013 | |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 7300MB | N/A |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 6900MB | N/A |
| Brand/Series | ADTA GAMMIX S70 | Seagate Firecuda 530 | WD Black SN850 |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 400,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 700,000 | 680,000 |
| 1TB Model | AGAMMIXS70-1T-C | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 350000 | 800000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 720000 | 1000000 | 720,000 |
| 2TB Model | AGAMMIXS70-2T-C | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 650,000 | 1,000,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 740,000 | 1,000,000 | 710,000 |
| 4TB Model | N/A | ZP4000GM3A013 | |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 1,000,000 | N/A |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 1,000,000 | N/A |
Yes, that is a LONG table, but you can immediately see that the Seagate Firecuda 530 raises the stakes on all of the key specifications. Although there are a number of micro reasons for this, the 176L NAND is the biggest factor here. Yes, that is why the Firecuda 530 commands the higher price tag. Additionally, the WD Black arriving at a better price point, higher IOPS in most tiers and the fact it does this whilst still hitting that 7,000MB/s certainly gives pause for thought. However, for many, the additional cost for higher durability they may never need, peak performance their core system will not reach and IOPS rating that their larger file handling will never utilize will mean that holding out for the Firecuda or WD Black SN850 is not in their interest. Both SSDs (on paper at this stage!) are fantastic examples of where consumer and prosumer SSDs are evolving towards. Remember that you can get 1TB of XPG GAMMIX S70 for the same price as 500GB of the Firecuda 530 – which given the similarity of that performance means that you are getting incredible value! Let’s get the XPG GAMMIX S70 on the test machine!
The XPG GAMMIX S70 was selected for this test and it was tested using multiple benchmark tools, from a cold boot, in the 2nd storage slot (i.e not the OS drive). Each test was conducted three times (full details of this are shown in the YouTube Review of the XPG GAMMIX S70 over on NASCompares):
Test Machine:
Using CrystalDisk, we got a good measure of the drive and verified that this PCIe Gen 4 x4 SSD was indeed using the 4×4 lane. Additionally, the temp averaged out a little higher in idle than most previously tested SSD, HOWEVER, the ADATA Gammix S70 heatsink kept the drive at a consistent temp of late 40’s for most of the tests and did an incredible job of maintaining a working temp without spiralling too high between each one being conducted.
The first tests were conducted using the ATTO disk benchmark software. The first was a 256MB test file size and below is a breakdown of the transfer rates and IOPS. The 2nd Test was a 1GB test file and finally, the last test was with a 4GB test file. The system was given 1-minute cool downtime between tests, no screen recording software was used (remove overhead) and a heatsink was used throughout (no reboots)
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #1
256MB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.34GB/s
256MB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.94GB/s
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #2
1GB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.34GB/s
1GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.91GB/s
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #3
4GB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.46GB/s
4GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.85GB/s
Next, although the ATTO tests were quite good, but not what I would have hoped from this SSD, so I moved on to the Crystal Disk Mark testing to see how well it would handle our lasts barrage of tests. The first test was the 1GB file testing, which measured both sequential and random, as well as the read and write IOPS. Test were conducted on a 1GB, 4GB and 16GB Test File. I also included a mixed 70/30 read and write task to give a little bit more of a realistic balanced workload. These tests were conducted with 1-minute cooling break in between
CRYSTALDISK MARK 1GB TEST
CRYSTALDISK MARK 4GB TEST
CRYSTALDISK MARK 16GB TEST
Next, I switched to AS SSD benchmark. A much more thorough test through, I used 1GB, 3GB and 5GB test files. Each test includes throughput benchmarks and IOPS that are respective to the larger file sizes (important, if you are reading this and trying to compare against the reported 4K IOPS from the manufacturer).
AS SSD Benchmark Test #1
|
|
AS SSD Benchmark Test #2
|
|
AS SSD Benchmark Test #3
|
|
Ordinarily, I would introduce tests like BlackMagic and AJA into the mix here, but even a short burst of testing on an NVMe like this would over saturate the cache memory on board. Nevertheless, in the short term we still could ascertain the reported performance on 1GB, 4GB and 16GB file testing was:
1GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5861MB/s Read & 5039MB/s Write
4GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5874MB/s Read & 5127MB/s Write
16GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5881MB/s Read & 5218MB/s Write
Throughout the testing, the XPS GAMMMIX S70 SSD started at a slightly higher than average temp, but maintained a good operational temperature throughout the whole testing:
Overall, the XPG GAMMIX S70 was certainly able to provide some solid performance, as well as potentially exceed the test figures here on a more powerful machine. Given the reported Read and Write statistics that the brand has stated publically, I think there is enough evidence here to back up those claims. IOPs were a little lower than I expected, but again, we were testing very large file types, so this would have to be taken in context.
Is the ADATA GAMMIX S70 NVMe SSD the best PCIe SSD to buy right now? It is really hard not to think so! Arriving at a price point that is a noticeable degree lower in price than its competitors, arriving with a higher sequential Read and Write than most of its competitors AND arriving with an included and high-quality heatsink – it is REALLY tough to argue with that! It is by no means perfect, with reported IOPS appearing only a pinch higher than average and fairly standard durability, but these are always going to be factors that are of a specific concern to VERY specific types of buyers. With impressive temperature control, enough architectural differences to stand out from an increasingly busy crowd of PCIe 4 SSDs right now, I think this and the Seagate Firecuda 530 come to an incredibly tied first place for me and even then, the GAMMIX S70 from ADATA still gains an upper hand by virtue of being the better all-round choice for the majority of buyers in 2021/2022. If you are considering buying the ADATA GAMMIX s70 – stop considering and just buy it already!
| PROs of the XPG GAMMIX S70 | CONs of the XPG GAMMIX S70 |
| Genuinely Impressive Performance
Excellent Value (Especially With the Reported Performance) PS5 Compatibility Confirmed Inclusive Heatsink is high quality AND expertly applied Innogrit Controller is Unique vs the many Phison E18 SSDs out there Excellent on-board Temp Control August ’21 Update Increased Performance Further |
The heatsink is 15mm high and uniquely shaped, so physical installation should be checked first
Only two capacities are available
|
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
SEARCH IN THE BOX BELOW FOR NAS DEALS
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.
Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
Terms and Conditions
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Tags de l’article
Of all the PCIe Gen 4 NVMe SSD that have arrived on the market in 2021, few promised the blend of value vs quality that the Corsair MP600 Pro has. It is no secret that this summer has seen a large number of 7,000MB/s m.2 SSDs have dropped into the consumer and prosumer market either to capitalize on the growing trend of professional/next-gen gamers or delayed till then due to the pandemic, hardware shortages and chia. The Corsair MP600 Pro media drive on the other hand is one of a small handful of PCIe4 SSD is one of a very small contingent of drives that brands were able to sneak out for release between the closing stages of 2020 and Spring 2021. With around 6 months longer on the shelves than many alternative drives like the Firecuda 530 and SPATIUM M480, this has led to this drive being a popular choice indeed, as well as more time to get flexible with its pricing. With PCIe4 equipped motherboards now becoming considerably more affordable and the PS5 M.2 SSD expansion slot activation growing closer, the appeal of this highly-compatible drive has grown even further. Add to that the Corsair MP600 Pro’s inclusive custom heatsink and impressive availability (in spite of shortages elsewhere) and now seems like a perfect time to Review this SSD and find out if the Corsair MP600 Pro deserves your data in 2021/20222?
It is genuinely very hard not to like the Corsair MP600 Pro NVMe SSD. Even when it did not quite hit 7,000MB/s in some of my testing, I got the impression was my system not having the ‘umpf’ to break that number and not the SSD hitting any kind of internal barrier. Likewise, the price point of this SSD (thanks to its earlier release and large availability) means it is easily one of the best value PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSDs that you can buy right now and although its durability & write performance is still overshadowed by the Seagate Firecuda 530 and its IOPS are a tad eclipsed by the WD Black SN850 & Samsung 980 Pro, these are very industry-specific factors that most home and prosumer gamers will never need to factor into their long term storage use. The inclusive heatsink is high in quality, application and utility – something most brands would include as an optionally charged extra, Corsair include and still arrive at a price point lower than most, only really challenged meaningfully on this score by the Gigabyte Aorus 7000s. The SLC caching (raised often in other reviews) seems a little underwhelming in size and realistic recovery when compared to everything else, but still compares well against others in this bracket nonetheless. Additionally, there is a non-PRO version that although lower traditional throughput performance, addresses/remedies concerns of endurance etc. Overall, the Corsair MP600 Pro is a standout drive amoung the growing crowd of PCIe4 SSDs being released right now and I can easily recommend it.
| PROs of the Corsair MP600 Pro | CONs of the Corsair MP600 Pro |
| Impressive Inclusive Heatsink
Genuinely Impressive Performance PS5 Compatibility Confirmed 96 Layer TLC 3D NAND Higher Durability than WD Black & Samsung 980 Pro Consistent 7,000MB/s on ALL Capacities Available in up to 4TB, at 2280 Length Too |
IOPS figures are lower than many PCIe4 SSDs
Cache fills up quick! Lower endurance than the Firecuda 530
|
The retail packaging of the Corsair MP600 Pro is very gamer aimed and quite slick. With an embossed mesh design, performance stats adorning the bottom and a neat grey, black and neon yellow colour scheme, it certainly stands out.
A closer look at the reported performance statistics at the base of the box shows us that this drive is making a few rather bold claims. Now, on the face of it (at the time of writing in September 2021), these stats are actually not so unique. Indeed, with around 8 very distinct M.2 NVMe PCIe4 SSDs launched in Summer 2021, these seem standard. However, back in Feb/March 2021, these were not so common and the MP600 Pro was one of only 3-4 SSDs to take advantage of the Phison E18 controller (that makes this performance throughput possible) commercially.
Opening up the retail box shows us rather neat, today and secure contents. The SSD (with heatsink attached that I will touch on shortly) arrives in a pre-cut hard-foam surround (which I very much approve of, when most SSDs arrive in simply cut card or plastic shell they are easily crushed). The drive also arrives with a couple of paper docs regarding initial use and warranty information (5 years included).
I really want to add that the foam, pre-cut surround for the MP600 Pro is genuinely unique and in the 13-14 SSD I have reviewed this year on NASCompares, NONE of them arrived in such well-protected packaging. This is a minor point I know, but I will always give bonus points to a brand that actually spends a little more on retail/shipping packaging, as it shows they are willing to spend a little more now to save time/money later on RMAs and issues. Tick!
Removing the SSD in it’s entirety shows us the full 2280 Corsair MP600 Pro drive, with it’s lovely unique heatsink. The drive is branded with the manufacturer logo and model ID, as well as the heatsink fully surrounding the drive in a screwless, hard-clip design.
Looking at the heatsink at an angle, you can see the rather unique vent structure that Corsair has employed here and it is one that you can see a semblance of in a number of premium Corsair memory modules. I am also surprised that this heatsink does not use screws, but instead is latched on at 4 different points with metal clips. We did manage to get the drive removed from the heatsink later in the review, but it was attached remarkably firmly and almost certainly at the point of manufacturer, in bulk on a production line.
Much like a number of other Phison E18 PCIe4 SSDS, the larger controller chip on the PCB has been placed right at the top, millimetres from the m.2 key connector. However, I am pleased to confirm that this heatsink toes the line nicely between amply covering the controller, whilst not obstructing the M.2 connector over-lap (surprisingly more common than you would think). That is one of the primary benefits of buying an SSD that has the heatsink included, it often (but not always, see Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus) means that the thermal pads between the heatsink and drive are SPECIFICALLY applied to the most important components in a bespoke fashion and not one long covering strip as found in generic 3d party heatsinks. Additionally, as it is applied at the point of manufacture/production, it will likely have been done far more accurately and in a dust/airflow controlled environment. It’s a tall heatsink, but the width and depth of coverage on the SSD is still very good and not compromised upon.
Indeed, looking at this heatsink at an angle shows us just how deep this is. The SSD measures quite tall with this pre-installed Heatsink and in testing for a separate video and article here on NASCompares coming soon involving testing this drive with the Sony PS5 console gaming system, the heatsink was too tall to allow the installation of the m.2 cover panel after the drive was connected. The system could still be used with the drive uncovered (but the larger system console cover panels on), but this is still a very important consideration to factor in.
So that is the physical design of the Corsair MP600 Pro SSD. But what about the hardware components themselves? Does the Corsair MP600 Pro cut the mustard in terms of current generation hardware and protocols? Let’s find out.
As you might expect from an M.2 NVMe SSD that boldly promises performance of over 7,000MB/s sequential read (ie BIG data), the hardware specifications and architecture of the Corsair MP600 Pro are quite modern. Indeed, for all the big talk of the Seagate Firecuda 530 hardware (still currently the ‘score to beat’ PCIE Gen4 m.2 NVMe right now) being top tier, the Corsair MP600 Pro is pretty darn similar on the spec sheet! Below is how it looks:
| Corsair MP600 Plus
|
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | 3D TLC Micron 96L |
| Max Capacity | 4TB – Double Sided |
| Controller | Phison E18-PS5018 |
| Warranty | 5yr |
I know a lot of the above will seem needlessly technical, so below we can bring the most important considerations into sharper focus.
The first big, BIG thing to remember here is the controller, that Phison E18. An SSD is much like a microcosm version of a whole computer. The Controller is equivalent to the CPU, and Phison are one of the bigger 3rd party SSD controller manufacturers in the world! I say 3rd party, because some long-running storage brands like Samsung and WD have most of their development and hardware engineering ‘in-house’ and use their own branded controllers. Whereas some brands source some/all components for their SSDs from 3rd parties – which is not necessarily a bad thing for both them and the industry (there are pros and cons on either side). Phison has been at the cutting edge of this subject for years now and the E18 was first revealed last year in 2020, but due to the pandemic making storage trends unpredictable and semi-conductor shortages, most SSDs that utilized the Phison E18 eventually arrived in 2021. This controller is one of the biggest reasons that the Corsair MP600 Pro can actually back up it’s promises about the 7,000MB/s+ Sequential Read (sequential data = big chunks of data). However, that is not the only reason.
The NAND on the Corsair MP600 Pro is where the data lives! SSDs (as you no doubt know) do not use moving parts as found in traditional hard drives and instead uses cells that are charged and data is read/written to them in this process. The quality of the NAND and the layers used will make a big difference to the durability and performance of an SSD and although the Corsair MP600 Pro does not provide the best SSD in the industry at this tier right now (that, once again, goes to the Seagate Firecuda 530 at 176 layer 3D TLC NAND), it is bigger than most, arriving at 96 Layers of 3D TLC NAND. Although the majority of modern PCIe M.2 SSD use 3D TLC NAND (avoid QLC NAND like the PLAGUE btw!), most are still at 64 layers or so, so this is a big jump up for the corsair MP600 Pro SSD.
Much like the Controller on the Corsair MP600 Pro being the ‘CPU’, it also has an area of memory. The Corsair MP600 Pro SSD uses 1GB DDR4 memory on board and this in conjunction with the SSD provides a massive body of data handling resources for getting your data moving through the SSD and out of the m.2 NVMe PCIe 4 interface. The amount of memory scales in conjunction with the 1TB or 2TB SSD you use, with 2GB of DDR4 at the on the 2TB tier, 1GB DDR4 on the 1TB, etc. As mentioned, all available capacities of the Corsair MP600 Pro arrive at 2280 in length. This is quite normal for the 1TB and 2TB versions, but the fact that the 2TB can arrive on single-sided SSD boards is very impressive. Physical storage NAND is distributed evenly in order to space out the storage and allow even cooling, NAND wear and performance.
Finally, there is the M.2 NVMe connection. Not all m.2 SSDs are created equal and although M.2 SATA and M.2 NVMe look similar, they provide massively different performance and connectivity. However, the Corsair MP600 Pro takes it one step further, by using a newer generation of PCIe Connectivity. In short, M.2 NVMe SSDs are connected to the host PC/Console system via PCIe protocol (think of those slots that you almost always use for your graphics cards, but a much, MUCH smaller connector). These allow much larger bandwidth (ie maximum speed) for the connected storage media, Much like regular PCIe slots, they have different versions (i.E PCIe Gen 1, 2, 3, 4, etc) and also a multiplying factor (x1, x2, x4, etc). Up until around 18 months ago, the best M.2 NVMes were M.2 PCIe Gen 3×4 (so a maximum 4,000MB/s possible). However, never generation SSD like the Corsair MP600 Pro use PCIe Gen 4×4 (a potential 8,000MB/s possible) and it is only now that SSD controllers and NAND production has reached a point where it can catch up and fully saturate (i.e fill) this connection. Overall, you really cannot fault the hardware inside/onboard the Corsair MP600 Pro, as it is still (2-3 months after release) higher performing in sequential Read and Write than many other M.2 NVMe PCIe 4 SSDs released in that time. Before we go into the full testing, however, it is worth taking a moment to look closely at the reported performance benchmarks of the Corsair MP600 Pro, as although the performance seems stellar, there are areas such as IOPS and endurance when compared with its main rivals that are worth taking into consideration.
Before we conduct our own testing on this SSD, Let’s take a closer look at the reported specifications and benchmarks first. The Corsair MP600 Pro SSD arrives in multiple capacities (below). The Prices currently are a little inconsistent (with each higher capacity tier actually having a higher price per GB – quite unusual) likely due to the hardware shortages, the Pandemic, Chia has affected SSD availability in the last 12 months and most recently the announcement that PS5 supports this SSD and it has increased the current price of both models around 20-30%!. Below is a breakdown of how each Corsair MP600 Pro SSD compares:
| Brand/Series | Corsair MP600 Plus
|
Seagate Firecuda 530
500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99. |
WD Black SN850
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | 3D TLC Micron 96L | 3D TLC Micron B47R 176L | BiCS4 96L TLC |
| Max Capacity | 4TB – Double Sided | 4TB – Double Sided | 2TB |
| Controller | Phison E18-PS5018 | Phison E18-PS5018 | WD_BLACK G2 |
| Warranty | 5yr | 5yr | 5yr |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | N/A | $139 / £119 | $119 / £99 |
| 1TB Model | MP600-1TB | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | $225 / £185 | $239 / £199 | $249 / £169 |
| 2TB Model | MP600-2TB | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | $435 / £364 | $419 / £379 | $399 / £339 |
| 4TB Model | MP600-4TB | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Price in $ and $ | $1055 / £915 | $949 / £789 | N/A |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | N/A | 640TB | 300TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | N/A | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | N/A | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 1TB Model | MP600-1TB | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 700TB | 1275TB | 600TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,700,000 | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | 0.38DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 2TB Model | MP600-2TB | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 1400TB | 2550TB | 1200TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,700,000 | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | 0.38DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 4TB Model | MP600-4TB | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 3000TB | 5100TB | N/A |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,700,000 | 1,800,000 | N/A |
| DWPD | 0.38DWPD | 0.7DWPD | N/A |
There are clear throughput improvements as you rise through the capacity tiers (not unusual), as does the rated 4K IOPS. Though one area worth focusing on a little is that TBW (terabytes Written) and DWPD (Drive writes per day), as this drive is rated a pinch higher than the Samsung 980 Pro and WD Black SN850 in terms of NAND lifespan on daily writes, likely down to that Micron 96 Layer 3D TLC NAND used, rather than t used by those used by competitors. This is an important point because the brand has significantly less pedigree in-home/business SSD media than the likes of Samsung, WD and Seagate and people will want to know they are going to get a product that lasts! It is also worth highlighting that the Corsair MP600 Pro arrives in an impressive 4TB version that, although clearly more expensive, is a relative rarity compare with many of the current top-tier PCIe 4.0 M.2 NVMe SSDs (with only 3-4 brands having this option and most being noticeably more expensive)
However, despite the use of the Phison E18 controller and 96 layer NAND, the reported IOPS on each capacity is actually a noticeable degree lower than those reported by their competitors. Indeed, the Corsair MP600 Pro is one of the few E18 SSDs that does not cross into the reported 1 Million IOPS mark, maxing out at 700k. This is still very impressive anyway, but it does make me wonder where the disparity stems from. Indeed, when you look at the bulk of PCIe 4×4 M.2 NVMe 1.4 SSD, that feature the E18 controller and 96L (or higher) on board, it really only leaves about 4 other SSDs in the market today that this can be compared against. The Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus, the MSI Spatium M480, the ADATA Gammix S70 and (current leader) the Seagate Firecuda 530. Of those, the only one that seemingly ‘out specs’ the Corsair MP600 Pro is the Seagate Firecuda 530. However, the Corsair MP600 Pro SSD has been available in the market for almost 3-4 months longer and has certainly embedded itself in the market at that time a fraction more. Below is how these two drives compare:
| Brand/Series | Corsair MP600 Plus
|
Seagate Firecuda 530
500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99 |
WD Black SN850
|
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 7000MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 3000MB | 4100MB |
| 1TB Model | MP600-1TB | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7000MB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 5500MB | 6000MB | 5300MB |
| 2TB Model | MP600-2TB | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7000MB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6550MB | 6900MB | 5100MB |
| 4TB Model | MP600-4TB | ZP4000GM3A013 | |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7000MB | 7300MB | N/A |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6850MB | 6900MB | N/A |
| Brand/Series | Corsair MP600 Plus | Seagate Firecuda 530 | WD Black SN850 |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 400,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 700,000 | 680,000 |
| 1TB Model | MP600-1TB | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 360000 | 800000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 780000 | 1000000 | 720,000 |
| 2TB Model | MP600-2TB | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 660,000 | 1,000,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 800,000 | 1,000,000 | 710,000 |
| 4TB Model | MP600-4TB | ZP4000GM3A013 | |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 700,000 | 1,000,000 | N/A |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 650,000 | 1,000,000 | N/A |
Yes, that is a LONG table, but you can immediately see that the Seagate Firecuda 530 raises the stakes on all of the key specifications. Although there are a number of micro reasons for this, the 176L NAND is the biggest factor here. Yes, that is why the Firecuda 530 commands the higher price tag. Additionally, the WD Black arriving at a better price point, higher IOPS in most tiers and the fact it does this whilst still hitting that 7,000MB/s certainly gives pause for thought. However, for many, the additional cost for higher durability they may never need, peak performance their core system will not reach and IOPS rating that their larger file handling will never utilize will mean that holding out for the Firecuda or WD Black SN850 is not in their interest. Both SSDs (on paper at this stage!) are fantastic examples of where consumer and prosumer SSDs are evolving towards. Let’s get the Corsair MP600 Pro on the test machine!
The Corsair MP600 Pro was selected for this test and it was tested using multiple benchmark tools, from a cold boot, in the 2nd storage slot (i.e not the OS drive). Each test was conducted three times (full details of this are shown in the YouTube Review of the Corsair MP600 Pro over on NASCompares):
Test Machine:
Using CrystalDisk, we got a good measure of the drive and verified that this PCIe Gen 4 x4 SSD was indeed using the 4×4 lane. Additionally, the temp averaged out around 41C between each test being conducted.
The first tests were conducted using the ATTO disk benchmark software. The first was a 256MB test file size and below is a breakdown of the transfer rates and IOPS. The 2nd Test was a 1GB test file and finally, the last test was with a 4GB test file. The system was given 1-minute cool downtime between tests, no screen recording software was used (remove overhead) and a heatsink was used throughout (no reboots)
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #1
256MB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.56GB/s
256MB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.10GB/s
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #2
1GB File PEAK Read Throughput = 5.69GB/s
1GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.13GB/s
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #3
4GB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.59GB/s
4GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.12GB/s
Next, although the ATTO tests were quite good, but not what I would have hoped from this SSD, so I moved on to the Crystal Disk Mark testing to see how well it would handle our lasts barrage of tests. The first test was the 1GB file testing, which measured both sequential and random, as well as the read and write IOPS. Test were conducted on a 1GB, 4GB and 16GB Test File. I also included a mixed 70/30 read and write task to give a little bit more of a realistic balanced workload. These tests were conducted with 1-minute cooling break in between
CRYSTALDISK MARK 1GB TEST
CRYSTALDISK MARK 4GB TEST
CRYSTALDISK MARK 16GB TEST
Next, I switched to AS SSD benchmark. A much more thorough test through, I used 1GB, 3GB and 5GB test files. Each test includes throughput benchmarks and IOPS that are respective to the larger file sizes (important, if you are reading this and trying to compare against the reported 4K IOPS from the manufacturer).
AS SSD Benchmark Test #1
|
|
AS SSD Benchmark Test #2
|
|
AS SSD Benchmark Test #3
|
|
Ordinarily, I would introduce tests like BlackMagic and AJA into the mix here, but even a short burst of testing on an NVMe like this would over saturate the cache memory on board. Nevertheless, in the short term we still could ascertain the reported performance on 1GB, 4GB and 16GB file testing was:
1GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5894MB/s Read & 5461MB/s Write
4GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5874MB/s Read & 5450MB/s Write
16GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5887MB/s Read & 5450MB/s Write
Overall, the Corsair MP600 Pro was certainly able to provide some solid performance, as well as potentially exceed the test figures here on a more powerful machine. Given the reported Read and Write statistics that the brand has stated publically, I think there is enough evidence here to back up those claims. IOPs were a little lower than I expected, but again, we were testing very large file types, so this would have to be taken in context.
It is genuinely very hard not to like the Corsair MP600 Pro NVMe SSD. Even when it did not quite hit 7,000MB/s in some of my testing, I got the impression was my system not having the ‘umpf’ to break that number and not the SSD hitting any kind of internal barrier. Likewise, the price point of this SSD (thanks to its earlier release and large availability) means it is easily one of the best value PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSDs that you can buy right now and although its durability & write performance is still overshadowed by the Seagate Firecuda 530 and its IOPS are a tad eclipsed by the WD Black SN850 & Samsung 980 Pro, these are very industry-specific factors that most home and prosumer gamers will never need to factor into their long term storage use. The inclusive heatsink is high in quality, application and utility – something most brands would include as an optionally charged extra, Corsair include and still arrive at a price point lower than most, only really challenged meaningfully on this score by the Gigabyte Aorus 7000s. The SLC caching (raised often in other reviews) seems a little underwhelming in size and realistic recovery when compared to everything else, but still compares well against others in this bracket nonetheless. Additionally, there is a non-PRO version that although lower traditional throughput performance, addresses/remedies concerns of endurance etc. Overall, the Corsair MP600 Pro is a standout drive amoung the growing crowd of PCIe4 SSDs being released right now and I can easily recommend it.
| PROs of the Corsair MP600 Pro | CONs of the Corsair MP600 Pro |
| Impressive Inclusive Heatsink
Genuinely Impressive Performance PS5 Compatibility Confirmed 96 Layer TLC 3D NAND Higher Durability than WD Black & Samsung 980 Pro Consistent 7,000MB/s on ALL Capacities Available in up to 4TB, at 2280 Length Too |
IOPS figures are lower than many PCIe4 SSDs
Cache fills up quick! Lower endurance than the Firecuda 530 |
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
SEARCH IN THE BOX BELOW FOR NAS DEALS
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.
Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
Terms and Conditions
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Tags de l’article
CUSTOM-GAMING-DESKTOP-PC-RIG
full
CUSTOM-GAMING-DESKTOP-PC-RIG
thumbnail
Il n’est pas facile de rendre un PC silencieux surtout si sa configuration est musclée. Si cette mission est délicate elle n’est heureusement pas impossible. Il existe des tas d’astuces et des solutions pour combattre les décibels. Alors comment rendre son PC silencieux ? Afin de combattre cet ennemi, il est nécessaire de mieux le ...
The post Comment obtenir un PC silencieux en 2021 ? nos astuces et conseils appeared first on GinjFo.
Microsoft annonce la fin de Windows Thin PC alias Windows TP. Bien qu’oublié par beaucoup cet OS est toujours disponible afin de profiter du bureau à distance. A son lancement en 2011 le succès fut au rendez-vous en raison des possibilités qu’il proposait pour l’époque. Depuis le paysage a énormément évolué et Windows Thin PC ...
The post Windows TP tire sa révérence le 12 octobre prochain appeared first on GinjFo.
There has been a remarkable deluge of PCIe NVMe M.2 SSDs hit the market in the middle of 2021 and for many users who have been looking at upgrading their high-performance gaming storage or post-production editing, this has come as something of a mixed blessing. The fact that the MSI Spatium M480 SSD arrives amidst a bunch of other alternative drives from brands like Seagate, Gigabyte and Sabrent gives buyers a great deal of choice right now, but when is too much choice a bad thing? The relative similarity of the MSI Spatium M480 in hardware architecture to the Corsair MP600 Pro, Gigabyte Aorus 7000S and Sabrent Rocket plus in the controller, NAND, price and availability has the potential for this new SSD release to arrive with a whiff of ‘old news’ about it. However, with the Spatium M480 arriving from one of the biggest and recognizable names in pro-PC builder architecture gives it a certain air of quality to its name and in today’s review of the MSI M480 SSD, I want to work out whether this new PCIe NVMe drive deserves your data, or if it is just a lot more of the same with a different label on top? Let’s go!
The MSI Spatium M480 SSD is an SSD that, if it had been released even 4-5 months earlier, would have made a much bigger splash than it has. This is not MSI’s fault. The massive range of market damaging events that have plagued the storage market for good or bad in the last 24 months (ranging from the pandemic, semi-conductor shortages, changes in buying trends, US-China trade war, Chia and more) have led to a large number of releases that ordinarily would have been released in a more appropriate/spaced-out manner has led to a downpour of 7,000MB/s SSD releases to hit the market back to back within 3-4 months. Some brands were luckier than others to sneak limited available storage releases at the closing of 2020 and start of 2021 – Looking at you Samsung, WD and Sabrent) and a big result of this is that although the MSI Spatium IS a good SSD that provides EXACTLY what it promises, it does it whilst appearing near identical to about 6 other SSDs from fellow big brands that do the same thing – at a slightly lower price. The MSI Spatium IS a GOOD drive and if you are looking for an NVMe M.2 SSD that can push through more than enough data to largely saturate the potential 8,000MB/s of PCIe 4×4, then this can do it. It is just a little harder to pinpoint what makes this drive stand out from the crowd right now that have similar promises.
| PROs of the MSI SPATIUM M480 | CONs of the MSI SPATIUM M480 |
| Genuinely Impressive Performance
PS5 Compatibility Confirmed 96 Layer TLC 3D NAND Higher Durability than WD Black & Samsung 980 Pro More affordable than the Seagate Firecuda 530 Consistent 7,000MB/s on ALL Capacities |
The heatsink isn’t included and run rather hot!
IOPS figures are lower than many PCIe4 SSDs
|
The packaging is pretty understated, with the drive arriving in a black carton hanging retail slider. The box is quick to highlight that this drive arrives from MSI, with their instantly recognizable logo appearing loud n proud at the top, alongside the promised 7,000MB/s Seq’ Read speed. This is one of the few M.2 PCIe SSD drives that I have reviewed in the last few months that actually downplays the text on the front, with most brands heavily hammering boastful text on the front. They mention the 7,000MB/s reported read – and that’s it.
Indeed they don’t even present it with a pile of caveats and exclusions. The read of the box details things more of course, but fair play to the brand for keeping it nice, clear and simple.
Opening up the retail kit provides suitably simple content. Anyone that has ever purchased an MSI hardware component that they have a huge body of online resources that is the preferred source for assistance and setup guidance, so this does not come as a massive surprise! Inside we find the drive in a sealed surrounding plastic shell and information on the 5 years inclusive warranty and light setup information. For today’s review, we are featuring the 1TB model, but not the 1st party heatsink version that is around $30-35 more.
The drive itself arrives with the fairly standard layout for a 1TB. Single-sided NAND/System processors, with a branded label over the top. I am a little sad that it is not a metallic label as you find on the Sabrent Rocket series or even a metal surround as found on the Gigabyte 7000s, but this is all fairly standard otherwise.
The m.2 connector o this NVMe 1.4 rev drive is nice and clear, without any overhand at the top of the drive. The controller is located right there at the top, so definitely make sure that heatsink and thermal padding you install on this drive when you install it is right up to the top!
The rear of this single-sided NVMe SSD is pretty standard, detailing the worldwide classifications and utility. Oddly, I noticed the mentioning of warranty support refusal if the label is removed. This is always a peculiar thing, given that many users remove these labels to ensure the connectivity of heatsinks and thermal panels (so they can see the key components are amply covered). This is largely irrelevant in the case of a single-sided 1TB, but I would be interested in how this is addressed and handled in larger versions.
So that is the physical design of the MSI SPATIUM M480 SSD. But what about the hardware components themselves? Does the MSI SPATIUM M480 cut the mustard in terms of current generation hardware and protocols? Let’s find out.
As you might expect from an M.2 NVMe SSD that boldly promises performance of over 7,000MB/s sequential read (ie BIG data), the hardware specifications and architecture of the MSI SPATIUM M480 are quite modern. Indeed, for all the big talk of the Seagate Firecuda 530 hardware (still currently the ‘score to beat’ PCIE Gen4 m.2 NVMe right now) being top tier, the MSI SPATIUM M480 is pretty darn similar on the spec sheet! Below is how it looks:
| MSI SPATIUM M480
|
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | 3D TLC Micron 96L |
| Max Capacity | 2TB – Single Sided |
| Controller | Phison E18-PS5018 |
| Warranty | 5yr |
I know a lot of the above will seem needlessly technical, so below we can bring the most important considerations into sharper focus.
The first big, BIG thing to remember here is the controller, that Phison E18. An SSD is much like a microcosm version of a whole computer. The Controller is equivalent to the CPU, and Phison are one of the bigger 3rd party SSD controller manufacturers in the world! I say 3rd party, because some long-running storage brands like Samsung and WD have most of their development and hardware engineering ‘in-house’ and use their own branded controllers. Whereas some brands source some/all components for their SSDs from 3rd parties – which is not necessarily a bad thing for both them and the industry (there are pros and cons on either side). Phison has been at the cutting edge of this subject for years now and the E18 was first revealed last year in 2020, but due to the pandemic making storage trends unpredictable and semi-conductor shortages, most SSDs that utilized the Phison E18 eventually arrived in 2021. This controller is one of the biggest reasons that the MSI SPATIUM M480 can actually back up it’s promises about the 7,000MB/s+ Sequential Read (sequential data = big chunks of data). However, that is not the only reason.
The NAND on the MSI SPATIUM M480 is where the data lives! SSDs (as you no doubt know) do not use moving parts as found in traditional hard drives and instead uses cells that are charged and data is read/written to them in this process. The quality of the NAND and the layers used will make a big difference to the durability and performance of an SSD and although the MSI SPATIUM M480 does not provide the best SSD in the industry at this tier right now (that, once again, goes to the Seagate Firecuda 530 at 176 layer 3D TLC NAND), it is bigger than most, arriving at 96 Layers of 3D TLC NAND. Although the majority of modern PCIe M.2 SSD use 3D TLC NAND (avoid QLC NAND like the PLAGUE btw!), most are still at 64 layers or so, so this is a big jump up for the MSI SPATIUM M480 SSD.
Much like the Controller on the MSI SPATIUM M480 being the ‘CPU’, it also has an area of memory. The MSI SPATIUM M480 SSD uses 1GB DDR4 memory on board and this in conjunction with the SSD provides a massive body of data handling resources for getting your data moving through the SSD and out of the m.2 NVMe PCIe 4 interface. The amount of memory scales in conjunction with the 1TB or 2TB SSD you use, with 2GB of DDR4 at the on the 2TB tier, 1GB DDR4 on the 1TB, etc.
As mentioned, all available capacities of the MSI SPATIUM M480 arrive at 2280 in length. This is quite normal for the 1TB and 2TB versions, but the fact that the 2TB can arrive on single-sided SSD boards is very impressive. Physical storage NAND is distributed evenly in order to space out the storage and allow even cooling, NAND wear and performance. Finally, there is the M.2 NVMe connection. Not all m.2 SSDs are created equal and although M.2 SATA and M.2 NVMe look similar, they provide massively different performance and connectivity. However, the MSI SPATIUM M480 takes it one step further, by using a newer generation of PCIe Connectivity. In short, M.2 NVMe SSDs are connected to the host PC/Console system via PCIe protocol (think of those slots that you almost always use for your graphics cards, but a much, MUCH smaller connector). These allow much larger bandwidth (ie maximum speed) for the connected storage media, Much like regular PCIe slots, they have different versions (i.E PCIe Gen 1, 2, 3, 4, etc) and also a multiplying factor (x1, x2, x4, etc). Up until around 18 months ago, the best M.2 NVMes were M.2 PCIe Gen 3×4 (so a maximum 4,000MB/s possible). However, never generation SSD like the MSI SPATIUM M480 use PCIe Gen 4×4 (a potential 8,000MB/s possible) and it is only now that SSD controllers and NAND production has reached a point where it can catch up and fully saturate (i.e fill) this connection.
Overall, you really cannot fault the hardware inside/onboard the MSI SPATIUM M480, as it is still (2-3 months after release) higher performing in sequential Read and Write than many other M.2 NVMe PCIe 4 SSDs released in that time. Before we go into the full testing, however, it is worth taking a moment to look closely at the reported performance benchmarks of the MSI SPATIUM M480, as although the performance seems stellar, there are areas such as IOPS and endurance when compared with its main rivals that are worth taking into consideration.
Before we conduct our own testing on this SSD, Let’s take a closer look at the reported specifications and benchmarks first. The MSI SPATIUM M480 SSD arrives in multiple capacities (below). The Prices currently are a little inconsistent (with each higher capacity tier actually having a higher price per GB – quite unusual) likely due to the hardware shortages, the Pandemic, Chia has affected SSD availability in the last 12 months and most recently the announcement that PS5 supports this SSD and it has increased the current price of both models around 20-30%!. Below is a breakdown of how each MSI SPATIUM M480 SSD compares:
| Brand/Series | MSI SPATIUM M480
|
Seagate Firecuda 530
500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99 |
WD Black SN850
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | 3D TLC Micron 96L | 3D TLC Micron B47R 176L | BiCS4 96L TLC |
| Max Capacity | 2TB – Single Sided | 4TB – Double Sided | 2TB |
| Controller | Phison E18-PS5018 | Phison E18-PS5018 | WD_BLACK G2 |
| Warranty | 5yr | 5yr | 5yr |
| 500GB Model | M480-500G | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | $119 / £99 | $139 / £119 | $119 / £99 |
| 1TB Model | M480-1000G | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | $225 / £185 | $239 / £199 | $249 / £169 |
| 2TB Model | M480-2000G | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Price in $ and $ | $435 / £364 | $419 / £379 | $399 / £339 |
| 4TB Model | N/A | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Price in $ and $ | N/A | $949 / £789 | N/A |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | N/A | 640TB | 300TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | N/A | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | N/A | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 1TB Model | M480-1000G | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 700TB | 1275TB | 600TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,700,000 | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | 0.38DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 2TB Model | M480-2000G | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 1400TB | 2550TB | 1200TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,700,000 | 1,800,000 | 1,750,000 |
| DWPD | 0.38DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 4TB Model | N/A | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | N/A | 5100TB | N/A |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | N/A | 1,800,000 | N/A |
| DWPD | N/A | 0.7DWPD | N/A |
There are clear throughput improvements as you rise through the capacity tiers (not unusual), as does the rated 4K IOPS. Though one area worth focusing on a little is that TBW (terabytes Written) and DWPD (Drive writes per day), as this drive is rated a pinch higher than the Samsung 980 Pro and WD Black SN850 in terms of NAND lifespan on daily writes, likely down to that Micron 96 Layer 3D TLC NAND used, rather than t used by those used by competitors. This is an important point because the brand has significantly less pedigree in-home/business SSD media than the likes of Samsung, WD and Seagate and people will want to know they are going to get a product that lasts!
However, despite the use of the Phison E18 controller and 96 layer NAND, the reported IOPS on each capacity is actually a noticeable degree lower than those reported by their competitors. Indeed, the MSI SPATIUM M480 is one of the few E18 SSDs that does not cross into the reported 1 Million IOPS mark, maxing out at 700k. This is still very impressive anyway, but it does make me wonder where the disparity stems from. Indeed, when you look at the bulk of PCIe 4×4 M.2 NVMe 1.4 SSD, that feature the E18 controller and 96L (or higher) on board, it really only leaves about 4 other SSDs in the market today that this can be compared against. The Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus, the MSI Spatium M480, the ADATA Gammix S70 and (current leader) the Seagate Firecuda 530. Of those, the only one that seemingly ‘out specs’ the MSI SPATIUM M480 is the Seagate Firecuda 530. However, the MSI SPATIUM M480 SSD has been available in the market for almost 3-4 months longer and has certainly embedded itself in the market at that time a fraction more. Below is how these two drives compare:
| Brand/Series | MSI SPATIUM M480
|
Seagate Firecuda 530
500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99 |
WD Black SN850
|
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 7000MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 3000MB | 4100MB |
| 1TB Model | M480-1000G | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7000MB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 5500MB | 6000MB | 5300MB |
| 2TB Model | MP600-2TB | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7000MB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6550MB | 6900MB | 5100MB |
| 4TB Model | N/A | ZP4000GM3A013 | |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 7300MB | N/A |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | N/A | 6900MB | N/A |
| Brand/Series | MSI SPATIUM M480 | Seagate Firecuda 530 | WD Black SN850 |
| 500GB Model | N/A | ZP500GM3A013 | WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 400,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 700,000 | 680,000 |
| 1TB Model | M480-1000G | ZP1000GM3A013 | WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 360000 | 800000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 780000 | 1000000 | 720,000 |
| 2TB Model | M480-2000G | ZP2000GM3A013 | WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0 |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 660,000 | 1,000,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 800,000 | 1,000,000 | 710,000 |
| 4TB Model | N/A | ZP4000GM3A013 | |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 1,000,000 | N/A |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | N/A | 1,000,000 | N/A |
Yes, that is a LONG table, but you can immediately see that the Seagate Firecuda 530 raises the stakes on all of the key specifications. Although there are a number of micro reasons for this, the 176L NAND is the biggest factor here. Yes, that is why the Firecuda 530 commands the higher price tag. Additionally, the WD Black arriving at a better price point, higher IOPS in most tiers and the fact it does this whilst still hitting that 7,000MB/s certainly gives pause for thought. However, for many, the additional cost for higher durability they may never need, peak performance their core system will not reach and IOPS rating that their larger file handling will never utilize will mean that holding out for the Firecuda or WD Black SN850 is not in their interest. Both SSDs (on paper at this stage!) are fantastic examples of where consumer and prosumer SSDs are evolving towards. Let’s get the MSI SPATIUM M480 on the test machine!
The MSI SPATIUM M480 was selected for this test and it was tested using multiple benchmark tools, from a cold boot, in the 2nd storage slot (i.e not the OS drive). Each test was conducted three times (full details of this are shown in the YouTube Review of the MSI SPATIUM M480 over on NASCompares):
Test Machine:
Using CrystalDisk, we got a good measure of the drive and verified that this PCIe Gen 4 x4 SSD was indeed using the 4×4 lane. Additionally, the temp averaged out around 43C between each test being conducted.
The first tests were conducted using the ATTO disk benchmark software. The first was a 256MB test file size and below is a breakdown of the transfer rates and IOPS. The 2nd Test was a 1GB test file and finally, the last test was with a 4GB test file. The system was given 1-minute cool downtime between tests, no screen recording software was used (remove overhead) and a heatsink was used throughout (no reboots)
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #1
256MB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.31GB/s
256MB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5GB/s
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #2
1GB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.31GB/s
1GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5GB/s
|
|
ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #3
4GB File PEAK Read Throughput = 6.30GB/s
4GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 5.03GB/s
Next, although the ATTO tests were quite good, but not what I would have hoped from this SSD, so I moved on to the Crystal Disk Mark testing to see how well it would handle our lasts barrage of tests. The first test was the 1GB file testing, which measured both sequential and random, as well as the read and write IOPS. Test were conducted on a 1GB, 4GB and 16GB Test File. I also included a mixed 70/30 read and write task to give a little bit more of a realistic balanced workload. These tests were conducted with 1-minute cooling break in between
CRYSTALDISK MARK 1GB TEST
CRYSTALDISK MARK 4GB TEST
CRYSTALDISK MARK 16GB TEST
Next, I switched to AS SSD benchmark. A much more thorough test through, I used 1GB, 3GB and 5GB test files. Each test includes throughput benchmarks and IOPS that are respective to the larger file sizes (important, if you are reading this and trying to compare against the reported 4K IOPS from the manufacturer).
AS SSD Benchmark Test #1
|
|
AS SSD Benchmark Test #2
|
|
AS SSD Benchmark Test #3
|
|
Ordinarily, I would introduce tests like BlackMagic and AJA into the mix here, but even a short burst of testing on an NVMe like this would over saturate the cache memory on board. Nevertheless, in the short term we still could ascertain the reported performance on 1GB, 4GB and 16GB file testing was:
1GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5356MB/s Read & 5855MB/s Write
4GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5313MB/s Read & 5835MB/s Write
16GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5383MB/s Read & 5855MB/s Write
Overall, the MSI SPATIUM M480 was certainly able to provide some solid performance, as well as potentially exceed the test figures here on a more powerful machine. Given the reported Read and Write statistics that the brand has stated publically, I think there is enough evidence here to back up those claims. IOPs were a little lower than I expected, but again, we were testing very large file types, so this would have to be taken in context.
The MSI Spatium M480 SSD is an SSD that, if it had been released even 4-5 months earlier, would have made a much bigger splash than it has. This is not MSI’s fault. The massive range of market damaging events that have plagued the storage market for good or bad in the last 24 months (ranging from the pandemic, semi-conductor shortages, changes in buying trends, US-China trade war, Chia and more) have led to a large number of releases that ordinarily would have been released in a more appropriate/spaced-out manner has led to a downpour of 7,000MB/s SSD releases to hit the market back to back within 3-4 months. Some brands were luckier than others to sneak limited available storage releases at the closing of 2020 and start of 2021 – Looking at you Samsung, WD and Sabrent) and a big result of this is that although the MSI Spatium IS a good SSD that provides EXACTLY what it promises, it does it whilst appearing near identical to about 6 other SSDs from fellow big brands that do the same thing – at a slightly lower price. The MSI Spatium IS a GOOD drive and if you are looking for an NVMe M.2 SSD that can push through more than enough data to largely saturate the potential 8,000MB/s of PCIe 4×4, then this can do it. It is just a little harder to pinpoint what makes this drive stand out from the crowd right now that have similar promises.
| PROs of the MSI SPATIUM M480 | CONs of the MSI SPATIUM M480 |
| Genuinely Impressive Performance
PS5 Compatibility Confirmed 96 Layer TLC 3D NAND Higher Durability than WD Black & Samsung 980 Pro More affordable than the Seagate Firecuda 530 Consistent 7,000MB/s on ALL Capacities |
The heatsink isn’t included and run rather hot!
IOPS figures are lower than many PCIe4 SSDs
|
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
SEARCH IN THE BOX BELOW FOR NAS DEALS
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.
Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
Terms and Conditions
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Tags de l’article
Good news for anyone looking to upgrade their PCIe4 m.2 NVMe enabled PC editing or gaming machine with the sneakily quiet reveal that Sabrent is working on an 8TB model to their popular Rocket 4 Plus series of SSDs. This is particularly interesting, given that till now the largest drive we have seen on the market has been an impressive 4TB of storage (from several brands) and although there have been 8TB models of M.2 SSDs available (even in PCIe4), they have been provided with one especially large compromise in the NAND department that has massively downgraded their performance and durability to a point where they are designated as lesser drives and therefore hardly comparable to the top tier SSDs in their premium ranges. This Sabrent SB-RKT4–8TB Rocket 4 Plus 8TB drive though is a very different beast and potentially one of the first drives in the world to manage to balance the scales and provide high storage, high performance, high durability and open the gates commercially to the next tier of M.2 PCIe4 SSD storage. Let’s go through everything we know.
Review of the Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus 4TB Model HERE – https://nascompares.com/2021/08/05/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-review
At this time it appears the Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus 8TB model is not especially close to full release and wit that the specifications at this stage are largely unavailable. We DO know that the drive is part of their highest tier NVMe SSD series and therefore a lot of the existing architecture we can already ascertain. Below is everything we know, what we can estimate and how the 8TB model might compare with the rest of the Sabrent Rocket Plus 1, 2 and 4TB models:
Note – Where ‘(est.)’ is stated, I am still awaiting confirmation on these specifications, which are supplied below as based on the previous 4TB release and are provided for general guidance and not from the brand/testing
| SABRENT Rocket 4 + | SB-RKT4P-1TB
|
SB-RKT4P-2TB
|
SB-RKT4P-4TB
|
NEW = SB-RKT4P-8TB
|
| Capacity | 1TB / 1000GB | 2TB / 2000GB | 4TB / 4000GB | 8TB / 8000GB |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | B27 3D TLC NAND 96L | B27 3D TLC NAND 96L | B27 3D TLC NAND 96L | B27 3D TLC NAND 96L |
| Capacity | 1TB Single Sided | 4TB Double Sided | 4TB Double Sided | 4TB Double Sided |
| Controller | Phison E18-PS5018 | Phison E18-PS5018 | Phison E18-PS5018 | Phison E18-PS5018 |
| Memory | 1GB | 2GB | 4GB | 8GB |
| Size | 2280 | 2280 | 2280 | 2280 |
| Warranty | 5yr | 5yr | 5yr | 5yr |
| SB-RKT4P-1TB | SB-RKT4P-2TB | SB-RKT4P-4TB | SB-RKT4P-4TB | |
| Price in $ and $ | $179 / £155 | $359 / £305 | $999 / £810 | $1999 / £1699 (est.) |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 700TB | 1400TB | 3000TB | 6000TB (est.) |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1600000 | 1600000 | 1600000 | 1600000 (est.) |
| DWPD | 0.4DWPD | 0.4DWPD | 0.4DWPD | 0.4DWPD (est.) |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 350000 | 650000 | 650000 | 650000 (est.) |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 700000 | 700000 | 700000 | 700000 (est.) |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7000MB | 7100MB | 7100MB | 7100MB (est.) |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 5500MB | 6850MB | 6850MB | 6850MB (est.) |
One very important detail that needs focus here is the use of 3D TLC NAND on the new 8TB Sabrent SSD. Now, as mentioned, Sabrent has had an 8TB PCIe4 NVMe M.2 SSD available already, known as the Sabrent Rocket Q4 which is their much more affordable PCIe 4.0 SSD tier. It is labelled as such as it takes advantage of the much more economy sensitive QLC NAND (Quad Layer Cells) which are able to squeeze in a larger amount of data onto the NAND blocks on the PCB board of the SSD. However, the application of QLC NAND, although noticeable lower in price-per-TB, results in significantly lower throughput (i.e Read and Write) than TLC (Triple Layer Cell) NAND that is largely the NAND build of choice for Prosumer/Business SSDs. It also results in a much lower insurance rating (i.e TBW and DWPD) meaning the timeframe for the lifespan of the drive and sustained lifetime performance is much lower. THIS is one of the BIGGEST reasons that the 8TB Rocket 4 Plus model being revealed is such a big deal because it is arriving with 3D TLC NAND and therefore will be expected to hit that 7,000MB/s+ Sequential Read Speed and 6,850MB/s+ Sequential Write as featured in the 2TB and 4TB models (perhaps even possibly surpass it). We still need to wait for full official details on this drive to become public, but it’s a very intriguing and compelling reason to keep the Sabrent 8TB Rocket 4 Plus on your radar in 2021/2022.
There is practically no details on when this Sabrent 8TB Rocket 4 Plus SSD media will release, but given the deluge of PCIe4 M.2 NVMe drives released in the last 2 months (as the market catches up from delays and setbacks in the pandemic, semi-conductor shortages, supply chain corrections and existing release roadmap’s being forced to adapt on the fly!) it will be interesting to see if Sabrent can get this drive out to market before big names like Samsung, WD and Seagate can challenge the 8TB tier on these drives. PCIe4 x4 M.2 is going to be around for a while and although PCIe5 is now in discussion and slow implementation will be on the horizon in 2022, it will be by no means mainstream enough to substantially interrupt the growth of PCIe4 M.2 any time soon. With that in mind, Sabrent might well have the time to work on this and not rush it to the door. Perhaps a more formal reveal before the end of the year with something more substantial as a confirmed ETA to follow.
With so many factors, ranging from the fact that 8TB NVMe PCIe4 m.2 SSD with 3D TLC NAND (96layer) is almost completely industry unheard of at this m.2 length, to the previously mentioned market hurdles in the last 12-18months, if Sabrent can get the 8TB Rocket 4 Plus SB-RKT4P-8TB to market before many of it’s competitors, they will be in a position to be quite high in their pricing. Recent months have led to the price tiering on 1TB, 2TB and 4TB drives no longer strictly adhering to the “doubling your storage means you pay less per TB” and in fact in many cases, a 4TB costs more per terabyte than a 2TB, which in term can be more than a 1TB. Given the relative obscurity of a drive of this type, we will be seeing a drive that will almost certainly weigh in at $1500-2000 at even a conservative estimate. However, until Sabrent make a more formal announcement of this drive and its availability, this is all still very much up in the air!
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
SEARCH IN THE BOX BELOW FOR NAS DEALS
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.
Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
Terms and Conditions
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Tags de l’article
Un nouvel outil est désormais disponible pour savoir si son PC Windows 10 est compatible avec Windows 11. Microsoft propose de nouveau son application PC Health Check. L’utilitaire PC Health Check a fait son apparition peu de temps après la présentation officielle de Windows 11. Son objectif était de proposer à l’utilisateur une solution rapide ...
The post Windows 11, Microsoft propose un nouvel outil pour vérifier la compatibilité de son PC appeared first on GinjFo.
Windows 11 a certaines exigences matérielles. Si vous souhaitez l’adopter il faut s’assurer que votre PC est compatible. En clair sa configuration répond-elle aux besoins « vitaux » du système d’exploitation ? Pour vous aider dans cette tâche Microsoft vient de republier son outil de vérification de compatibilité Windows 11. Cette nouvelle version est censée ...
The post Windows 11, votre PC est-il compatible ? voici un outil pour le vérifier appeared first on GinjFo.
MSI a dévoilé un nouveau Mini-PC, le Cubi N series. L’engin se décline en deux versions. Dans tous les cas il vise les usages bureautiques. Ce Mini-PC Cubi N Series s’arme d’un châssis compact lui permettant de trouver facilement une place sur un bureau. Dans un volume de 0,5 litre il accueille une configuration Intel ...
The post Mini-PC Cubi N Series, MSI adopte la plateforme Intel Jasper Lake appeared first on GinjFo.
Quel casse-tête pour choisir son PC portable ! Tellement de constructeurs, de marchands, de composants et de services différents, qu’il faut aujourd’hui être un véritable détective afin de trouver le PC portable qui convient à nos besoins et à notre budget. Si vous êtes complètement perdu devant cette offre pléthorique d’ordinateurs portables, que vous ne savez pas si – à un prix égal – un PC...
The PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSD market continues to grow into the accepted standard in 2021/2022 for performance – and the usual brands are rising to the challenge. If there is only one thing that you take from these comparisons on NVMe SSDs of late, it is that even in this relatively recent tier of Prosumer/Business storage, there is still plenty of choice. In fact, when Seagate revealed their industry beating Firecuda 530 last month, it was largely unchallenged for just a week, before MSI stepped up and formally revealed their new Spatium M480 series. What makes these two SSDs particularly interesting is that they are both based on an incredibly similar architecture and provide arguable comparable throughput too. Alongside this, professional and casual gaming consumers are having to make a choice here between Seagate (a big, BIG name in data storage) and MSI (a big, BIG name in gamer circles) – not as straightforward as you might think. So today I want to talk about these two brands, discuss what they offer in terms of performance, responsiveness, durability and endurance, and hopefully help you decide whether the Firecuda or Spatium M480 deserves your data.
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
MSI SPATIUM M480
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.4 |
| NAND | 3D TLC Micron B47R 176L | B27 3D NAND 96L |
| Max Capacity | 4TB – Double Sided | 2TB |
| Controller | Phison E18-PS5018 | Phison E18-PS5018 |
| Warranty | 5yr | 5yr |
|
|
A quick look at the architecture of each SSDs does NOT show a huge amount of disparity between them at first. Both arrive with PCIe 4.0 M.2 bandwidth (a potential maximum 8,000MB/s), the latest NVMe 1.4 revision and utilizing the cutting edge E18 Phison controller, resulting in over 7,000MB/s performance. However, one key difference we CAN see is in the choice of NAND being used by either NVMe SSD. Though both the Seagate and MSI SSD both use 3D TLC NAND, the M480 USES 96 layer NAND, whereas the Firecuda 530 arrives with an impressive 176 layer NAND – a significant advantage in a number of areas like IOPS and Throughput in the usage of the drive (even affecting endurance). This may seem like a minor point, but the impact of this choice will bear fruit later on. Let’s compare how each drive is priced.
The price tag of the Firecuda 530 and Spatium M480 respectively are both based on the most recently available pricing at the time of writing, though the MSI NVMes might change. Nonetheless, the pricing on each PCIe 4×4 SSD is actually quite comparable and the differences that appear between each capacity model and even in the currency conversion is not too bad. It should also be noted that the prices below are based o nthe M480 and FC530 without a heatsink, though both brands supply a high-quality heatsink kit version at a smaller increased cost. Overall, I would say that the MSI M480 has a lower Price per GB/TB than the Seagate drive, but that is not quite the end of the story, as both brands have providing slightly different series capacity options:
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
MSI SPATIUM M480
|
| 500GB Model | ZP500GM3A013 | M480-500GB |
| Price in $ and $ | $139 / £119 | $119 / £105 (TBC) |
| 1TB Model | ZP1000GM3A013 | M480-1000GB |
| Price in $ and $ | $239 / £199 | $239 / £189 (TBC) |
| 2TB Model | ZP2000GM3A013 | M480-2000GB |
| Price in $ and $ | $419 / £379 | $399 / £369 (TBC) |
| 4TB Model | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Price in $ and $ | $949 / £769 |
Both brands have supplied the 500GB tier (i.e smaller scale gamers, caching, 2+ 4K projects for editing), 1TB (i.e professional gamers, rackmount caching/tiering, 4K/8K editing) and 2TB (i.e Pro Gamers and Streamers, Professional 4K/8K Post Production and enterprise) available in their ranges, but the Seagate Firecuda 530 is one of only around 2-3 brands that supply a 4TB PCIe Gen 4×4 m.2 4TB drive at 2280 length. This is particularly ambitious of the brand, especially when you look a the potential 4 figure price tag. However professional buyers who only want to make a purchase like this once every 5 years at least are going to be attracted to this option. Additionally, because the highest tiers of storage in NVMe are where you find the best performance (with the MASSIVE exception of when a brand uses QLC NAND of course), Seagate has clearly decided to put ALOT of backing on these drives in 2021/2022 to facilitate the biggest budget buyers. The MSI M480 is the winner here in terms of price per GB/TB, but Seagate win on Capacity and potentially on value – but let’s not get too ahead of ourselves yet.
The throughout that the MSI M480 and Firecuda 530 can provide in sequential read and write are close, but on paper, Seagate win. Obviously, these are slightly more idealised benchmarks from the brands themselves and are maximums reported by their tech teams respectively, but even then you can see that the FC 530 provides a heck of a lot! Even in the Seagate Firecuda 530’s weakest tier (the 500GB model) it still outpaces the M480 noticeably. Once again, though both drives feature similar memory/SD, it is that higher-quality NAND that the Seagate features that gives it that edge. Below is a breakdown of the performance of each capacity tier on each NVMe:
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
MSI SPATIUM M480
|
| 500GB Model | ZP500GM3A013 | M480-500GB |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7000MB | 6500MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 3000MB | 2850MB |
| 1TB Model | ZP1000GM3A013 | M480-1000GB |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6000MB | 5500MB |
| 2TB Model | ZP2000GM3A013 | M480-2000GB |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6900MB | 6850MB |
| 4TB Model | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7300MB | |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6900MB |
Fair play to the MSI for still providing some genuinely impressive performance, eclipsing a number of other 96 layer 3D NAND drives previously compared here. Although neither brand is using an in-house built controller, choosing to use the Phison E18-PS5018 chip, so the fact that they can both hit 7,000MB/s is not too surprising, the fact the FC530 can hit higher in 3 of its 4 available capacities at 7,3000MB/s is the clincher here. Remember, the PCIe 4.0 x4 bandwidth that this drive utilises max’s out at 8,000MB/s, which is getting increasingly close to saturation here! The Seagate Firecuda 530 clearly wins here. Next, we can look at the reported IOPS of these two drives, as this is one of the Achilles heels of the MSI M480 sadly.
The IOPs ratings of each of these drives, despite their relatively similar architecture, is significantly different. IOPs, along with the endurance and durability which we will touch on later, is one of the key areas that Seagate say they focused on with the Firecuda 530 and compared with the MSI M480, it shows. Performing twice the random read IOPS at the 500GB and 1TB tiers, they soon break the 1,000,000 IOPS barrier in both random read and write in the higher tiers. Although IOPS are generally a much more business/enterprise metric, they still hold court with professional gamers and in data centre-class AI operations. The 170K random read IOPS on the Spatium M480 is especially low (given the rest of the hardware on that m.2 PCB!) and it eventually maxes out at 650/700K random read/write at the highest tiers. Here is a breakdown:
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
MSI SPATIUM M480
|
| 500GB Model | ZP500GM3A013 | M480-500GB |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 400,000 | 170,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 700,000 | 600,000 |
| 1TB Model | ZP1000GM3A013 | M480-1000GB |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 800000 | 350,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1000000 | 700,000 |
| 2TB Model | ZP2000GM3A013 | M480-2000GB |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1,000,000 | 650,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1,000,000 | 700,000 |
| 4TB Model | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1,000,000 | |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1,000,000 |
Overall, it is hard to claim this as anything else but a definitive win for the Seagate Firecuda 530 over the MSI M480 in terms of IOPS. Later in 2021, we will be running extended performance testing on these drives to see how well these stats hold up over extended periods, but in all likelihood, these stats will still be comparatively distance between each drive.
Next up, we need to discuss how well these two drives can endure consistent write/rewrites in their predicted 5 year lifespan (i.e in their 5 year warranty period and based on the drives being in constant use). The Endurance and Durability of an SSD is an area that is overlooked often enough that I wanted to take a moment to focus a little more on this – you can thank you years from now! The importance of SSD durability and endurance in 2021/2022 is actually pretty massive. Now that the devices we use all feature incredibly powerful processors, often cloud/network hybrid AI processes and graphical handling that will be instantly bottlenecked by traditional hard drives, SSDs are no longer just the ‘boot’ drive for our OS and are now the day to day working drive. This combined with SSD being used as caching and larger SSD capacities allowing suitable substitution for HDDs entirely means that the CONSTANT concern about SSDs lifespan and the durability of those NAND cells is now quite paramount. SSDs wear out – it’s as simple as that. The more you write, the more wear those individual NAND cells suffer – degrading performance over the years and inevitably leading to drive failure. Likewise, the smaller the drive, the greater likelihood that you will be writing, then rewriting, then rewriting, time and time again. The Seagate Firecuda 530 and MSI Spatium M480 are no exception and alongside massive research and development in better controllers and interfaces to improve performance, the way NAND is improved has led to SSDs lasting lover than ever before. However, SSDs and NAND are not built equally and there is actually quite a large difference in durability between the MSI Spatium M480 and the Seagate Firecuda 530. The Storage industry typically measures the predicted durability and endurance of an SSD as TBW, DWPD and MTBF. They are:
TBW = Terabytes Written, rated as the total number of terabytes that this SSD can have written to it in its warranty covered lifespan. So if the TBW was 300TB and the warranty is 5 years of coverage, that would mean that the drive can receive on average (with deleting/overwriting data each repeatedly) 60 Terabytes per year (or 5TB a month). After this point, the manufacturer highlights that durability, endurance and performance will decline. Often highlighted as an alternative to warranty length when gauging the predicted lifespan of a SSD.
DWPD = Drive Writes Per Day / Data Writes Per Day, this is a decimalized figure that represents what proportion of the capacity of an SSD (where 1.0 = 100% capacity) can be filled, erased and/or rewritten on a daily basis. This is provided using the warranty period and TBW figure. So, for example, if a 500GB drive has a 0.3DWPD rating, that is approx 150GB of data per day
MTBF = Mean Time Between Failure, which is the interval between one failure of an SSD and the next. MTBF is expressed in hours and most industrial SSDs are rated in the Millions of Hours. MTBF and MTTF (Mean Time to Failure) have largely become overlooked in recent years in favour of TBW and DWPD in SSDs, but are still stated on most Data Sheets.
So, now you know what those large Terbyte stats, hours and decimal point details are on the average SSD datasheet. So where do the Seagate Firecuda 530 and MSI Spatium M480 stand on this:
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
MSI SPATIUM M480
|
| 500GB Model | ZP500GM3A013 | M480-500GB |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 640TB | 350TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,800,000 | 1,600,000 |
| DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.38DWPD |
| 1TB Model | ZP1000GM3A013 | M480-1000GB |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 1275TB | 700TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,800,000 | 1,600,000 |
| DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.38DWPD |
| 2TB Model | ZP2000GM3A013 | M480-2000GB |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 2550TB | 1400TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,800,000 | 1,600,000 |
| DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.38DWPD |
| 4TB Model | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 5100TB | |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,800,000 | |
| DWPD | 0.7DWPD |
Although many users might well dismiss the TBW/DWPD of an SSD, as they do not feel they are going to refresh the data on the drive at that extreme frequency per day, it should be noted that this should also be used as a suitable benchmark for the lifespan of the NAND itself. In other words, jsut because a drive has a 5-year warranty, doesn’t mean you necessarily want to replace it in 5 years! More enduring NAND means both that the SSD will have a longer lifespan AND that it should be able to maintain it’s advertised performance for longer! High DPWD ratings are something that Seagate have been hugely supporting in their ranges for a number of years (they introduced several 1.0 and higher ratings into their Ironwolf and Nytro SSDs of late too). Again, another big win for the Seagate Firecuda 530 over the MSI Spatium M480 – particularly when you factor in that the FC530 ALSO arrives with 3 years of data recovery services (forensic level) alongside the 5yr warranty too, in their Rescue Recovery services.
It will not come as a huge shock that in comparing the Firecuda 530 and Spatium M480, that the Seagate drive is still largely dominating this comparison and potentially the entire PCIe Gen 4 m.2 market so far. The M480 from MSI is a very good drive that has clearly been geared towards providing gamers and PC professionals some high tier throughput, and it is coming from a brand they already know and trust. However, it is impossible the ignore the comparatively mature decision by Seagate to focus a great deal on endurance and sustained performance and this plays out substantially throughout how these two drives compare and how they will support you later in their lifespan. Yes, the Firecuda 530 arrives at a higher price point, but you get more for your money and the money you save on day 1 with the M480 might end up costing you more in terms of an extra few minutes here or there, every day, week, month and year. If you are on a tighter budget and your NVMe SSD storage requirements are not considered Pro, Business or Enterprise, the M480 will serve you well – but for everyone else, the FC 530 has you covered in spades.
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
MSI SPATIUM M480
|
| Best Performance | ✓ | |
| Best Endurance/Durability | ✓ | |
| Best Price for TB | ✓ | |
| Best Extras | ✓ | |
| Best Value | ✓ | |
| Where To Buy | |
|
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
SEARCH IN THE BOX BELOW FOR NAS DEALS
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.
Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
Terms and Conditions
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Tags de l’article
One industry that continues to exceed all expectations is solid-state drives (SSD). The accepted norms of storage in terms of capacity, speed and durability have wildly eclipsed those early days of SATA and now the combined might of near-total bandwidth utilisation and sophisticated onboard controllers has resulted in an SSDs capable of 20 times the performance of the first generation flash drives (370MB/s x10) and close to 50 times the speed of regular hard drives (150MB/s x50). It sounds insane but now there are SSD that can provide well over 7000MB/s read that are not only well established and available to consumer buyers, but also surprisingly affordable. Into this slowly growing tier of NVMe M2 PCIe Gen 4 SSD storage, two of the biggest players are Samsung and Seagate with their 980 Pro and Firecuda 530 drives. Released almost an entire year apart, these two drives are still among the most often requested media right now in summer 2021 for gamers, video editors and high-performance storage uses. Although similar in preliminary architecture, as both utilise a significantly higher saturation of the PCIe gen4 potential 8,000MB/s bandwidth available, each brand has geared their drives respective development in a different direction and the result is two drives that may seem similar at first but wildly deviate in what they can do at even a cursory examination. So today I want to compare the Seagate Firecuda 530 against the Samsung 980 Pro to help you decide which one deserves your data.
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
Samsung 980 Pro
|
| PCIe Generation | PCIe Gen 4 | PCIe Gen 4 |
| NVMe Rev | NVMe 1.4 | NVMe 1.3c |
| NAND | 3D TLC
3D TLC Micron B47R 176L |
3D TLC
1xx-layer layer V6 V-NAND 3-bit TLC |
| Max Capacity | 4TB – Double Sided | 2TB |
| Controller | Phison E18-PS5018 | Custom Elpis |
| Warranty | 5 Years
|
5 Years
|
Samsung introduced the 980 Pro into the market in summer 2020, during the height of the global pandemic, the US trade war and the start of the semi-conductor shortage – so that was ALOT of early friction to overcome. Despite all of this, the drive has gone from strength to strength and is largely the drive of choice in the early client development of PCIe4 m.2 on motherboards thanks to being one of the first on the market and that custom controller allowing them to break the 7,000MB/s barrier in M.2 form factor before practically everyone else. The Seagate uses the late 2020 formally revealed Phison E18-PS5018 controller (also used by a few other SSD manufacturers), whereas Samsung has its own massive in-house R&D manufacture available and has ait’s own unique custom Elpis controller. We talk in a moment about how this impacts their respective performance, but fair play to Samsung for continuing to keep their SSD development 100% in house with this one. Both drives arrive with 5 years of warranty (though their DWPD/TBW do differ noticeably) which is quite standard, but it is worth highlighting that the Seagate Firecuda 530 also arrives with 3years of data recovery services included. Know as the Seagate Rescue Service, it allows you to access professional data recovery services in the event of accidental deletion, reversing corruption and recovery services at no additional cost (there are T& course). It’s a small extra on the face of it, but for anyone that has lost key data (in the case of this drive utility, I am talking 4K raw video, savegames, editing projects, etc), this is a very noticeable extra to have thrown in!
For most casual users, the price per GB/TB and the variety of available capacities are always going to form a decent chunk of the decision-making process! Both the Firecuda 530 and Samsung 980 Pro are available in 500GB, 1TB and 2TB versions, however, the Samsung also arrives in a modest 250GB model (which may well be useful to NAS users for caching or video editors looking for a smaller, faster drive for current projects (moving them to a slower archive as they go). The Seagate Firecuda has very much gone the other way on this and provides a hefty 4 terabyte (double-sided – cells on either side of the M.2 PCB) that, although rather expensive, is still going to be very attractive to buyers who only want to make this kind of purchase ONCE and want it to suitable for long term storage convenience (Professional Gamers/Pro Streamers with larger constant libraries they need to access relatively on the fly and PS5 console owners looking to take advantage of that storage expansion slot). When it comes to the price tag, Samsung 980 PRO has a tremendous advantage with being released almost a year ago (September 2020) and that has given them a great deal of time to saturate the market with their drive and introduce a greater degree of flexible pricing now in 2021. That said, the prices are not quite as far apart as I would have thought – with around $20-30/£10-20 at each storage capacity tier. See below:
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
Samsung 980 Pro
|
| 500GB Model | ZP500GM3A013 | MZ-V8P500BW |
| Price in $ and $ | $139 / £119 | $119 / £109 |
| 1TB Model | ZP1000GM3A013 | MZ-V8P1T0BW |
| Price in $ and $ | $239 / £199 | $209 / £179 |
| 2TB Model | ZP2000GM3A013 | MZ-V8P2T0BW |
| Price in $ and $ | $419 / £379 | $390 / £369 |
| 4TB Model | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Price in $ and $ | $949 / £769 | N/A |
The Samsung 980 PRO is easily going to be the lower-priced of the two, even if you ignore the RRP of each brand, the 980 PRO will be on sale at one retailer or another just as the Seagate Firecuda 530 gets out of the gate! We will talk a little more about Value later on, but if the pricetag is paramount to you (perhaps you are on a tighter budget or are buying multiple NVMe SSD units) then Samsung win this one easily. However in capacity, these two PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSDs are harder to compare, given they differ ever so slightly. I do like that the Samsung 980 PRO arrives in the smaller 250GB capacity model, as some hybrid storage users or those looking for their OS/Steam Library for 1-2 AAA games, will like this smaller unit at around $89/£70 (though the performance is lesser – important). However, the Firecuda 530 arriving in 4TB is an unignorable power flex from Seagate, being only 1 of 2 PCIe 4.0m.2 NVMe 7,000MB/s+ available in the market (the other being the Sabrent Rocket Plus SB-RKT4P-4TB for $999). Yes, it is a hefty price tag at $949 at launch, but it still works out as $237 per TB, has by FAR the fastest performance of any of the other drives and means you only need to make this purchase ONCE. So, overall, I think the Seagate Firecuda 530 takes the win for its approach to capacity.
NOW we are talking! Moving away from price, let’s talk about what these two top tier NVMe PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSDs can give you in terms of traditional Read and Write performance. Ever since we first started seeing PCIe4 SSDs arrive, it has been a case of how much of the potential 8,000MB/s they could saturate with sophisticated controllers, SDRAM and NAND. The first-gen looked good at 5,000MB/s, but was soon eclipsed when Samsung 980 PRO entered the market last summer/autumn with their 7,000MB/s Read drive. Indeed, although the 250GB and 500GB drives dip slightly to 6,400/6,900MB/s respectively, the 1TB and 2TB models can reach that 7,000MB/s mark, which is great news for gamers that prioritize reading those core game files for streaming/casual gaming. However, their write speeds (a key concern for video editors and advanced content creators in general) largely cap at 5,000MB/s for the most part – still VERY impressive and Samsung have not been secretive about this, but it is still a noticeable difference. The Seagate Firecuda 530 series, thanks to a newer revision of NVMe (NVMe 1.4 over NVMe 1.3c) as well as the 176 layer 3D NAND (improving performance and relative durability, covering later). Samsung don’t disclose the layer count but claim it to be 40% more than their previous generation at 92 layers, so it is assumed to be 128L 3D NAND. The 500GB model from Seagate drops the ball a bit in terms of write speed, at a comparatively lowly 3,000MB/s (which does make the 500GB model much less appealing) but from there, the 1TB, 2TB and 4TB models all massively surpass the majority of other SSD in the market right now, reaching 6,000MB/s – 6,900MB/s in sequential Write and smashing an impressive 7,300MB/s in sequential Read – genuinely staggering and for manufactures to be getting so close to the theoretical 8,000MB/s max of PCie 4×4 M.2 so early cannot be ignored! See below:
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
Samsung 980 Pro
|
| 500GB Model | ZP500GM3A013 | MZ-V8P500BW |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7000MB | 6900MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 3000MB | 5000MB |
| 1TB Model | ZP1000GM3A013 | MZ-V8P1T0BW |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6000MB | 5000MB |
| 2TB Model | ZP2000GM3A013 | MZ-V8P2T0BW |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7300MB | 7000MB |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6900MB | 5100MB |
| 4TB Model | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 7300MB | N/A |
| Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB | 6900MB | N/A |
As the chart above indicates, Seagate Firecuda 530 almost completely wins the performance comparison for traditional Read/Write activity. Given its later release, slightly higher price tag and increase NAND quality/layers, this is what you would expect and unless Samsung release a new revision of the PRO SSD series in 2021/2022, the Firecuda 530 wins this round in spades.
The performance of the Samsung 980 Pro and Seagate Friecuda 530 in terms of IOPS are actually surprisingly similar. Indeed, only the 500GB model ZP500GM3A013 and MZ-V8P500BW give us much difference of note. Both drive manufacturers report that they hit the 1,000,000 input/output operations per second threshold. So that means that these drives pass through data incredibly well. I mention the 500GB model, as the Samsung 980 Pro largely dwarfs the Firecuda 530 at this tier, with twice the random read IOPS and 40% or so more on random write IOPS. I would be interested to see if this is because of NAND placement (as the larger 2TB Firecuda 530 matches the Samsung 980 PRO, but is double-sided) or total GB per physical cell and more/less over-provisioning in place – but for now we can definitely see that buyers looking for premium IOPS on a 500GB scratch/current-projects drive will see better results on the Samsung 980 PRO (also remember that the 500GB 980 Pro also had superior traditional Write too). Below is breakdown on the reported IOPS on each drive:
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
Samsung 980 Pro
|
| 500GB Model | ZP500GM3A013 | MZ-V8P500BW |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 400,000 | 800,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 700,000 | 1,000,000 |
| 1TB Model | ZP1000GM3A013 | MZ-V8P1T0BW |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 800000 | 1000000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1000000 | 1000000 |
| 2TB Model | ZP2000GM3A013 | MZ-V8P2T0BW |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1,000,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1,000,000 | 1,000,000 |
| 4TB Model | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1,000,000 | N/A |
| Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 | 1,000,000 | N/A |
IOPS are always going to be a tricky measurement of an SSD. Individually (i.e the M.2 NVMe in a single drive-use environment like a console or OS), the IOPS will translate to a much more responsive system. However this is still a question of near-milliseconds and the minute you introduce multiple PCIE4 M.2 SSDs RAID’d into a single system, then the multiplication of these IOPS and bottleneck of the rest of the system will level the playing field massively. The Samsung 980 Pro easily provides the best IOPS and excellent price-vs-R/W throughput on the 500GB level and makes it the clear choice at that capacity. However, in practically all over tiers they are level for the most part and unless you are running these drives in massive sessions individually (ie a streamer or eSport professional running daily 4-6hr sessions), then either of the Samsung 980 Pro or Seagate Firecuda 530 will be a suitable choice at 1TB and higher in terms of responsiveness.
The importance of IOPS and Throughput are all well and good, but how long the SSD can maintain those speeds and operation in general as the years go by is an increasing concern in 2021/2022. The Firecuda 530 and 980 PRO are rated quite differently in terms of Endurance and Durability, so I wanted to take a moment to focus a little more on this – you can thank you years from now! The importance of SSD durability is actually pretty massive. Now that the devices we use all feature incredibly powerful processors, often cloud/network hybrid AI processes and graphical handling that will be instantly bottlenecked by traditional hard drives, SSDs are no longer just the ‘boot’ drive for our OS and are now the day to day working drive. This combined with SSD being used as caching and larger SSD capacities allowing suitable substitution for HDDs entirely means that the CONSTANT concern about SSDs lifespan and the durability of those NAND cells is now quite paramount. SSDs wear out – it’s as simple as that. The more you write, the more wear those individual NAND cells suffer – degrading performance over the years and inevitably leading to drive failure. Likewise, the smaller the drive, the greater likelihood that you will be writing, then rewriting, then rewriting, time and time again. The Seagate Firecuda 530 and Samsung 980 PRO are no exception and alongside massive research and development in better controllers and interfaces to improve performance, the way NAND is improved has led to SSDs lasting lover than ever before. However, SSDs and NAND are not built equally and there is actually quite a large difference in durability between the Samsung 980 PRO and the Seagate Firecuda 530. The Storage industry typically measures the predicted durability and endurance of an SSD as TBW, DWPD and MTBF. They are:
TBW = Terabytes Written, rated as the total number of terabytes that this SSD can have written to it in its warranty covered lifespan. So if the TBW was 300TB and the warranty is 5 years of coverage, that would mean that the drive can receive on average (with deleting/overwriting data each repeatedly) 60 Terabytes per year (or 5TB a month). After this point, the manufacturer highlights that durability, endurance and performance will decline. Often highlighted as an alternative to warranty length when gauging the predicted lifespan of a SSD.
DWPD = Drive Writes Per Day / Data Writes Per Day, this is a decimalized figure that represents what proportion of the capacity of an SSD (where 1.0 = 100% capacity) can be filled, erased and/or rewritten on a daily basis. This is provided using the warranty period and TBW figure. So, for example, if a 500GB drive has a 0.3DWPD rating, that is approx 150GB of data per day
MTBF = Mean Time Between Failure, which is the interval between one failure of an SSD and the next. MTBF is expressed in hours and most industrial SSDs are rated in the Millions of Hours. MTBF and MTTF (Mean Time to Failure) have largely become overlooked in recent years in favour of TBW and DWPD in SSDs, but are still stated on most Data Sheets.
So, now you know what those large Terbyte stats, hours and decimal point details are on the average SSD datasheet. So where do the Seagate Firecuda 530 and Samsung 980 PRO stand on this, as the extra 10-12 months that the Firecuda spent ‘in the oven’ has seemingly produced rather large improvements in it’s predicted lifespan:
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
Samsung 980 Pro
|
| 500GB Model | ZP500GM3A013 | MZ-V8P500BW |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 640TB | 300TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,800,000 | 1,500,000 |
| DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 1TB Model | ZP1000GM3A013 | MZ-V8P1T0BW |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 1275TB | 600TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,800,000 | 1,500,000 |
| DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 2TB Model | ZP2000GM3A013 | MZ-V8P2T0BW |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 2550TB | 1200TB |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,800,000 | 1,500,000 |
| DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
| 4TB Model | ZP4000GM3A013 | N/A |
| Total Terabytes Written (TBW) | 5100TB | N/A |
| Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) | 1,800,000 | N/A |
| DWPD | 0.7DWPD | 0.3DWPD |
Whether it is that Phison E18 controller having better-balanced wear management, the 176 layer 3D NAND or just generally more refinement of the handling as PCIe4 m.2 is explored, there is no ignoring that 0.7 drive writes per day of the Firecuda 530 being more than double that of the Samsung 980 Pro. This is not the first time Seagate have prioritized DWPD and TBW in their SSD media (their first entries into 24×7 NAS SSD featuring 1.0DWPD, practically unheard of at that tier) and given that Samsung have some of the most sophisticated and well-engineered in-house R&D operations in the world (only really challenged by WD), it is very surprising this is drive only has a 30% drive fill per day rating. I won’t focus too much on the MTBF (although clearly there are differences) as it is far less relevant as a spec these days, but in summary and in terms of durability, endurance and predicted lifespan – the Seagate Firecuda 530 wins by a country mile here.
The Seagate Firecuda 530 is the more recently released drive of the two and it shows. Samsung heavily occupied the PCIe4 M.2 SSD market when this tier of Prosumer media (at the client-manufacturer level) arrived last year. But, as incredible as it sounds, the Samsung 980 Pro is in danger of looking a little slow as the rest of the market produces their own faster and more enduring alternatives in the Firecuda 530, the MSI SPATIUM M480 and Sabrent Rocket Plus. The Samsung 980 Pro still an incredible feat of development and construction, but much like my comparison of the Firecuda 530 and WD Black SN850, entering the market before full widespread adoption of your kind of product is better established can sometimes lead to competitors being given more time to overtake. Adoption of PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSD is still by no means ‘standardised’ and even now, numerous mobo manufacturers taht support the technology either do so using bandwidth sharing on the board OR choose to dedicate those potential PCIe 4.0 lanes to a traditional PCIe upgrade slot over M.2.The Samsung 980 Pro is an EXCELLENT SSD and provides the best price for this kind of performance at every capacity tier (not just compared with the Firecuda 530, but against pretty much ALL of the other PCIe4 M.2s on the market right now) which is thanks in a big way to it’s earlier release than most. However, it is impossible to ignore that the Seagate Firecuda 530 has used that extra time in development very wisely and has produced a higher-performing drive for the most part, with a much more enduring lifespan and ultimately better VALUE overall. I recommend buying the Firecuda 530 right now or wait until Samsung revisit their PRO series to see how where they can push things even further!
| Brand/Series | Seagate Firecuda 530
|
Samsung 980 Pro
|
| Best Performance | ✓ | |
| Best Endurance/Durability | ✓ | |
| Best Price for TB | ✓ | |
| Best Extras | ✓ | |
| Best Value | ✓ | |
| Where To Buy | |
|
This description contains links to Amazon. These links will take you to some of the products mentioned in today's content. As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases. Visit the NASCompares Deal Finder to find the best place to buy this device in your region, based on Service, Support and Reputation - Just Search for your NAS Drive in the Box Below
SEARCH IN THE BOX BELOW FOR NAS DEALS
Finally, for free advice about your setup, just leave a message in the comments below here at NASCompares.com and we will get back to you.
Need Help?
Where possible (and where appropriate) please provide as much information about your requirements, as then I can arrange the best answer and solution to your needs. Do not worry about your e-mail address being required, it will NOT be used in a mailing list and will NOT be used in any way other than to respond to your enquiry.
[contact-form-7]
Terms and Conditions
Alternatively, why not ask me on the ASK NASCompares forum, by clicking the button below. This is a community hub that serves as a place that I can answer your question, chew the fat, share new release information and even get corrections posted. I will always get around to answering ALL queries, but as a one-man operation, I cannot promise speed! So by sharing your query in the ASK NASCompares section below, you can get a better range of solutions and suggestions, alongside my own.
Tags de l’article
FreshRSS