FreshRSS

🔒
❌ À propos de FreshRSS
Il y a de nouveaux articles disponibles, cliquez pour rafraîchir la page.
À partir d’avant-hierFlux principal

dBrand Darkplates 2.0 PS5 & SSD Review and Temperature Tests

7 mars 2022 à 01:08

dBrand Darkplates – Are they Good or Bad for your PS5 SSD & System Temperatures?


The Playstation 5 is one of the oddest looking consoles in…well.. ever! I think we can all agree that when Sony unveiled the console, a large number of us assumed it was concept art, or a tech demo. But no, the PS5 is white and black, has fins and is huge! When they announced that the side plates of the system were removable, it took all of about 10 minutes for brands to start getting to work on replacement side panels (or ‘Plates’) for the console in a multitude of colours and patterns. Sony, needless to say, immediately started pursuing legal action against these companies for infringement of their design and intellectual property without permission and of all the companies that received this legal onslaught, very few made the headlines as loudly as Brand and their Darkplate series. Thanks to a combination of speed of producing concepts, to an arguable savvy social marketing management team, they appeared on the bulk of mainstream gamer news sites and editorial platforms with their ‘illicit’ Darkplates. Sony won the battle of course, but dBrand seems to feel they can win the war with the release of their Darkplate 2.0, a new take on the shape and presentation of the PS5 plates, featuring additional ventilation, a tongue in cheek reference to their legal battles (with a user highlighting to me that the binary 01101 etc embossed inside is translated to the cease and decide Sony issued Brand) and creates a much more compact looking system that can also arrive in multiple colours, patterns and optional LED lighting. Now, I generally never look at things like this on NASCompares, as I focus almost exclusively on storage (NAS, DAS, HDDs, SSDs, Switches, Routers, IP Cameras, etc, etc), however, the Brand DARKPLATE 2.0 covers open up TWO important area of concern for some buyers that ARE very much in my/NASCompares wheelhouse. 1, Do these plates undermine or nullify the negative pressure air in/air out system the PS5 uses with its central fan and 2) if an m.2 SSD expansion drive is installed in the available bay of the PS5 (also inevitable given the baseline storage the system has and AAA games in 2022 onwards), does the increased block of heat that the SSD+HEATSINK+M.2 Cover panels result in ambient heat that the system is not efficiently ejecting? So, today I want to talk a little about these plates, but more importantly, run a series of tests that measure the temperature of the internal system AND the SSD expansion bay in a series of different setup scenarios. But, before we go any further, let’s take a closer look at the dBrand Darkplates themselves and how they install/look on the PS5

DESIGN - 9/10
QUALITY - 9/10
EFFECTIVENESS - 7/10
PRICE - 4/10
VALUE - 4/10


6.6
PROS
👍🏻Nice design, feel, patterns and colours
👍🏻In shape when deployed makes the system look a lot more subtle and understated (no tall fins)
👍🏻
👍🏻The Vented dark plate vents do not seemingly undermine the PS5 negative pressure cooling
👍🏻
👍🏻Mesh covered vents can be removed for cleaning
CONS
👎🏻Quite pricey for what you are getting
👎🏻The vented panels seem largely useless throughout temp testing

 

Twice the Price – What’s the Difference?

The Design and Cooling Differences of the Brand Darkplates 2.0 for PS5?


So, first and foremost, the vent panels of the Brand Darkplates. These are not featured on the official PS5 plates and are one of the biggest differences between the two (and almost certainly form part of the argument that these are not infringing on Sony’s copyright. It should be highlighted though that there are not fan-assisted, they do not connect with any internal/USB power source to increase airflow and are designed to be used above the existing PS5 system fan to allow more air to be pulled into the system before it gets pushed out the back of the console. This is where the concern is for some regarding how these pass airflow vents will undermine the PS5 active cooling system when in operation.



Fairplay to Brand, the presentation of the Darkplate 2.0 kit is incredibly chic, with a box that opens from the middle on dual hinges that reveals the individual plates wrapped in plastic and black foam, then cleaning fabric and a Darkplate 2.0 reference card. It’s all very modern in presentation and dBrand make several references to the Sony legal action, their ‘fight the man style stance and generally trying to promote this as more than just plastic for your home console. It is all laid on pretty thick, but it’s still a good retail kit.



One question many buyers have about the dBrand Darkplates is about value for money. Once you step aside from the marketing and legal fandango, you are looking at type plastic plates for your PS5 that are $59 to buy. Now, Sony is already releasing their own plates now at a notably higher price, but also you need to factor in that ALOT of budget eTailers (eshops, online retailers, etc) are now selling plain black budget plates for upgrading your PS5 for just $29 – half the price fo the black dBrand Darkplates. You can also add that if you wanted to upgrade your PS5 with a new SSD and wanted to ensure low operating temperatures and/of the longevity of the SSD, then you can look at PS5 designed SSD heatsinks for the system for as little as $20. So that means that the dBrand Darkplates 2.0 arriving at $59 puts it very much in a price bracket than many might think. The PS5 designed heatsink as an optional purchase is particularly pertinent as not only will it ensure that your PS5 SSD runs at a much better general heat level, but it does so with little/no impact on the system cooling (testing here on NASCompares several times in 2021/2022). So, do the dBrand Darkplates keep the system running cool still?

How the dBrand Darkplate PS5 Temperature Testing was Conducted?


For this test, I used the following components in four different hardware configurations, with each test cycle featuring four individual components that feature heavy Write activity actioned by moving 300GB of data from the internal system SSD and over to the expansion SSD, gameplay of two PS5 titles located on the SSD and a heavy Read activity by moving the games back onto the default system storage. When each test was completed, I turned the system completely off for 15 minutes and removed the side plates between tests, to allow the system the chance to dissipate heat. This seemed reasonable instead of leaving the system off for hours at a time to completely cool naturally and as long as all tests were afforded this same cool-down period equally, it still kept things even. Here are the hardware components used in this these tests:

  • PS5 System
  • Original Official Cover Plates
  • Seagate Firecuda 530 1TB SSD with EK Official Heatsink
  • Seagate Firecuda 530 1TB SSD without Heatsink
  • M.2 SSD Cover Plate
  • Sabrent PS5 Designed Heatsink
  • Twin Node Temperature Sensor

In all tests, a temperature node was placed an inch beneath the core system fan to measure ambient system temperature at all times. This was to see if 1, the ventilated debrand plates prevented the PS5 negative pressure cooling doing its job and 2, to see if the additional heat of the SSD with/without a cover would particularly increase heat in light of the brand plates changing the system passive cooling system. The first thing to do was to get a default/baseline from the PS5 system in all these tests, so I set up the PS5 in its original plates. I installed the Seagate Firecuda 530 SSD, set in place the metal m.2 cover plate, closed the system side plates and then begun running the tests on this ‘control’ or ‘baseline’ setup.



After the first range of tests were completed, I removed the official PS5 cover plates, left the system to cool for an hour (removing and then replacing the SSD at the start and end including the m.2 cover plate), then added the dBrand Darkplates to repeat all the tests.



The range of tests and operations were repeated in this near-identical setup (but with new plates) around 2 hours after the start of the first tests and with little meaningful change in the room temperature.



Next, I wanted to see what impact that m.2 cover plate had on the running of the PS5 with the dBrand plates, so after test phase 2 was completed, I powered the device down and removed the m.2 cover plate. This time I did not leave it covering the SSD during test phase 3. The Seagate Firecuda 530 SSD used for these tests features its official EK gaming heatsink and it would be interesting to see if the additional passive ventilation in the dBrand plates would allow the air to be better drawn through the m.2 SSD bays even slightly.



After Test Phase 3 was completed, I had one final test and that was using the Sabrent PS5 designed heatsink inside the dBrand darkplate setup. Swapping the Seagate Firecuda 530 EK Heatsink version in favour of the bare/non-H/S version for this test, I installed it + the Sabrent heatsink and then replaced the Darkplates for testing as before. It would be interesting to see if the increased surface mass of the Sabrent would possibly benefit from the dBrand plates and/or if the system would be impacted in any way.



So, there you have it. Those were the tests. So, now let’s go through the results and everything we observed. It is worth remembering that the temperature for the airflow/ambient temps inside the PS5 between each test (due to factors such as the time of day and surrounding room temp that were beyond my control) at the start and end of each test cycle had a few degrees of difference between tests and although I will be adding start/end temp levels into consideration, the increase between them inside each test will be primarily what I will compare, as it will demonstrate how well the system adapted/adjusted to the change in hardware setup. For the SSD temperature, I have used CrystalDisk for PC to access the logs of the SSD controller and see how the SSD changed temp throughout the four tests each time. The spike in the graphs represent the peak of the heat recorded during each test and decreased between tests. This temp was NOT a constant and just shows its highest point.


Key – Heavy-Write = Heavy Write Activity (300GB) moving games from internal PS5 Storage to M.2 SSD, Far-Cry-6 = Far Cry 6 Gameplay, Demon -Souls = Demon Souls Gameplay, Heavy-Read = Heavy Read Activity (300GB) moving games from M.2 SSD to internal PS5 Storage

Original PS5 PLATES + Seagate FC530 H/S + M.2 Cover Test Results


In test one, I used the original PS5 Plates, the Seagate Firecuda 530 H/S Edition and the m.2 expansion cover plate. Here are the results:

Type of Reading

Ambient System Temp.

SSD Controller Peak Temp.

Heavy-Write

20.2 > 20.8 = 0.6°C

45°C

Far-Cry-6

21.6 > 24.0 = 2.4°C

43°C

Demon -Souls

22.8 > 26.6 = 3.8°C

48°C

Heavy-Read

20.8 > 24.3 = 3.5°C

51°C


The general system temperature throughout the tests was quite normal for the PS5 (as you would expect in this default setup) but the SSD controller temperature was higher than I would have liked (especially compared to a PC setup) and a lot of that can be blamed on that M.2 cover plate. I have raised this before, but I do not think the cover for the M.2 is a good design for a closed system like the PS5.



 

dBrand PLATES +Seagate FC530 H/S + M.2 Cover Test Results


The next test was the dBrand Darkplates this time, but still with the same Seagate Firecuda 530 H/S SSD and m.2 cover plate. This was mainly to see if the additional ventilation would be a positive/negative to the system’s negative cooling (as its introduction of two meshed vents had to make an impact!).

Type of Reading

Ambient System Temp.

SSD Controller Peak Temp.

Heavy-Write

20.2 > 20.5 = 0.3°C

28°C

Far-Cry-6

20.4 > 22.2 = 1.8°C

39°C

Demon -Souls

21.0 > 24.0 = 3.0°C

44°C

Heavy-Read

20.9 > 24.8 = 3.9°C

47°C


The SSD temperatures were still predictably high, because of that m.2 cover, but overall the system temperature was very close to the official test temperatures and in some cases even managed to be a little cooler. Below is the temperature of the SSD controller at each test. Still higher than in a PC/Open setting, but a pinch lower.



 

dBrand PLATES + Seagate FC530 H/S + NO M.2 Cover Test Results


Next I wanted to remove the m.2 plate from the equation, so I repeated the previous test setup hardware WITHOUT the M.2 cover plate. Would allowing more active airflow in contact with the SSD heatsink help?

Type of Reading

Ambient System Temp.

SSD Controller Peak Temp.

Heavy-Write

21.3 > 21.0 = -0.3°C

18°C

Far-Cry-6

20.1 > 23.2 = 3.1°C

29°C

Demon -Souls

20.9 > 22.2 = 1.3°C

39°C

Heavy-Read

22.2 > 24.0 = 1.8°C

45°C


Overall the numbers were better for the SSD but negligible for the ambient temps. Nothing incredible and certainly not something that makes the dBrand plates worth the $59 asde from their look, but they did seem to run a slightly cooler system temp most of the time. The SSD controller was definitely a noticeable degree lower in running temp and although it still reached a height of 45 degrees after all the tests, it maintained the lower temperature recording for longer than the previous two tests.



 

dBrand PLATES + Seagate FC530 H/S + Sabrent PS5 H/S Test Results


The final test was the most unofficial sony one of the three, using the dBrand plates in conjunction with the Sabrent PS5 designed heatsink. This heatsink fills the entire M.2 slot and is raised slightly from the expansion aby in order for active airflow drawn by that internal fan to travel over/through the grooves of the heatsink. Use of the Sabrent heatsink means that I have to switch the Firecuda 530 SSD out for the same SSD but without the official/pre-applied heatsink. Now, the question here is that if the system internal negative pressure cooling is not as efficient with the vented panel of the dBrand plates, will that means that air flow over the Sabrent heatsink will be reduced (as the air gets pulled through the circular vents of the plates and not the grooved front vents of the PS5 normally?

Type of Reading

Ambient System Temp.

SSD Controller Peak Temp.

Heavy-Write

21.9 > 22.4 = 0.5°C

28°C

Far-Cry-6

19.8 > 24.9 = 5.1°C

32°C

Demon -Souls

20.3 > 22.9 = 2.6°C

33°C

Heavy-Read

18.5 > 20.9 (fan increased) = 2.4°C

38°C


Overall, this was a great test and the SSD temperature was at its lowest here than in any other test. The ambient system temperature was good too, lower at boot and by the end of a test wave than any other test. The only thing that marred it slightly was the fact the system fans appeared to ramp up in the closing stages of the heavy read test.



Let’s compare each test vs the default setup below.


In all four scenarios, games were being loaded from the Seagate Firecuda 530 NVMe SSD inside the PS5 expansion bay and an interesting take from this is the varying differences in temperature between them (in the white and red graphs) that, even if you factor small changes in the environmental temperatures around the machine, are still notably different, the more access airflow had to those heatsinks. Likewise, you can see that the temperatures displayed for the ambient system temperature were from the last seconds of each test in jsut the standard setup in conjunction with either plate set choice were still incredibly similar. Therefore I think this indicates that the system temp with the dBrand plates is still comparable in either setup (at most 1-2 degrees of difference):

Click to view slideshow.

Comparing the initial setup with dBrand and Official PS5 plates side by side, you can see that most fo the internal PS5 temperatures were largely identical and it’s only really on the SSD controller reports that we see a significant difference (with the dBrand SSD heatsink being the lower temperature at boot, but closing in on the same temp as the official plates as each test was completed. Overall, comparing these showed (at least to me) that the use of the dBrand plates did not impact the PS5 system operational temp levels negatively.


RESULTS:

TEST Original PS5 Plates + SSD + M.2 Cover

dBrand Darkplates 2.0 PS5 Plates + SSD + M.2 Cover

Ambient System Temp Start/End/Diff SSD Controller Temp Max Ambient System Temp Start/End/Diff SSD Controller Temp Max
Heavy-Write

20.2 > 20.8 = 0.6°C

45°C

20.2 > 20.5 = 0.3°C

28°C

Far-Cry-6

21.6 > 24.0 = 2.4°C

43°C

20.4 > 22.2 = 1.8°C

39°C

Demon -Souls

22.8 > 26.6 = 3.8°C

48°C

21.0 > 24.0 = 3.0°C

44°C

Heavy-Read

20.8 > 24.3 = 3.5°C

51°C

20.9 > 24.8 = 3.9°C

47°C


 

dBrand Darkplates 2.0 vs Original PS5 Plates (WITHOUT m.2 Cover Plate)


Whereas if we look at comparing the default PS5 setup+SSD+m.2 cover against the dBrand plates+SSD+no cover, we see that temperatures were even better for the SSD controller. In terms of ambient airflow, the uncovered SSD heatsink did not really negatively impact the PS5 system and in the areas, it did get hotter than the official PS5 plates and cover, it was very small indeed and negligible at best!


RESULTS:

TEST Original PS5 Plates + SSD + M.2 Cover

dBrand Darkplates 2.0 PS5 Plates + SSD + NO M.2 Cover

Ambient System Temp Start/End/Diff SSD Controller Temp Max Ambient System Temp Start/End/Diff SSD Controller Temp Max
Heavy-Write

20.2 > 20.8 = 0.6°C

45°C

21.3 > 21.0 = -0.3°C

18°C

Far-Cry-6

21.6 > 24.0 = 2.4°C

43°C

20.1 > 23.2 = 3.1°C

29°C

Demon -Souls

22.8 > 26.6 = 3.8°C

48°C

20.9 > 22.2 = 1.3°C

39°C

Heavy-Read

20.8 > 24.3 = 3.5°C

51°C

22.2 > 24.0 = 1.8°C

45°C


 

dBrand Darkplates 2.0 vs Original PS5 Plates (with m.2 Cover Plate)


Finally, there is comparing the default setup of the official plates versus using the dBrand Darkplates, M.2 SSD and the Sabrent PS5 designed heatsink. The controller was easily at it’s coolest point on the tests using the Sabrent heatsink, which wasn’t a big surprise. However, what really stood out was that the heat increase inside the PS5 system (although STARTING lower) increased quite quickly. Even though it was still lower than the SSD+official heatsink+m.2, it increased fast enough to make me wonder if the additional vents of the dBrand design lost some of that sucked in airflow directly next to the Sabrent heatsink. Here is how they compare:


RESULTS:

TEST Original PS5 Plates + SSD + M.2 Cover

dBrand Darkplates 2.0 PS5 Plates + SSD + SABRENT HEATSINK

Ambient System Temp Start/End/Diff SSD Controller Temp Max Ambient System Temp Start/End/Diff SSD Controller Temp Max
Heavy-Write

20.2 > 20.8 = 0.6°C

45°C

21.9 > 22.4 = 0.5°C

28°C

Far-Cry-6

21.6 > 24.0 = 2.4°C

43°C

19.8 > 24.9 = 5.1°C

32°C

Demon -Souls

22.8 > 26.6 = 3.8°C

48°C

20.3 > 22.9 = 2.6°C

33°C

Heavy-Read

20.8 > 24.3 = 3.5°C

51°C

18.5 > 20.9 (fan increased) = 2.4°C

38°C


Throughout Feb 2022, I will be publishing the videos of my tests (x3 videos) and they will be published below. Take a look at them as they get published, as well as my video detailing the results of temperature testing of the Sabrent PS5 SSD heatsink:


Note: if a video is showing as ‘unavailable’, it means it is still awaiting publication in the schedule and will be coming soon.

dBrand Darkplate 2.0 Temp Test 1

dBrand Darkplate 2.0 Temp Test 2

dBrand Darkplate 2.0 Temp Test 3

Sabrent PS5 Heatsink Temp Test


 

dBrand Darkplates 2.0 for PS5 and Keeping it Cool? – Conclusion & Verdict


Overall, I would say that the pricetag of the dBrand Darkplates is a lot more about having a unique looking and possibly better design looking PS5 in your home, than it is about improvements on systems temperatures and efficiency. The $59 price tag of the base/default dBrand Darkplate 2.0 kit is quite steep, when there are budget $25-30 PS5 plate kits in the market right now and the ventilation that forms a big part of the design of these newly refreshed designed plates looks interesting/effective, but in reality seems to change the operating temperature of the PS5 very little. Therefore although they don’t seem to improve the temperatures much, it can be argued that the plates do NOT undermine or negatively affect the PS5’s negative cooling system. Regarding their use in conjunction with an SSD, m.2 PC style heatsink or a PS5 designed alternative, the differences between identical setups with the official PS5 plates or Darkplates were too similar to declare any form of advantage. Ultimately, in 2022, if you want the SSD that is housing your bigger games to run at its coolest, investing in a better system designed heatsink or running without the m.2 cover plate is much, much more recommended than upgrading cover plates. I like the look, feel, presentation and overall design of the dBrand Darkplates, I just question whether they are worth $59, or double the price of budget plate replacements out there.

PROs of the dBrand Darkplates 2.0 CONs of the dBrand Darkplates 2.0
Nice design, feel, patterns and colours

In shape when deployed makes the system look a lot more subtle and understated (no tall fins)


The Vented dark plate vents do not seemingly undermine the PS5 negative pressure cooling


Mesh covered vents can be removed for cleaning

Quite pricey for what you are getting

The vented panels seem largely useless throughout temp testing



 


 

📧 LET ME KNOW ABOUT NEW POSTS 🔔

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,460 other subscribers


Get an alert every time something gets added to this specific article!


Want to follow specific category?

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 ANY OTHER NAS

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

We want to keep the free advice on NASCompares FREE for as long as we can. Since this service started back in Jan '18, We have helped hundreds of users every month solve their storage woes, but we can only continue to do this with your support. So please do choose to buy at Amazon US and Amazon UK on the articles when buying to provide advert revenue support or to donate/support the site below. 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.  

Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD Review and Benchmark – Changing Gear?

11 février 2022 à 01:49

Review of the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX PCIe Gen 4 NVMe SSD


When Corsair released their first high performing SSD entry onto the PCIe 4 m.2 NVMe tier, they did so into a significantly less crowded marketplace than it is right now. The MP600 was one of the first Phison E16 SSDs to arrive on the scene and it made quite the mark! Then the Phison E18 prosumer model arrived in the MP600 Pro (Originally reviewed here on NASCompares, it scored very well in its review and benchmark ), but fast forward to 2022 and corsair have revisited this SSD with a new heatsink and tweaked firmware (optimized in favour of PS5 utilization) in the new Corsair MP600 Pro LPX. This new revision of the Corsair MP600 embraces some physical differences in the heatsink (changing the rather beefy PC targetted H/S), but for the most part is the same SSD, with the same architecture as the MP600 that came before it. That said, with the boost in SSD deployment in PS5 consoles around the world, the move by the brand to make their flagship prosumer SSD more accessible to that market makes a lot of sense. That said, is this the same old SSD with a simple paint job? What sets the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX apart from its predecessor? Let’s find out.


Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD Review – Quick Conclusion


Arriving as a slight change on the blueprints of the previously released Corsair MP600 Pro, the newly PS5 optimized Corsair MP600 Pro LPX is very much a second helping of what that same SSD did previously. It does bring a few tweaks into the mix (modified Heatsink, improved NAND, etc) but if you are already an owner of the PC focused MP600 Pro, there isn’t going to be much new for you here. However, if this is your first time considering the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX as your gamer SSD of course, is it a remarkably solid, well built and understated piece of storage! Performing remarkably well in testing on the PC and PS5, this IS a good SSD. That said, the PCIe Gen 4 SSD market is fast becoming a very crowded place and despite its pluses, the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX may be in danger of fading into the background. Luckily its pricing appears more dynamic than many out there (even at its launch) and the Corsair name carries enough kudos in the PC market to get picked up by console gamers nonetheless. A good SSD that, had it been released just 6 months before, I think would have made a bigger noise for buyers to hear! PS5 Buyers, don’t hesitate! PC buyers, maybe save a few quid and opt for the MP600 Pro standard version.

SPEED - 8/10
HARDWARE - 9/10
PERFORMANCE - 9/10
PRICE - 8/10
VALUE - 8/10


8.4
PROS
👍🏻Another good Phison E18 SSD
👍🏻Same Architecture (inc NAND quality) to the Seagate Firecuda 530
👍🏻
👍🏻Good Price Point vs WD & Seagate Options
👍🏻
👍🏻Genuinely Impressive value for the price tag
👍🏻
👍🏻PS5 Compatibility is Confirmed and the heatsink fits great
👍🏻
👍🏻No overpromising of its abilities and solid performance
👍🏻
👍🏻Durability is a pinch better than the WD Black SN850 and Samsung 980 Pro
👍🏻
👍🏻Higher 4K Random IOPS ratings than most
👍🏻
👍🏻Impressively high write performance compared with similar architecture SSD
CONS
👎🏻The retail package is a little underwhelming
👎🏻Ran a little hotter than most SSDs in PC benchmark tests

Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD Review – Packaging


A close look at the retail box of the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX shows us that this range differs ever so slightly from the original version and its yellow/black design. The box is fairly monotone and conservative, lacking the loud luminous yellow of its predecessor.



The retail box shows us the familiar rigid packaging we saw in the Corsair MP600 Pro, as well as the inclusion of installation instructions and warranty information. All fairly standard stuff.



There are details on the box regarding the performance of the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX, as well as further information on how well this SSD performs. Much like the Corsair MP600 Pro original version, the new LPX release is remarkably restrained in its reported performance from the brand (in our testing of its general predecessor, we would it could achieve a good 10-15% more than the brand implied. Let’s hope this is the case once again.



Removing the SSD from all the retail packaging, we find the SSD and its PS5 optimised heatsink. Quite similar to the Nextorage NEM-PA discussed here on the channel a couple of weeks ago, the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX SSD is a chunky but low profile m.2 heatsink that features multiple airflow channels for assisting heat dissipation. However, this SSD heatsink will likely be encased in the PS5 SSD expansion slot and that will marginally limit airflow.



The Corsair MP600 Pro LPX SSD heatsink though is still quite coversome and surrounds the SSD very neatly. Arriving as a pre-installed heatsink purchase, this SSD arrives tightly cases inside the aluminium surrounding case.



With so many first party SSD heatsinks arriving in the market (largely due to the increased heat generated by PCIe 4 Performance generally), the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX heatsink still manages to be a little generic but is certainly built to a standard that I feel it will do the job it is built for. The heatsink has been clearly designed to fit inside the PS5 m2 SSD expansion slot (hence the several references to the console on the retail packaging) and I am pleased to confirm that it fits without a hitch! I’m still not a huge fan of the covered design of the SSD slot on the PS5, but still, this heatsink has adapted well compared with the standard MP600 model.



The heatsink on the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX in a PS5 deployment seems a good fit, but when we performed our PC benchmarks (detailed later in the review) it should be noted that the temperature of the controller rose a pinch higher (around 10-12 degrees) higher than most other similarly designed SSD+Heatsink combos, peaking at the most intense testing at 57 degrees. This is still well within the operational temperatures of this SSD to perform, but I have seen similar architecture SSDs (in the controller, NAND, memory) to the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX maintain the temperature better and that is often down to the heatsink being chunkier or a larger surface area in a PC environment to capture active airflow.



When installing the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX in the PS5, we performed a benchmark using the system’s own tool several times and although the highest it achieved was 6388MB/s, the best average temp was around 6300-6400MB/s.


As you would expect, the SSD immediately appeared in the PS5 storage manager and was available for use straight away.



Full PS5 Games Loading testing of the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX NVMe SSD will be coming soon to the YouTube channel here on NASCompares, but in the meantime, here is how it compared again games loading on 6 games against the internal PS5 SSD:


Let’s see how the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX PS5 benchmark compared with other SSDs we have tested.


Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD Review – PS5 Benchmark


To put the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD PS5 Performance Benchmark into a little perspective, here is how it compares against the Addlink A95, Adata XPG Gammix S70, Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus and Gigabyte Aorus 7000s – four SSDs that are all PS5 supported and VERY similar architecture very little difference between the others in this tier, it is a solid benchmark.

Addlink A95 PS5 Benchmark – 6556MB/s XPG GAMMIX S70 PS5 Benchmark – 6235MB/s
Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus – 6557MB/s Gigabyte Aorus 7000s PS5 Benchmark6557MB/s

Full PS5 Testing of this is all available as a playlist over on the NASCompares YouTube channel. But for now, let’s carry on with looking at the hardware of the A440, how it conventionally benchmarks and how it compares with currently favourite PS5 SSDs like the WD Black and Seagate Firecuda 530,



So that is the physical design of the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD. But what about the hardware components themselves? Does the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX cut the mustard in terms of current generation hardware and protocols? Let’s find out. First thing’s first, let’s remove the heatsink of the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX, which is done by the removal of four individual Phillips head screw heads. Also, don’t do this! It will invalidate your warranty.



Inside, we find thermal paste/gel applied directly onto the key components. This SSD was a 2-sides PCB (8x 256GB NAND) and thermal material was applied on either side. I expected to see a rectangular thermal pad, but this direct application onto the key components is arguably better (more precisely on the controller). Let’s discuss the main components and architecture of this SSD:


Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD Review – Hardware Specifications


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 LPX are quite modern. Indeed, for all the big talk of the incredibly similar Seagate Firecuda 530 hardware (still currently the ‘score to beat’ PCIE Gen4 m.2 NVMe right now, though a noticeable degree more expensive than all the others) being top tier, the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX is pretty darn similar on the spec sheet! Below is how it looks:

Corsair MP600 PRO LPX


500GB – $99, 1TB – $169, 2TB – $3394TB – $745

PCIe Generation PCIe 4 x4
NVMe Rev NVMe Rev. 1.4
NAND & Memory 176L 3D TLC Micron B47R
Max Capacity 1-4TB
Controller Phison PS5018-E18
Warranty 5 Years

I know a lot of the above will seem needlessly technical, so below we can bring the most important considerations into sharper focus.

Hardware Focus of the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD Series


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 LPX can actually back up it’s promises about the 7,000MB/s+ (reporting a max 7,100) Sequential Read (sequential data = big chunks of data). However, that is not the only reason.



The NAND on the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX 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 the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX features the same NAND quality as the Seagate Firecuda 530 at 176 layer 3D TLC NAND), which 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 96 layers or so, which still puts the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD ahead.



Much like the Controller on the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX being the ‘CPU’, it also has an area of memory. The Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD uses 2GB DDR4 DRAM/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 2TB tier, 1GB DDR4 on the 1TB, etc.



As mentioned, all available capacities of the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX arrive at 2280 in length. The Corsair MP600 PRO LPX range arrives in 500GB, 1TB, 2TB and 4TB, with the latter two choices arriving as double-sided SSDs. Performance increases (less so in Read, but very much in Write) as your scale-up in the capacities and the larger distribution of NAND that can be accessed simultaneously is a big reason for this.



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 LPX 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 LPX 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 LPX, as it is still 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 LPX, 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.

Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD Review – Official Stats First


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 LPX 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%! That said, the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX arrives at a price point that undercuts the Seagate and even challenges popular SSDs in the market from WD and Samsung, despite being the newest SSD on the scene. Below is a breakdown of how each Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD compares:

Brand/Series Corsair MP600 PRO LPX


500GB – $99, 1TB – $169, 2TB – $3394TB – $745

Seagate Firecuda 530


500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99

WD Black SN850


500GB – $169.99, 1TB – $249.99, 2TB – $549.99

PCIe Generation PCIe Gen 4 PCIe Gen 4 PCIe Gen 4
NVMe Rev NVMe 1.4 NVMe 1.4 NVMe 1.4
NAND 176L 3D TLC Micron B47R 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 CSSD-F0500GBMP600PLP ZP500GM3A013 WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0
Price in $ and $ $99 $139 / £119 $119 / £99
1TB Model CSSD-F01000GBMP600PLP​ ZP1000GM3A013 WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0
Price in $ and $ $169 / £169 $239 / £199 $249 / £169
2TB Model CSSD-F02000GBMP600PLP​ ZP2000GM3A013 WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0
Price in $ and $ $339 / £289 $419 / £379 $399 / £339
4TB Model CSSD-F04000GBMP600PLP ZP4000GM3A013 N/A
Price in $ and $ $749 / £699 $949 / £789 N/A
500GB Model CSSD-F0500GBMP600PLP ZP500GM3A013 WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0
Total Terabytes Written (TBW) 350TB 640TB 300TB
Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) 1,600,000 1,800,000 1,750,000
DWPD 0.38 0.7DWPD 0.3DWPD
1TB Model CSSD-F01000GBMP600PLP​ ZP1000GM3A013 WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0
Total Terabytes Written (TBW) 700TB 1275TB 600TB
Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) 1,600,000 1,800,000 1,750,000
DWPD 0.38DWPD 0.7DWPD 0.3DWPD
2TB Model CSSD-F02000GBMP600PLP​ ZP2000GM3A013 WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0
Total Terabytes Written (TBW) 1400TB 2550TB 1200TB
Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) 1,600,000 1,800,000 1,750,000
DWPD 0.38DWPD 0.7DWPD 0.3DWPD
4TB Model CSSD-F04000GBMP600PLP ZP4000GM3A013 N/A
Total Terabytes Written (TBW) 2800TB 5100TB N/A
Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF, hours) 1,600,000 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 176 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!



Additionally, thanks to the use of the Phison E18 controller and 176 layer NAND, the reported IOPS on each capacity is actually a noticeable degree higher than those reported by their competitors. Indeed, the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX is one of the few E18 SSDs that does not state it’s reported 4K random IOPS on the official pages,so 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 leaves about 10 other SSDs in the market today that this can be compared against, such as 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 LPX is the Seagate Firecuda 530. However, the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD has been available in the market for mere weeks at the time of writing 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 PRO LPX


500GB – $99, 1TB – $169, 2TB – $3394TB – $745

Seagate Firecuda 530


500GB – $149.99, 1TB – $239.99, 2TB – $489.99, 4TB – $949.99

WD Black SN850


500GB – $169.99, 1TB – $249.99, 2TB – $549.99

500GB Model CSSD-F0500GBMP600PLP ZP500GM3A013 WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0
Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB 7100MB 7000MB 7000MB
Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB 3700MB 3000MB 4100MB
1TB Model CSSD-F01000GBMP600PLP​ ZP1000GM3A013 WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0
Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB 7100MB 7300MB 7000MB
Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB 5800MB 6000MB 5300MB
2TB Model CSSD-F02000GBMP600PLP​ ZP2000GM3A013 WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0
Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB 7100MB 7300MB 7000MB
Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB 6800MB 6900MB 5100MB
4TB Model CSSD-F04000GBMP600PLP ZP4000GM3A013  
Sequential Read (Max, MB/s), 128 KB 7100MB 7300MB N/A
Sequential Write (Max, MB/s), 128 KB 6800MB 6900MB N/A
Brand/Series Seagate Firecuda 530 WD Black SN850
500GB Model CSSD-F0500GBMP600PLP ZP500GM3A013 WDS500G1X0E-00AFY0
Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 435,000 400,000 1,000,000
Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 615,000 700,000 680,000
1TB Model CSSD-F01000GBMP600PLP​ ZP1000GM3A013 WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0
Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 900000 800000 1,000,000
Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 1,200,000 1000000 720,000
2TB Model CSSD-F02000GBMP600PLP​ ZP2000GM3A013 WDS200T1X0E-00AFY0
Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000
Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 1,200,000 1,000,000 710,000
4TB Model CSSD-F04000GBMP600PLP ZP4000GM3A013  
Random Read (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 1,000,000 1,000,000 N/A
Random Write (Max, IOPS), 4 KB QD32 1,200,000 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, but also that EK designed heatsink and inclusive data recovery services. Yes, that is why the Firecuda 530 commands a higher price tag. Additionally, the WD Black arrives at a better price point, solid 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 LPX on the test machine!


Testing the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX m.2 PCIE4 NVMe SSD


The Corsair MP600 PRO LPX 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 LPX over on NASCompares):


Test Machine:

  • Windows 10 Pro Desktop System
  • Intel i5 11400 Rocket Lake – 6-Core 2.6/4.4Ghz
  • 16GB DDR4 2666MHz Memory
  • Intel B560M mATX Motherboard
  • OS Storage, Seagate Firecuda 120 SSD
  • Test SSD connected to Secondary PCIe Gen 4 M.2 Slot

Once again, it is worth looking at the temperatures that this SSD hit during the testing. 1 minute cooldown was provided between tests and although the SSD clearly dissipated heat effectively, it still maintained a comparatively high temp during the tests.



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 47C 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  = 6.61GB/s


256MB File PEAK Write Throughput = 6.34GB/s


 



 


ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #2


1GB File PEAK Read Throughput  = 6.61GB/s


1GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 6.34GB/s


 



 


ATTO Disk Benchmark Test #3


4GB File PEAK Read Throughput  = 6.61GB/s


4GB File PEAK Write Throughput = 6,.38GB/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 last 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. Tests 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) = 5835MB/s Read & 5648MB/s Write



4GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 5816MB/s Read & 5678MB/s Write



16GB AJA File Test Results (Peak) = 6035MB/s Read & 5547MB/s Write



Overall, the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX 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 (I hoped to see them cross into the 1Million mark), but again, we were testing very large file types, so this would have to be taken in context.


Corsair MP600 PRO LPX SSD Review – Conclusion


Arriving as a slight change on the blueprints of the previously released Corsair MP600 Pro, the newly PS5 optimized Corsair MP600 Pro LPX is very much a second helping of what that same SSD did previously. It does bring a few tweaks into the mix (modified Heatsink, improved NAND, etc) but if you are already an owner of the PC focused MP600 Pro, there isn’t going to be much new for you here. However, if this is your first time considering the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX as your gamer SSD of course, is it a remarkably solid, well built and understated piece of storage! Performing remarkably well in testing on the PC and PS5, this IS a good SSD. That said, the PCIe Gen 4 SSD market is fast becoming a very crowded place and despite its pluses, the Corsair MP600 Pro LPX may be in danger of fading into the background. Luckily its pricing appears more dynamic than many out there (even at its launch) and the Corsair name carries enough kudos in the PC market to get picked up by console gamers nonetheless. A good SSD that, had it been released just 6 months before, I think would have made a bigger noise for buyers to hear! PS5 Buyers, don’t hesitate! PC buyers, maybe save a few quid and opt for the MP600 Pro standard version.

PROs of the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX CONs of the Corsair MP600 PRO LPX
Another good Phison E18 SSD

Same Architecture (inc NAND quality) to the Seagate Firecuda 530


Good Price Point vs WD & Seagate Options


Genuinely Impressive value for the price tag


PS5 Compatibility is Confirmed and the heatsink fits great


No overpromising of its abilities and solid performance


Durability is a pinch better than the WD Black SN850 and Samsung 980 Pro


Higher 4K Random IOPS ratings than most


Impressively high write performance compared with similar architecture SSD

The retail package is a little underwhelming

Ran a little hotter than most SSDs in PC benchmark tests


📧 LET ME KNOW ABOUT NEW POSTS 🔔

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,460 other subscribers


Get an alert every time something gets added to this specific article!


Want to follow specific category?

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 ANY OTHER NAS

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

We want to keep the free advice on NASCompares FREE for as long as we can. Since this service started back in Jan '18, We have helped hundreds of users every month solve their storage woes, but we can only continue to do this with your support. So please do choose to buy at Amazon US and Amazon UK on the articles when buying to provide advert revenue support or to donate/support the site below. 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.  

Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD – PS5 EXPANSION GUIDE & TEST RESULTS

27 décembre 2021 à 01:22

PS5 SSD Expansion Testing with the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD

Modern SSD are not cheap! It’s super annoying that despite Solid State Drives being commercially available for more than a decade, that they are still expensive. Part of that is because the storage capacities have got bigger and another big reason is that they are getting faster all the time! However, occasionally a middle ground can be reached and the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD is a great example of that. Thanks to the use of more cost-effective NAND (the cells on the physically SSD board that hold the storage) modern PCIe NVMe M.2 SSDs have the potential to be cheaper, though this does lessen their performance and durability. The Sabrent Q4 SSD is technically lower than the recommended 5,500MB/s read speed needed for the PS5 SSD expansion bay, however, the drive IS still compatible and DOES still appear when installed in the latest software beta firmware release. Here is the PS5 internal Benchmark for the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD at the initialization of the system:

Whether you are looking at upgrading the SSD on your PS5 because you are running out of space or because you heard that some SSDs can increase load times for your favourite games, it is always going to be sensible to spend a few minutes researching before pulling the trigger and spending hundreds on the Sabrent Rocket Q4 to avoid finding out that the benefits are negligible or, worse still, actually slow your games down! Equally, you should always factor in that the PS5 is a relatively new console and games developers are still in the early stages of maximizing how much they can do with the CPU, Memory, GPU and (of course) super-fast NVMe M.2 SSD. Therefore the commitment you make on buying an SSD upgrade to your PS5 needs to also factor in that it will still perform well in the years to come. The Sabrent Rocket Q4 meets a number of the key specifications of the PS5 storage bay, but then again many, MANY SSDs do. So today I want to put this SSD through it’s paces with many games to see how well it compares against the internal PS5 SSD doing the same thing. NOTE – FULL Videos of the testing of the Sabrent Rocket Q4 that combined cover more than an hour can be found at the bottom of the article. This article primarily covers the load times of games and saves on the PS5 using the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD and how they compare with the internal PS5 loading the same game. If you want to watch the full videos that cover PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 use that feature frame rates, texture swapping, asset management and more, I recommend you watch those videos at the end of this article.

What Are the Specifications of the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD?

Before we go through the load time testing of the Sabrent Rocket Q4 on the PS5, it is worth taking a look at the hardware specifications. Unlike traditional Hard Drives and SSDs that were using the PS3 and PS4 that used SATA connectivity, this new generation of SSD storage using M.2 NVMe PCIe 4.0 architecture. This is a very, VERY big difference physically, in terms of maximum performance and opens up ALOT of specifications that you should keep an eye on. Aside from the capacity (i.e the amount of data the Sabrent Rocket Q4 can hold in gigabytes and terabytes) the key ones to factor in when buying an SSD are the following:

  • Controller & NAND – These are the brain of the SSD (handling the transfer of data as quickly and efficiently as possible) and the physical cells on the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD that hold the data.
  • Sequential Read – This is the reported maximum access speed that the data on the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD can be access when accessing large blocks of data
  • Sequential Write – This is the reported maximum speed that data can be written to the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD. As far as the PS5 architecture goes, this is much less important right now but could become important later in the system’s life as games, services and the level to which the Sabrent Rocket Q4 can be accessed changes.
  • IOPS – These represent the number of individual operations the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD can handle per second, based on the smallest size possible. Again, not strictly relevant in the PS5 right now because of the way data is largely front-loaded on modern games, but may well impact how larger and evolved worlds and multiplayer games are developed in future
  • TBW, MTBF & DWPD – Terabytes Written and Drive Writes Per Day, these indicate how much the drive is designed to withstand in activity over a 5 year or daily basis (respectively), Before the drive begins to deteriorate in performance or eventually fail. The PS5 will hardly be able to hit these kind of numbers daily BUT these figures will give you a good idea of the lifespan of the SSD beyond 5 years. Given the lifespan of some consoles can cross over a decade, the higher these numbers are, the better!

Here are the official specifications of the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD:

SABRENT Rocket 4 + SB-RKT4P-1TB

SB-RKT4P-2TB

SB-RKT4P-4TB

Price in $ and $ 1TB – $139 2TB – $299.99 4TB – $699.99
PCIe Generation PCIe Gen 4 PCIe Gen 4 PCIe Gen 4
NVMe Rev NVMe 1.3 NVMe 1.3 NVMe 1.3
NAND QLC NAND 96L QLC NAND 96L QLC NAND 96L
Capacity 1TB Single Sided 2TB Double Sided 4TB Double Sided
Controller Phison E16-PS5016 Phison E16-PS5016 Phison E16-PS5016


IMPORTANT – This article contains ALOT of gifs to demonstrate the loading times of the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD versus the internal PS5 SSD, so the page/gifs might take an extra minute to load. Please be patient OR watch the videos of the full testing at the bottom of the page.
So, now you know the hardware specifications of the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD and you also know that (at the time of writing!) the Sabrent Rocket Q4 is supported by the PS5 SSD expansion bay.

Testing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD with the PS5 – Test Parameters

All of the tests of the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD on the PS5 were conducted in groups of 5 games at a time. In the event of a game arriving on a disc, the full disc data and all current updates were transferred over the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD. The disc might be present, but it is only for system verification and would be an identical setup to the PS5 internal SSD that it is being compared against. The SSD was tested using the latest PS5 Beta Firmware update (3.0 or 3.1 depending on the time of testing as a further update was made available during the widespread testing) and although the supported drives when the SSD expansion feature might change, the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD is fully functioning and supported on the PS5 at the time of writing. So, let’s get started on the testing of each game:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Demon Souls Nexus Loading Test

This test was loading from the title screen to the central hub world (Nexus) of Demon Souls, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Demon Souls Archstone 2 Test

This test was loading to the Smithing Grounds of Demon Souls, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Demon Souls Archstone 1 Test

This test was loading to the first main area of Demon Souls, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Ratchet & Clank World Loading Test I

This test was loading to the starting area of Ratchet & Clank Rifts Apart, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Ratchet & Clank World Loading Test II

This test was loading to the first main transitional area of Ratchet & Clank Rifts Apart, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Borderlands 3 Full Loading Test I

This test was loading Borderlands to the Title Screen fro the PS5 Main menu on Borderlands 3, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Borderlands 3 Level Load Test II

This test was loading a save game from the title screen to the Pandora World Area, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Resident Evil Village Castle Loading Test I

This test was loading the Castle Area of Resident Evil Village, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Resident Evil Village Stronghold Loading Test II

This test was loading the Stronghold of Resident Evil Village, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Hitman 3 Dartmoor Loading Test I

This test was loading the Dartmoor level on Hitman 3, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Hitman 3 Mendoza Loading Test II

This test was loading the Mendoza level on Hitman 3, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Oddworld SoulStorm Loading Test

This test was loading from the title screen to an early, lighting heavy area of the 2.5D platformer Oddworld Soulstorm for PS5, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Terminator Resistance Level Loading Test

This test was loading Terminator Resistance Infiltrator Mode, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – GTA V Full Game Loading Test

This test was loading the Grand Theft Auto V from the PS5 menu to gameplay on the Single Player Mode, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Dead By Daylight Bots Test

This test was loading the tutorial Bots Mode on Dead By Daylight, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Red Dead Redemption II Campaign Loading Test

This test was loading the Blackwater Area of Red Dead Redemption II in single Player, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Subnautica Loading Test I

This test was loading from the title screen to a fresh creative mode save load on Subnautica, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – No Man’s Sky Creative Mode Loading Test

This test was loading No Man’s Sky in Creative Mode from the Title screen, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – In Rays of the Light Loading Test I, Outside

This test was loading the outside world area of In Rays of the Light, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – In Rays of the Light Loading Test II, Inside

This test was loading the underground bunker area of In Rays of the Light, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Star Wars Fallen Order Level Loading Test I

This test was loading the Kashkykk area of Star Wars Fallen Order from the title screen, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Star Wars Fallen Order Trial Loading Test II

This test was loading a combat challenge, mid-game, of Star Wars Fallen Order from the title screen, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

PS5 Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD Testing – Doom Eternal Level Loading Test I

This test was loading a level in Doom Eternal from the title screen, comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q4 vs the internal PS5 SSD:

 

Full Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD PS5 Test Videos

If you want to see the FULL testing of every PS5/PS4 game with the Sabrent Rocket Q4 SSD, you can watch the videos below. These tests have been grouped into 5 games per video, with each game being assessed on Loading Times, Frame Rate, Texture swapping, Asset Popping and compared against the exact game being loaded on the PS5 SSD. NOTE – These videos are being edited and published throughout September and October, so if a video is showing as ‘unavailable’ below, it might not be published yet, but should be up shortly!

 

SABRENT Rocket 4 + SB-RKT4P-1TB

SB-RKT4P-2TB

SB-RKT4P-4TB

Price in $ and $ 1TB – $139 2TB – $299.99 4TB – $699.99
PCIe Generation PCIe Gen 4 PCIe Gen 4 PCIe Gen 4
NVMe Rev NVMe 1.3 NVMe 1.3 NVMe 1.3
NAND QLC NAND 96L QLC NAND 96L QLC NAND 96L
Capacity 1TB Single Sided 2TB Double Sided 4TB Double Sided
Controller Phison E16-PS5016 Phison E16-PS5016 Phison E16-PS5016
Sabrent Rocket Q4 PS5 SSD Test 1

Sabrent Rocket Q4 PS5 SSD Test 2

Sabrent Rocket Q4 FULL Review

Sabrent PS5 Heatsink Revealed

 


Articles Get Updated Regularly - Get an alert every time something gets added to this page!


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

Need Advice on Data Storage from an Expert?

We want to keep the free advice on NASCompares FREE for as long as we can. Since this service started back in Jan '18, We have helped hundreds of users every month solve their storage woes, but we can only continue to do this with your support. So please do choose to buy at Amazon US and Amazon UK on the articles when buying to provide advert revenue support or to donate/support the site below. 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.  

 

❌