ObiFrostFunny *grabs porpcorn* how you both poke each other with pitchforks trying to prove different opinnions... The truth is, average consumer is simply blind to realize the premium feeling of NVMe, because time is undetectable in naked eye and those who count seconds on fingers are dumb :). The question remains, is spending 50-70% more for saving 10-30 seconds worth it? Sure, dudes with deep wallets and no family upkeep can spend even 6 grands on PC and barely exploit it's power capabilities, but then there are those who barely make ends meet. NVMe were meant for heavy workloads to begin with, but then gamers "raised" such a r*tarded stereotype everyone follows (same individuals screaming "why you buy PC AND DON'T OVERCLOCK?", because not everyone is a goddamn enthusiast or settle their asses to care much). And such argument comes from a dude using 970 Pro and SN750 for workstation; cheap ass 480 GB SSD for game library.

You make it sound like SSDs are garbage. I can state this. Anyone who has read my posts can attest that I stand by that NVME drives are great for gaming....however. The Epic store (uh oh might have hit a nerve there) has a detailed screen when downloading games. I have a 4TB SSD in RAID 0. The max sequential is 1000 mb/s read and 950 mb/s write. I have a 256GB SX8200Pro as one of my data drives. When I installed a game on the SSD drive I got a consistent 500+ mb/s with no slow downs. I then installed a game on the NVME drive listed above. I saw a max of 545 mb/s writes but after about 20 seconds I noticed that the drive dips to around 100 mb/s for 2 to 5 seconds before jumping back up. Both of the games were approx. 4 GB and the SSD(s) drive finished the install about 20 seconds faster than the NVME drive. So SSDs are good for some things and NVME are good for others but they are both premium hardware for enthusiasts.

kapone32You make it sound like SSDs are garbage. I can state this. Anyone who has read my posts can attest that I stand by that NVME drives are great for gaming....however. The Epic store (uh oh might have hit a nerve there) has a detailed screen when downloading games. I have a 4TB SSD in RAID 0. The max sequential is 1000 mb/s read and 950 mb/s write. I have a 256GB SX8200Pro as one of my data drives. When I installed a game on the SSD drive I got a consistent 500+ mb/s with no slow downs. I then installed a game on the NVME drive listed above. I saw a max of 545 mb/s writes but after about 20 seconds I noticed that the drive dips to around 100 mb/s for 2 to 5 seconds before jumping back up. Both of the games were approx. 4 GB and the SSD(s) drive finished the install about 20 seconds faster than the NVME drive. So SSDs are good for some things and NVME are good for others but they are both premium hardware for enthusiasts.

*facepalm*

So you're comparing drives in RAID0 to a non-RAIDed drive, and concluding that the non-RAIDed drive is slow in comparison. NO S**T SHERLOCK, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF RAID0.

Not to mention that you don't understand how TLC drives operate some of their NAND in pseudo-SLC mode as a cache, which when filled causes the drive's performance to tank.

Not to mention you don't mention the model of your RAIDed SATA SSDs.

megamanxtremeLet's lower those game loading times.

Storage is still the bottleneck?

No, even against a DRAMless SSD, loading times will be the same.
This is more for CAD, Editing, Server or "enterprise" use.

TheLostSwedeWell, that's Japan for you...


Brave, or you don't care about your data...

Trollish posting. $250 vs 120 isn't a large increase? And now exclaiming that your data is safe on one drive vs two? C'mon, if you aren't making daily images, then you're just asking for disaster (so raid 0 is irrelevant).

TheGuruStudTrollish posting. $250 vs 120 isn't a large increase? And now exclaiming that your data is safe on one drive vs two? C'mon, if you aren't making daily images, then you're just asking for disaster (so raid 0 is irrelevant).

Trollish? Then you know nothing about the pricing of electronics in Japan. They are much more expensive there than in most other places. Singapore is another places where electronics are expensive. But Mr Yankie Doodle that has some of the cheapest, if not the cheapest electronics prices in the world, is calling me a troll, right...

RAID 0 is taking a huge risks and it's something I would never personally used, but hey, I didn't use to work for a NAS manufacturer and I have no clue about how many people have problems with RAID 0 setups, I'm just trolling...

Oh bugger , am not gonna wait for this ....


$249.99
This item ships to Denmark. Get it by Friday, Aug. 16 - Friday, Sept. 27 Choose this date at checkout.
Usually ships within 1 to 3 months.

PCI-E 5.0 next year! That will remain long term in the market, 4.0 will not last as long, 4.0 is short term.

voltagePCI-E 5.0 next year! That will remain long term in the market, 4.0 will not last as long, 4.0 is short term.

If i want pcie 5, i cant build an AMD pc now, this disturbs me greatly.
wait for pcie 5 or make AMD, its actually hard to deside.
If i wait , i will get Displayport 2.0 also.

EskimonsterIf i want pcie 5, i cant build an AMD pc now, this disturbs me greatly.
wait for pcie 5 or make AMD, its actually hard to deside.
If i wait , i will get Displayport 2.0 also.

well, "to each their own" I personally will not anymore give my hard earned money to amd, ever again. I will refrain from posting mostly why, because I don't want back lash with dumb reply comments. that said, I am impressed with amd FINALLY making a come back, but really, what took them so damn long? And this China issue, I wont start on that either... I waited years for the 10th gen Intel platform, I can easily wait a bit longer. I really want DDR5 and PCIE 5, both are said to last long in the market, longer than average, and so ill wait, after all its not that far off. Cheers

:banghead: should have had mine on wensday but delivery delaid until the mid next week, its supposed to be my next boot drive for my X3800 setup

$345 in Canada.
www.amazon.ca/Corsair-Force-MP600-Gen4-PCIe/dp/B07SQZYW2V/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?keywords=corsair+force+series+mp600+1tb+gen+4+pcie+x4+nvme+m.2+ssd&qid=1561989826&s=gateway&sr=8-1-fkmr0

voltagePCI-E 5.0 next year! That will remain long term in the market, 4.0 will not last as long, 4.0 is short term.

Sorry, but you're mistaken. PCIe 5.0 will only be for high-end servers to start with. Intel will launch a consumer platform with PCIe 4.0 in 2021.

voltagewell, "to each their own" I personally will not anymore give my hard earned money to amd, ever again. I will refrain from posting mostly why, because I don't want back lash with dumb reply comments. that said, I am impressed with amd FINALLY making a come back, but really, what took them so damn long? And this China issue, I wont start on that either... I waited years for the 10th gen Intel platform, I can easily wait a bit longer. I really want DDR5 and PCIE 5, both are said to last long in the market, longer than average, and so ill wait, after all its not that far off. Cheers

And you won't get either next year and you might have to wait really long before you get PCIe 5.0, unless you buy a server that is.

The heatsink concerns me. I've had a Noctua DH series for years, and given that nvme drives on x570 (and presumably x670 etc) will be above the video card I think that may get in the way. When I eventually upgrade I may have to go with a different heatsink for my processor.

HotobuThe heatsink concerns me. I've had a Noctua DH series for years, and given that nvme drives on x570 (and presumably x670 etc) will be above the video card I think that may get in the way. When I eventually upgrade I may have to go with a different heatsink for my processor.

First gen PCIe 4.0 controller problem, they didn't make a new controller in this case, they simply shoehorned in a PCIe 4.0 bus together with a current controller on a current manufacturing node.
Die shrink, fully re-worked controller and we should be back at similar thermals as PCIe 3.0 controllers.

W1zzardNut sure if Samsung will bother with this tiny market - they need to develop their own controller for PCIe 4 first, which isn't exactly free

Which most likely they have done that way before anybody else.

ObiFrostFunny *grabs porpcorn* how you both poke each other with pitchforks trying to prove different opinnions... The truth is, average consumer is simply blind to realize the premium feeling of NVMe, because time is undetectable in naked eye and those who count seconds on fingers are dumb :). The question remains, is spending 50-70% more for saving 10-30 seconds worth it? Sure, dudes with deep wallets and no family upkeep can spend even 6 grands on PC and barely exploit it's power capabilities, but then there are those who barely make ends meet. NVMe were meant for heavy workloads to begin with, but then gamers "raised" such a r*tarded stereotype everyone follows (same individuals screaming "why you buy PC AND DON'T OVERCLOCK?", because not everyone is a goddamn enthusiast or settle their asses to care much). And such argument comes from a dude using 970 Pro and SN750 for workstation; cheap ass 480 GB SSD for game library.

I agree, nobody ever, in the real world usage scenario, will see the difference between 2,000MB and 4,000MB reads/writes. The smartest thing is to buy the sweet spot hardware that will game you, if not same, almost same performance experience scenario.

Assimilator*facepalm*

So you're comparing drives in RAID0 to a non-RAIDed drive, and concluding that the non-RAIDed drive is slow in comparison. NO S**T SHERLOCK, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF RAID0.

Not to mention that you don't understand how TLC drives operate some of their NAND in pseudo-SLC mode as a cache, which when filled causes the drive's performance to tank.

Not to mention you don't mention the model of your RAIDed SATA SSDs.

Assimilator*facepalm*

So you're comparing drives in RAID0 to a non-RAIDed drive, and concluding that the non-RAIDed drive is slow in comparison. NO S**T SHERLOCK, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF RAID0.

Not to mention that you don't understand how TLC drives operate some of their NAND in pseudo-SLC mode as a cache, which when filled causes the drive's performance to tank.

Not to mention you don't mention the model of your RAIDed SATA SSDs.

I am sorry the SSD drives are Micron 1100 2 TB variants. I am comparing them because the rated speeds on the SX8200Pro are 3 times that of a RAID 0 SSD array.

I do understand how TLC works and SLC cache. Are you suggesting that a 4GB download would cause the drive to hit the SLC limit? Is not the major difference between an SSD and NVME drive the interface (SATA vs PCI_E)?

Called it: www.anandtech.com/show/14599/phison-ps5016e16-pcie-40-ssds-random-readwrite-performance-disclosed

AnandTechWhen compared to Phison PS5012-E12-based Corsair’s MP510, the new drives are not necessarily faster.

MP510 random R/W: 610K/570K IOPS
Phison PS5016-E16 random R/W: 600K/500K IOPS