Saturday, March 18th 2023

Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 SSD Preview Unit Hits 12 GB/s Read and Write Speeds, May 2023 Release Hinted

Crucial is keen to drum up early interest for an upcoming SSD model, and the Linus Tech Tips team has received and tested a sample unit. The T700 is a PCIe Gen 5 NVMe M.2 SSD storage solution based around a Phison PS5026-E26 controller, which is a very common choice for the current generation of PCIe 5.0 SSDs available on the market. Micron 3D NAND chips look to be present on the T700's PCB, and a Crucial-branded heatsink is mounted to the provided sample unit. It is interesting to note that the uncovered T700 unit bears a striking resemblance to Phison's E26 Engineering Reference sample, although the latter appears to feature SK Hynix memory chips, instead of Micron.

The LTT team posted benchmark results from a Crystal Disk Mark test session, and the T700 achieved maximums of 12.4 GB/s sequential read and 11.9 GB/s write speeds. This represents an almost two fold jump over the performance of Crucial's PCIe 4.0 based P5 Plus SSD, which is a substantial improvement and also very impressive considering the T700's usage of a passive cooling solution.
The Crucial Memory Twitter account has stated in a reply to the LTT tweet that the T700 is "dropping in May."
There is no word on pricing for T700 at this stage, but anticipate it being expensive, since companies charge a premium for cutting edge SSD tech during launch windows.
Sources: Linus Tech Tips Twitter, TPU Database, TweakTown
Add your own comment

34 Comments on Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 SSD Preview Unit Hits 12 GB/s Read and Write Speeds, May 2023 Release Hinted

#1
Chaitanya
No fan, hopefully final version will have more fins for better cooling.
Posted on Reply
#2
W1zzard
Image missing? turn off uBlock, not sure what causes it to break on this post
Posted on Reply
#3
n-ster
W1zzardImage missing? turn off uBlock, not sure what causes it to break on this post
Weird it works fine on the forum thread, but the article on the main site does get the image blocked by uBlock lol
Posted on Reply
#6
Dragokar
W1zzardImage missing? turn off uBlock, not sure what causes it to break on this post
It is off on your site anyway, at least for me.
Posted on Reply
#7
Selaya

sus


optane, meanwhile ...
Posted on Reply
#8
GerKNG
i'd wish we would work on software and hardware that can actually benefit from fast storage beside just raw file copy speed.
even forspoken a game with direct storage shows zero benefits from a half decade old gen 3 SSD vs a brand new 10GB/s gen 5 drive.
Posted on Reply
#9
Drash
Selaya
sus


optane, meanwhile ...
T700 does everything you don't need really well, but ...

Bring back optane Intel, please - just get the message out there, surely it can't just die?!?
Posted on Reply
#10
dgianstefani
TPU Proofreader
Selaya
sus


optane, meanwhile ...

Gotta go fast
GerKNGi'd wish we would work on software and hardware that can actually benefit from fast storage beside just raw file copy speed.
even forspoken a game with direct storage shows zero benefits from a half decade old gen 3 SSD vs a brand new 10GB/s gen 5 drive.
Because sequential speeds are borderline irrelevant unless you work with content creation and regularly transfer large single files.

Games can and do benefit from faster storage, but, like system files, that is typically lots of small files.
Posted on Reply
#11
bonehead123
T0@stanticipate it being expensive, since companies charge a premium for cutting edge SSD tech during launch windows
While alot of folks are struggling to pay their electric bills, what difference is it gonna make whether you have a shiny new, uber-fast gen 5 drive or a slothy slow gen 1 drive......

Yep, a perfect time to launch an uber-expensive new product :(
Posted on Reply
#12
zorb
GerKNGi'd wish we would work on software and hardware that can actually benefit from fast storage beside just raw file copy speed.
even forspoken a game with direct storage shows zero benefits from a half decade old gen 3 SSD vs a brand new 10GB/s gen 5 drive.
Is 3x faster not an improvement? I understand 2 seconds vs 6 is marginal but game loading speeds are quick already, where do you need more speed if not working with large files?
Posted on Reply
#13
Selaya
dgianstefani
[ ... ]
is that the 118gb m.2 2280 (consumer-grade) ... uhh, 800p/805p?
Posted on Reply
#14
dgianstefani
TPU Proofreader
Selayais that the 118gb m.2 2280 (consumer-grade) ... uhh, 800p/805p?
Read my specs


^
Posted on Reply
#15
AnarchoPrimitiv
Again, no performance increase where it matters.....I'd rather just have a PCIe 3.0 1TB drive with all SLC NAND than a PCIe 5.0 TLC drive.....who is well informed on NAND? What's it going to take to see improved random r/w's? A major breakthrough in NAND architecture?
Posted on Reply
#16
mama
dgianstefaniRead my specs


^
Honestly what can you do with 118GB of storage?
Posted on Reply
#17
dgianstefani
TPU Proofreader
mamaHonestly what can you do with 118GB of storage?
We went to the moon on 32 KB.
Posted on Reply
#18
mama
dgianstefaniWe went to the moon on 32 KB.
I didn't. 32KB won't take me to the corner shop.
Posted on Reply
#19
dgianstefani
TPU Proofreader
mamaI didn't. 32KB won't take me to the corner shop.
Sounds like a you problem.
Posted on Reply
#20
mama
dgianstefaniSounds like a you problem.
Nice dodge. What's the point of a 118GB drive other than a basic operating system?
Posted on Reply
#21
Athlonite
You'd think that a rando 4K read would be far faster than a rando 4K write considering the extra work needing to be done for a write cycle compared to a read why are these read speeds so dog damn awful they seem to have gone backward even my old SATA Sammy 860 Evo gets 126MBps rando 4K reads
Posted on Reply
#22
dgianstefani
TPU Proofreader
mamaNice dodge. What's the point of a 118GB drive other than a basic operating system?
A basic OS is 8 GB or less bud.
Posted on Reply
#23
jallenlabs
These are great if you are moving large data sets around your PC. But who does that? Where it counts, this drive is still slow compared to say an Intel Optane 905p.
mamaNice dodge. What's the point of a 118GB drive other than a basic operating system?
Cache drive or scratch drive. These were intended to sit in front of a bunch of HDDs in a server.
Posted on Reply
#24
Psychoholic
it must be insanely difficult to improve random 4k, it never seems to improve much (and cant touch Optane)
random 4k is arguably the most important, unless you had two of these drives copying large files between them who cares about sequential?
Posted on Reply
#25
Lianna
GerKNGi'd wish we would work on software and hardware that can actually benefit from fast storage beside just raw file copy speed.
even forspoken a game with direct storage shows zero benefits from a half decade old gen 3 SSD vs a brand new 10GB/s gen 5 drive.
Guessing from the time to load scenes 2-4 from SATA SSD they don't read more than 3.5 GB; that should be about or under 1 second for PCIe 3.0+ SSD. Seems like 2 to 3 seconds needed to load from PCIe 3.0/4.0/5.0 SSD are mostly spent on overhead, with differences in read speed hidden by overlapped I/O.

If you think about it, when you need to completely reload, say, 8 GB of data in VRAM and a few GB in system RAM, you should be able to do that in 3-4 seconds from PCIe 3.0 SSD; and probably 2-3 with DirectStorage compression. Everything else is just lack of optimization or overhead, filesystem (lots of small accesses instead of a few big sequential reads), inefficient/slow decompression, not doing enough things in parallel, overhead (e.g. drivers), plus time of game state reset.

Setting aside other issues with Forspoken, it looks like DirectStorage fell victim to... optimization and great performance.
I don't play a lot of games, but from my PCIe 3.0 SSD, in a few other AAA releases loading a save takes 10-20x the time Forspoken needs for the same (even when changing environment).
So I guess what happened is MS wanted to show off with DirectStorage, made the developer optimize, optimize and optimize some more. They shaved time from, say, 20 seconds to 2, then applied DirectStorage compression to reduce it to 1 second, made it smaller than CPU/GPU loading overhead... and it turned out that, on fast disks,
GerKNGdirect storage shows zero benefits
:)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 18th, 2024 02:02 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts