I am too chicken to break away from WD, I have been using them since forever, and I think I even have the original 64GB WD Blue kicking around somewhere..
The time I broke away to run a 120GB RevoDrive, it died within a year or so. Then I tried Intel and really like them, have a few of their SSDs kicking around.. and I tried a Crucial and it died.
Bleh. I should ask my buddy if he still has the original G.Skill 64GB SSD.. I lent it to him like 15 years ago.. have not heard from him lately
I was like that with samsung until the 980 series
WD have some trash-tier drives too, it's more about sticking with a good product line and watching for when the tech changes (Samsung doubled capacity which meant new NAND modules, and that halved their TBW in the same size drives, for example)
Going PCI-E 3 to 4 to 5 also means a change to investigate before purchasing
I want a budget 4TB NVME now, but they don't seem to exist yet. Prices are dropping at least.
Then 2TB SN850 with two partitions
1. for OS (128GB)
2. for 'user files' - downloads, desktop etc all get relocated to here, so the OS partition can be erased and I lose nothing. Higher SSD performance games can go here too, as needed.
Then this magical 4TB or larger NVME i'm waiting on, as a games drive. Currently theyr'e around $350 Au and poor value vs 2x2TB, but i lack the NVME slots for this option.
That's completely wrong. You won't find a single consumer drive that uses 1 GB of system RAM for HMB. Windows caps HMB at around 100 MB. But most drives request 32MB ~ 40 MB, and some could go as high as 64MB, and that is the case of the SN770, as seen on the
TPU review. And in fact,
requested does not necessarily mean
used, a drive that requests 64MB (like the SN770) could actually use less than that.
This is correct, I've only seem mentions of around 16MB when it was tested, it's used to store the the file list of the drive, theoretically like a copy of the MBR, not any actual files.
