Intel Launches SSD 665p "Neptune Harbor Refresh" Line of M.2 NVMe SSDs

[Assimilator]

Inb4 people whining about 2GB/s being slow when people with actual brains know that it's random R/W that's the most important metric, and that Intel has done an incredible job on their SLC cache.

... damn, too late.

Inb4 people complaining about QLC because it's new and new things scare them?

Damn again.

 

[Minus Infinity]

QLC, only on cold day in hell.

 

[stimpy88]

Inb4 people whining about 2GB/s being slow when people with actual brains know that it's random R/W that's the most important metric, and that Intel has done an incredible job on their SLC cache.

... damn, too late.

Inb4 people complaining about QLC because it's new and new things scare them?

Damn again.

The first 3 letters of your name really sum you up dude.

It is a slow drive, and for not much more money, you can get something superior.

QLC is shit, simple as. And again, why have it, when paying just a little more means you get TLC?

 

[newtekie1]

It is a slow drive, and for not much more money, you can get something superior.

You show me a 1TB SSD that is superior for "not much more" than $83.

As you go up, the option is the Crucial P1 at $96, but it's QLC too. The next one up is the XPG SX6000 Lite for $98. It's TLC(yay!) but dramless(aww) so it's actually slower than the QLC drives. Then the Teamgroup MP33 for $100, oh wait TLC and dramless again... The first drive you get to that is TLC and had a dram cache is the Sabrent Rocket and it's $120. You're looking at almost 50% more in price before you get to something that's actually superior.

 

[Chrispy_]

It is a slow drive, and for not much more money, you can get something superior.

It's not slow. It's still faster in every meaningful consumer way than every single one of the market-dominating SATA drives. As for your definition of "not much more money", that is simply wrong; If you're going to use heavily discounted TLC drives as a comparison, you need to measure them against the promotional discount prices of the 660p too, not the MSRP. Looking at pricetracker histories, rather than one-off comparisons, the cost of the 660p has been consistently 25-30% lower than the cheapest TLC equivalent (SX8200).

Yes, you are right if a decent TLC drive is on sale at a discount and the 660p is not discounted, but that's a no-brainer. Apples-to-apples comparison, the 660p is significantly, meaningfully cheaper than both NVMe and SATA TLC drives.

QLC is shit, simple as. And again, why have it, when paying just a little more means you get TLC?

People said TLC was shit, and now look at them holding up TLC as the gold standard! Both TLC and QLC write to SLC anyway, and if you run out of SLC cache, you're probably not doing consumer things with your consumer drive, so that's on you. Even a TLC drive will choke and embarass itself once the SLC cache is full, that's why there are still MLC enterprise drives with 30%+ of spare area. They're hard to find in the consumer market because their costs are as high as they always used to be, so utterly unappealing to the consumer market and withdrawn from sale.

 

[Tomorrow]

You show me a 1TB SSD that is superior for "not much more" than $83.

As you go up, the option is the Crucial P1 at $96, but it's QLC too. The next one up is the XPG SX6000 Lite for $98. It's TLC(yay!) but dramless(aww) so it's actually slower than the QLC drives. Then the Teamgroup MP33 for $100, oh wait TLC and dramless again... The first drive you get to that is TLC and had a dram cache is the Sabrent Rocket and it's $120. You're looking at almost 50% more in price before you get to something that's actually superior.

It's not slow. It's still faster in every meaningful consumer way than every single one of the market-dominating SATA drives. As for your definition of "not much more money", that is simply wrong; If you're going to use heavily discounted TLC drives as a comparison, you need to measure them against the promotional discount prices of the 660p too, not the MSRP. Looking at pricetracker histories, rather than one-off comparisons, the cost of the 660p has been consistently 25-30% lower than the cheapest TLC equivalent (SX8200).

Yes, you are right if a decent TLC drive is on sale at a discount and the 660p is not discounted, but that's a no-brainer. Apples-to-apples comparison, the 660p is significantly, meaningfully cheaper than both NVMe and SATA TLC drives.

People said TLC was shit, and now look at them holding up TLC as the gold standard! Both TLC and QLC write to SLC anyway, and if you run out of SLC cache, you're probably not doing consumer things with your consumer drive, so that's on you. Even a TLC drive will choke and embarass itself once the SLC cache is full, that's why there are still MLC enterprise drives with 30%+ of spare area. They're hard to find in the consumer market because their costs are as high as they always used to be, so utterly unappealing to the consumer market and withdrawn from sale.

Well all i can say then is that regional pricing sucks for TLC then. Then again QLC appears much more expensive in Europe where the cheapest 1TB QLC is ~99€ and the cheapest 1TB TLC (with DRAM cache btw) is ~120€. That's only 20% more expensive but has at least quadruple if not more the TBW value. Doubles the read speed and has more than 50% better write speed. Plus DDR4 for 1GB DRAM cache vs DDR3 on the QLC drives.

Proof: https://geizhals.eu/?cmp=1907687&cmp=1859204&cmp=2078647&cmp=1907832&cmp=2104623

So choosing between Crucial P1 and Corsair MP510 is would choose the Corsair. If the Crucial drive was ~80€ then it would be 50% cheaper and worth the compromises but for 20% less i just dont see the point. For people on a tight budget QLC is pointless as i can get a sub 20€ 120GB SATA based TLC drive with DRAM cache. Those people do not need the NVME speed anyway or won't notice the difference. I would have a hard time convincing them that they need to pay 80% more for 1TB NVME regardless if it's QLC or not.

When it comes to perception then that all changes with time. First drives with new standard are never recommended. TLC was crap before Samsung perfected it and others followed. Even MLC had it's problems at first. QLC is no different.

 

[R0H1T]

You show me a 1TB SSD that is superior for "not much more" than $83.

Do one off deals count?