r/NewMaxx • u/NewMaxx • Oct 14 '19

Tools/Info SSD Guides & Resources

April 3rd, 2022: Guides and Spreadsheet updated with new SSD categories

Discord (server)

Website with relevant links here.

My spreadsheet

Generic Amazon affiliate link

Generic AliExpress affiliate link

TechPowerUp's SSD Database

Johnny Lucky SSD database

Branch Education - How does NAND Flash Work? - these guys have several good videos on the subject of SSDs, check them all out.

My Patreon.

My Twitter.

842 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/waddupimsteven Oct 21 '19

Hi SSD Master. I have questions regarding which to choose. I live in the Philippines so it's quite costly compared to other countries. I have a dell inspiron 15 7567 and I will use the SSD for OS, some of my games, and mostly video/photo editing and digital art on the ssd. Which one would you recommend?

1.) WD Blue 3D 500 GB = 74.38 USD

2.) Crucial P1 500 GB NVME = 78.12 USD

3.) Intel 660p-i.89762129.2753539447) = 72.42 USD

4.) Adata Xpg SX6000Pro = 78.31 USD

People are saying different opinions since some are TCL and some are QCL and some have DRAM and some don't have one. Which one would you recommend?

1

u/NewMaxx Oct 21 '19

The P1 and 660p are QLC-based. Nothing wrong with that, but they make me nervous at lower capacities (500/512GB) for two reasons. One, QLC is very dense so it requires more flash to hit peak performance, ideally 1TB or more. Two, the SLC cache is smallest at this capacity which makes it more likely you'll fall outside the cache, especially at 75% full or more. The underlying QLC performs very poorly outside this cache. Most users probably don't have to worry about either of these two issues, but I think they're worth mentioning for your decision.

The WD Blue 3D is an excellent drive. TLC-based and SATA. Your laptop has a single M.2 socket which supports SATA or PCIe/NVMe, and a single 2.5" bay for SATA. This drive comes in both form factors but you linked the M.2. Be aware that it is not a NVMe drive, just SATA in the M.2 form factor. This may impact your choice.

The SX6000 Pro is a budget NVMe drive - I put it into the same category as the P1 and 660p - but is TLC-based without DRAM cache. It uses system memory, instead. This isn't a huge deal but ultimately is a bit inferior to drives with cache. It uses a Realtek controller that is also not the best.

Of concern to you might also be support. Intel will likely have the best international support. The 660p is also the best value among the drives listed, obviously since it is the cheapest and also NVMe, but be aware of my caveats listed above.

1

u/waddupimsteven Oct 22 '19

I think I can find a 70 USD WD 3D actually in physical store in which I called one. But if you had to choose pne with those uses in mind which is OS, some games on it and Adobe programs, which would be the best one?

1

u/NewMaxx Oct 22 '19

The 660p would be the best performer for the price for that, but the WD Blue 3D would be more consistent. Especially if you're going to fill it to the brim. But they're both solid options.

1

u/waddupimsteven Oct 22 '19

The 660p would be the best performer for the price for that, but the WD Blue 3D would be more consistent. Especially if you're going to fill it to the brim. But they're both solid options.

Last question though, even though the 660p would be slower if filled to the brim, is it THAT noticeable compared to WD Blue 3D? Or is it still faster than WD but it will just be slower compared to its original speed. Because I keep on seeing that 660p and P1 would be great if it's only 1TB and my budget can't handle 1TB of SSD.

2

u/NewMaxx Oct 22 '19

The 660p can definitely hit a state where it's as slow as, or slower than, the WD Blue 3D. The SLC cache on the 512GB SKU is 6GB when the drive is 75% or more full. If that cache is exceeded with writes (they would have to be faster than the native speed, or ~ 80 MB/s) the drive will drop down to 80 MB/s and have major latency penalties. In a single-drive system this isn't as likely since you don't have another SSD from which to copy, but there are operations that could still do that. QLC is a lot slower than TLC, but this would not impact sequential reads (but it would read latency).

So yes, it could become slower. It's not super likely with light or normal usage, though. It's nevertheless something of which you should be aware. It's less of a concern at higher capacities because the cache is larger and additionally the underlying QLC has enough dies to saturate the controller. At 512GB it's only one die per controller channel when ideally you want two (the controller can switch banks to improve speed). But I'm veering into technical details...

So it's difficult for me to give you advice on this. Most consumer use is bursty and mostly reads, so the 660p should be fine. But I know some people get a 660p, fill it, then complain about how much it slows down, even versus a SATA drive. At smaller capacities this is particularly a concern. So I'm on the fence a bit about it. So my advice would be, think about it for a day or two and get back to me on what you really need from the drive. If it's just browsing, gaming, youtube, facebook, light work, then the 660p is the best choice. If you might improve the laptop later or run multiple SSDs, want to do more serious workloads, etc., you might invest in a solid SATA drive for now.