3.1 Gen 1 is a joke. Should have been Gen 2 (10Gbps) minimum.
this post was submitted on 15 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Hardware
33 readers
1 users here now
A place for quality hardware news, reviews, and intelligent discussion.
founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
It's a QLC drive. It literally isn't fast enough to consume 3.1 Gen 1. Sustained writes are like 60MB/s.
I genuinely have zero idea what the market is for giant portable drives which can't read/write quickly but are more expensive than spinning rust. The nature of these portable drives is either you're writing just a little data to them so you don't need much storage, or you are writing a ton of data to them and want to probably run at TB3 speeds or better.
The writes only drop off in larger transfers, in small/moderate transfers its still faster than a HDD. Plus, the standard immunity to sudden movement.
If you're doing small/moderage transfers, why do you need 8tb of capacity? Why wouldn't you use, totally serious here, a 1tb usb stick which is going to go just as fast but cost a lot less and be smaller?
I just don't see the product market fit here. I just don't know why this product exists other than an engineer at Samsung deciding they could do it so damn it they were going to do it. It seems to be either outperformed at the same price, or have an equivalent that gets the same job done for a lower price.
Main thing I can think of is game drive for consoles. Games load a lot faster from SSDs but you don't need high sustained speed. Mostly read-only so QLC is fine.
I GUESS just because affordable 8tb QLC M.2 SSDs aren't really a thing, but it still sounds mad stupid to me compared to using a 4tb QLC M.2 SSD like Crucial P3 which are fuck cheap. Or even step up to a Teamgroup MP34 4tb.
How many fucking console games do people own? If you have enough to fill up a 4tb I'd say you should have bought a PC awhile ago.
Cost is not prohibitive to everyone. Console owners are often not the type to buy an internal SSD and put it in an enclosure either. And a few TB is easy to fill up with games steadily reaching 200 GB nowadays. It's not for me, but I can see who might want it.
I use a Samsung qlc QVO 8tb drive to host my sound effects library. Has to be SSD because it can't make a sound in the studio, needs to be very large and I should be able to move it when I travel. I'm the perfect customer for the t5 evo.
Everyone in this thread complaining about slow speeds and the wrong USB version, without realising that the damn SSD is using a fucking SATA III interface... in 2023. I mean, it's one way to cut costs but god damn...
qlc is not reliable enough, and these speeds suck balls.
qlc is not reliable enough
I'm fine with it, I want 16TB NVMe M2 cards at a reasonable price for my next TrueNAS build
only storage ive had fail since the seagate 1tb hdd days were qlc flash drives.
ive been running hdd's and ssd's, mostly tlc, since 2013 in RAID arrays with Areca cards. Before that was all HDD since the PCI-X days. Currently have 8x 4TB 850 Evos, theyd be 8TB but only QLC available in that capacity.
I have never had a tlc drive die on me, only qlc and only recently.
i hear you on cheaper storage, but reliability and speed matter as well, primarily reliability in my case.
is it true that there really are no 8tb tlc external ssd and they are all qlc? is that why I've never found one. I wanted an 8tb for ps4 games
thus far, commercially, no, for SATA at peast as far as i know.
Who makes the NAND for it? YMTC QLC are known to fail, but never had an issue with Samsung QLC.
Buddy just had a 970 Plus 1TB nvme die out of nowhere, one of the switcharoo models that samsung quietly swapped out tlc for qlc.
Its fairly widespread...
https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/100-of-my-qlc-drives-are-now-dead.315081/
I rely on multi-ssd RAID arrays for work, as do many others in my line of work. None of us use TLC. Its cheaper and higher capacity, but NOT reliable.
They didn't swap tlc for qlc for that particular model tho? The swap was from their 92L to 128L flash, both tlc
My old PC is currently using a 660p, no problems.
Limiting the T5 EVO to 5 Gbps speeds with its USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-C connector.
Lmfao
And 60 MBps write speed after the cache is filled
Limiting the T5 EVO to 5 Gbps speeds with its USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-C connector.
The drive maxes out at 460MB/s throughput anyway, the USB 3.2 Gen 1 connection is "limiting" it to ~600MB/s throughput, which it will never hit because these drives are slow as shit.