Thanks for the tip on this model - despite the fact that over the past month slowly pick terabyte SSD with operating support in the form factor M.2 NVME 2280 about the existence of this model learned only from your posts (research began with H. Market, and it is Monitors of the filters, and it's just a joke - in SSD section that appears to Pestryaev advertising, paid for the WD, model WD Blue SN550 WDS100T2B0CNo products cards
- they only have to 250GB and 500GB options: fool :). Here the planned use case and a summary of my research on potential candidates, perhaps they will prove useful to you and will help to answer your question -
Prompt whether the correct choice made? Adequate price for 9800 1Tb?
There ultrabook Lenovo Ideapad 720s 13 "with 128Gb SSD NVME Samsung MZVLW 128HEGR-000L2 (as I understand it, this OEM name for the Samsung PM961 line), which, to put it mildly, on the recording speed (which is almost at the level of modern SATA-making) stars the sky is not enough, but it has in fact 3 years. but I especially do not have enough volume, which is why we have to use an external USB HDD WD my Passport Ultra on 1Tb (even older and much slower). in general, this I have a bunch of tired (external hard wire inconvenient and annoying buzz), has decided to replace the internal tverdotelnik 1 terabyte. to complete a 128 GB SSD is not lost already bought for him with Ali outer case SSK Aluminum M.2 NVME SSD Enclosure Adapter (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVOUkRu-nDY
In Moscow I have not found, and what is on sale, to put it mildly, disappointing, even though the bottleneck in the controller even when you connect with Type-C port with Thunderbolt).
Tverdotelniki looked, of course, immediately appeared in the top line of Samsung 970 Evo Plus, but terabaytnik was (and still is) off-budget in the 10k, ie, or would have had to compromise with a toad, or buy a 500GB version, which does not suit both the volume and performance compared with older terabyte brother (all manufacturers is terabyte SSD are both the best performance and value otnostitelno smaller volumes, and usually stated number of write cycles, i.e., durability). In the segment of +/- 10k terabaytnikov M.2 NVME cat laugh - actually just been retired Intel SSDPEKNW010T8X1, wildly overpraysnuty due to the poor state of the economy, and Crucial CT1000P1SSD8 on QLC-in memory (about which many reviews, including in reviews, of its imperfection and fragility). In this segment there is a drive from the ADATA, but this brand is not one I skeptical, here are a couple of adjacent views of the same topic -SSD - drives based on flash memory (Post Speed_29 # 86994080)
andSSD - drives based on flash memory (Post silver dream # 86995880)
Now directly on WDS100T2B0C, here's what I found useful about it in the network (in relation to most other SSD is very little - perhaps due to the fact that it is at the moment rather fresh model):
- an interesting comparison of 3 WDshek from different lines (after reading themselves will be able to answer the question of what to choose - the SATA, or NVME);
- https: //www.notebookch...chmarked.448092.0.html
- "personal" review of the SSD, the key thought - "The Blue SN550 is at its weakest when reading and writing very small block sizes of 4 KB or smaller. If your work involves moving gigabytes of these small files, then the SN550 might not be the best choice. Fortunately, most applications like gaming or editing involve much larger files where the WD SSD is at its best
. "Honestly, I can not even imagine who in modern times even purely theoretically could drive tens of gigabytes of hundreds of thousands of files size with 4K or less: huh:
Nowhere I could not find information about your controller, only the official website -https: //shop.westerndi...0-nvme-ssd#WDS250G2B0C
- there is a reference to - "Developed by Western DigitalВ® and controller firmware, as well as the latest technology of 3D NAND deliver optimized stable performance.
"Well, at least not Phison: D
And a few of my conclusions about the modern SSD, which I finally came:
- Speed вЂ‹вЂ‹has grown so much over the last year or two, that in the real normal use, the difference between them is not actually there, because no one will now sane sit with a stopwatch to measure the difference literally in milliseconds when booting the operating system, games, or layout / design in the graphics / video editor, it all loaded quickly.
- The only case in my opinion, when you can feel the difference objectively Budget and top-end modern SSD in terms of speed - only once in the first cloning system and copy data from your previous carrier. And for very large data volumes in a choke point without exception SSD - from a buffer overflow from throttling, or by both.
- Pay attention should be on the price / volume / quality, by quality I mean first of all durability, which is defined (in my subjective opinion) such factors as the type of memory used, the controller, and of the brand (at least in terms of percentage marriage to the total production volume). And so, as far as I saw, 5 years warranty (albeit limited) - in this market is a kind of rule (the only question in the performance of warranty on the territory of the Russian Federation).
- The budget SSD segment, as well as in any other market categories - whether processors, video cards, smartphones, cars - always have to compromise, at least to himself from the feeling that you have at the moment is not the very best, what has proved to be capable of human genius ...
In short, a terabyte - that's good, and fast terabytes - even better. This terabytes of line WD Blue, judging by the specs and The above tests - though not the fastest (ie not comparable to synthetic indicators with the Samsung 970 Evo Plus), but it is fast enough for most usage scenarios of classical (home / office use graphic / video / audio creation and gaming). Especially for the price in the area 10k rubles in today's economic realities. After reading your post I myself ordered this, came a little more expensive, because in Moscow Citylink they dismantled another May 27 ...
P.S. I do not understand only your thesis that "SATA weight far more" - agree, is incorrect to compare the technology and form factor. And the SATA and NVME drives is, in the form factor of 2280 under M.2 connector, and weigh the plus / minus the same (the main difference may be due to the presence of the factory radiator, but in this way they become practically unusable for mobile use - into a modern thin ultrabook with a radiator, they just do not vlezut). The main difference between the SATA and NVME tverdotelnikami M.2 2280 is in terms of a read / write speed energy (average NVME consumes three times more energy - in the middle, because this figure varies depending on the load at times) and, as a consequence , heat (at peak loads ALL NVME SSD is very heated, and in these situations by throttling them could theoretically protect only the presence of an additional passive cooling + good ventilation will that none of that, none of the other items are not feasible in ultra-compact packages ultrabook).