[Amazon.ca] WD_Black SN750 1TB NVMe Internal Gaming SSD $179.99

Zarkey wrote: ↑ One thing to remember is TLC drives are better than QLC (this drive) in many ways like speeds, durability etc but im not sure by how much. For OS/main drive people usually recommend TLC because they can keep their speeds better once over 80% capacity. If you're going to fill that thing up quick then expect lower performance like older SSDs, durability shouldnt be an issue.


Decent QLC https://www.amazon.ca/Sabrent-Rocket-In ... 07ZZYWTBP/
decent TLC https://www.amazon.ca/Silicon-Power-Gen ... B07L6GF81L

(i'm not an SSD expert but this is what i've read from others and general reviews)

The performance dips as the drive fills is not really a phenomenon specific to QLC. It's a byproduct of dynamic caching. The SX8200 Pro is subject to the same issues for example. Most QLC drives use dynamic caching because it's cheaper than static caching and provided better performance on emptier drives (at the expensive of performance as the drive fills).

Most consumer workloads are read intensive so speed and durability aren't a real concern. QLC is fine for a lot of users, it's not as good, but it's fine. If your system is perpetually low on RAM and it's swapping like crazy, maybe this could cause issues with QLC NAND but even a 660p at 1TB is rated for 10GB writes a day over 5 years. So unless you're writing a lot or keeping your drive in a state that it's perpetually full, I don't see it being a major issue.

EDIT: just noticed a mistake in my math, it's 110GB/day for 5 years.

lightmeup wrote: ↑ Update: IMHO, DO NOT buy ADATA drives, I got 8200 PRO 1TB a while ago, used it as boot drive, I had windows bluescreen issue, windows freeze issue, and then I changed to Samsung, all issues were gone.
also for speed, on day 1, the drive was fast, but then I had like 400G data on it, then speed dropped to like half when i run crystal disk mark.
again, my personal opinion.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I habe the xpg sx 8200 pro, both the 1tb and 512gb versions. I have had no stability issues. Of course I run Linux, so YMMV.

If anything my older WD Black 512mb (1st gen) gave me more headaches than teh adata drives. Considering the sn750 and sx 8200 are priced identically, I would choose based on workload. For general desktop use I would get the Adata, and for sustained writes the WD.

mr_raider wrote: ↑ I habe the xpg sx 8200 pro, both the 1tb and 512gb versions. I have had no stability issues. Of course I run Linux, so YMMV.

If anything my older WD Black 512mb (1st gen) gave me more headaches than teh adata drives. Considering the sn750 and sx 8200 are priced identically, I would choose based on workload. For general desktop use I would get the Adata, and for sustained writes the WD.

Running in a laptop (flex 14) so heat might be an issue?
Mainly concerned with longevity.

I'm a bit of a data hoarder so I'm writing fairly constantly, but with breaks. Probably download 40gb today then offload to externals, then transfer some back on.

Considering the 1tb or 2tb XPG SX8200 Pro - as someone mentioned the lower the total capacity utilization the better the overall performance or longevity in write
OR
This SN750 - as you say for sustained writes, but not sure my data hoarding falls into that category (compared to intensive video editing or other laborious process)

If I'm going to wait for Zen 3 (mostly for a drop in price on Zen 2) and RDNA 2, should I just hold off on getting an NVMe drive until then, or is this price as good as it gets?

Is a PCIe 4.0 drive like the Corsair MP600 worth it or nah?

Dirtypoodle wrote: ↑ Running in a laptop (flex 14) so heat might be an issue?
Mainly concerned with longevity.

I'm a bit of a data hoarder so I'm writing fairly constantly, but with breaks. Probably download 40gb today then offload to externals, then transfer some back on.

Considering the 1tb or 2tb XPG SX8200 Pro - as someone mentioned the lower the total capacity utilization the better the overall performance or longevity in write
OR
This SN750 - as you say for sustained writes, but not sure my data hoarding falls into that category (compared to intensive video editing or other laborious process)

Downloads are not "sustained" writes because your drive is written in spurts. Download speed will never come close to saturating the SLC cache. For sutained think disk cloning, or video editing or installing an OS. And even then, a full OS install won't come close to saturatng the cache:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13759/co ... hp-ex950/2

Look at the diagram. The speed drops off after 200GBs written. From 3000 to 1000. The WD is consistent, but only at 1500.

mr_raider wrote: ↑ I habe the xpg sx 8200 pro, both the 1tb and 512gb versions. I have had no stability issues. Of course I run Linux, so YMMV.

If anything my older WD Black 512mb (1st gen) gave me more headaches than teh adata drives. Considering the sn750 and sx 8200 are priced identically, I would choose based on workload. For general desktop use I would get the Adata, and for sustained writes the WD.

The original WD Black used a different controller that was designed by Marvell, not WD, so your experience isn't terribly relevant to the SN750.

mr_raider wrote: ↑ Downloads are not "sustained" writes because your drive is written in spurts. Download speed will never come close to saturating the SLC cache. For sutained think disk cloning, or video editing or installing an OS. And even then, a full OS install won't come close to saturatng the cache:

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13759/co ... hp-ex950/2

Look at the diagram. The speed drops off after 200GBs written. From 3000 to 1000. The WD is consistent, but only at 1500.

It's worth noting that the charts you post reflect speeds based on an empty drive. The speed drop would come twice as quickly on a drive that was half full and four times as quickly on a drive that is three quarters full. The WD has a much smaller cache(about 12GB), since it's static, but it never shrinks so the performance characteristics don't change. If you look at the 2nd chart and click the Average for last 16GB, you can see the SN750 absolutely crushes the SX8200 Pro for example. Obviously a last 16GB fill is an extreme example but it shows the drawbacks to Silicon Motion's decisions with the controller. That said, you're right about download speeds not being able to saturate the drives write speeds anyways. The real concern is for people doing video editing on a partially filled drive (or similar write intensive workloads).

Jep4444 wrote: ↑ It's worth noting that the charts you post reflect speeds based on an empty drive. The speed drop would come twice as quickly on a drive that was half full and four times as quickly on a drive that is three quarters full. The WD has a much smaller cache(about 12GB), since it's static, but it never shrinks so the performance characteristics don't change. If you look at the 2nd chart and click the Average for last 16GB, you can see the SN750 absolutely crushes the SX8200 Pro for example. Obviously a last 16GB fill is an extreme example but it shows the drawbacks to Silicon Motion's decisions with the controller. That said, you're right about download speeds not being able to saturate the drives write speeds anyways. The real concern is for people doing video editing on a partially filled drive (or similar write intensive workloads).

If your drive is 50% or 3/4 full, I assume the OS install or cloning operation is finished.

That being said WD probably has better firmware support over the long run. Both my Adata's are still running original firmware. Either way, we've saturated what can be accomplished at PCI-E gen 3 speeds.

Jep4444 wrote: ↑ The original WD Black used a different controller that was designed by Marvell, not WD, so your experience isn't terribly relevant to the SN750.

Sure. But I am far from sure random windows BSODs are due to the drive it self as the OP claims. As I said I was so satisfied with the 1tb Adata, that I bought a 512gb model for my laptop this year.

mr_raider wrote: ↑ If your drive is 50% or 3/4 full, I assume the OS install or cloning operation is finished.

That being said WD probably has better firmware support over the long run. Both my Adata's are still running original firmware. Either way, we've saturated what can be accomplished at PCI-E gen 3 speeds.

Ya, that's why I said the real concern revolves around people who are doing sustained writes on their drive. Not that one can't exhaust the cache when cloning but how often does one actually clone a drive.

mr_raider wrote: ↑ Sure. But I am far from sure random windows BSODs are due to the drive it self as the OP claims. As I said I was so satisfied with the 1tb Adata, that I bought a 512gb model for my laptop this year.

Ya, BSODs can be tricky to nail down. Most of the major consumer SSDs are very reliable from a performance standpoint. SSDs are more prone to random death if the controller is crap than anything else. If changing the SSD fixed that person's issue, either they had a random defect, which is uncommon, but not impossible, or just a bad OS installation.

https://www.google.com/search?q=ssd+cau ... e&ie=UTF-8

SSD can cause BSOD

lightmeup wrote: ↑ https://www.google.com/search?q=ssd+cau ... e&ie=UTF-8

SSD can cause BSOD

Isnt that a load of crap? If your SSD BSOD's, it is because you installed or migrated improperly. For example, If you migrated a AHCI HDD to AHCI SSD, or even installed Windows in AHCI on a SSD and the system bios is set to UEFI.... BSOD. User error causes BSOD, not SSD equipment. I have never experienced a BSOD that didn't have a reason or a fix. We are long passed the time when SSDs cause BSOD because of lack of compatibility. SSDs are very simple with respect to functionability. There are no corrupt sectors and SSDs dont break down over time like an HDD. They either work or they don't...period.

obscura wrote: ↑ If I'm going to wait for Zen 3 (mostly for a drop in price on Zen 2) and RDNA 2, should I just hold off on getting an NVMe drive until then, or is this price as good as it gets?

Is a PCIe 4.0 drive like the Corsair MP600 worth it or nah?

Do you have a PCIe 4 motherboard? You need that for the drive if you intend on getting PCIe 4 speeds. The question of course is whether you will ever reach those speeds in your use scenario. Unless you are a media professional, you probably won't but it is always nice to have. If you are walking the fence... check out my sell thread as I have a few cheap... new Intel drive as a matter of fact. Hope its ok to link...

updated-29jun-more-ssds-dram-memory-doc ... 3-2365027/

flamenko wrote: ↑ Do you have a PCIe 4 motherboard? You need that for the drive if you intend on getting PCIe 4 speeds. The question of course is whether you will ever reach those speeds in your use scenario. Unless you are a media professional, you probably won't but it is always nice to have. If you are walking the fence... check out my sell thread as I have a few cheap... new Intel drive as a matter of fact. Hope its ok to link...

updated-29jun-more-ssds-dram-memory-doc ... 3-2365027/

Will end up getting a B550 or X570 motherboard, so I will have support. It does seem like the most users aren't going to notice much of a difference if any at all unless they're dealing with large files. Will wait a bit and hope the SN750 drops further in price in coming weeks/months when I get closer to building.

flamenko wrote: ↑ Isnt that a load of crap? If your SSD BSOD's, it is because you installed or migrated improperly. For example, If you migrated a AHCI HDD to AHCI SSD, or even installed Windows in AHCI on a SSD and the system bios is set to UEFI.... BSOD. User error causes BSOD, not SSD equipment. I have never experienced a BSOD that didn't have a reason or a fix. We are long passed the time when SSDs cause BSOD because of lack of compatibility. SSDs are very simple with respect to functionability. There are no corrupt sectors and SSDs dont break down over time like an HDD. They either work or they don't...period.

dont be so sure....

hard drive era was either work or they dont.
SSD era, is not likethat anymore. the good brand like samsung, intel are good enough to not have the bluescreen issue, but Intel had 8MB bug, crucial had the 4000 hours bug, crucial m4 had BSOD, samsung 840 had some bugs too, the list goes on.

ok, here is a link: https://www.theverge.com/2012/1/17/2713 ... rring-bsod
lol, load of crap too? PERIOD?

Will this be good to use with an external enclosure with heat sink? Looking to pick one up for forensics usage. Thx.