Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
TheNamelessOne

Gigabyte SSD need some info

Recommended Posts

Posted · Original PosterOP

Does anyone know if this drive:

https://www.gigabyte.com/Solid-State-Drive/GIGABYTE-NVMe-SSD-1TB#kf

uses QLC or TLC memory?

I've search a bit and can't find any information on it.

Also do any of you have it? How does it perform? Does it maintain its speed all throughout the drive or does it drop like a rock?

I know the Intel 660p drops in performance to 40MB/s once it runs out of its SLC cache.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unsure, but it's also cacheless which is a first sign it's a budget piece.


QUOTE ME IN A REPLY SO I CAN SEE THE NOTIFICATION!

When there is no danger of failure there is no pleasure in success.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Toshiba TLC NAND, but it's inferior to many PCIe 3.0 x4 drives as it doesnt have DRAM and has lower than average speed (that speed rating is the max of the Phison E13T controller on it, which is by no means high end like the Phison E12)


CPU: i7-2600K 4751MHz 1.44V (software) --> 1.47V at the back of the socket Motherboard: Asrock Z77 Extreme4 (BCLK: 103.3MHz) CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 RAM: Adata XPG 2x8GB DDR3 (XMP: 2133MHz 10-11-11-30 CR2, custom: 2203MHz 10-11-10-26 CR1 tRFC:230 tREFI:14000) GPU: Asus GTX 1070 Dual (Super Jetstream vbios, +70(2025-2088MHz)/+400(8.8Gbps)) SSD: Samsung 840 Pro 256GB (main boot drive), Transcend SSD370 128GB PSU: Seasonic X-660 80+ Gold Case: Antec P110 Silent, 5 intakes 1 exhaust Monitor: AOC G2460PF 1080p 144Hz (150Hz max w/ DP, 121Hz max w/ HDMI) TN panel Keyboard: Logitech G610 Orion (Cherry MX Blue) with SteelSeries Apex M260 keycaps Mouse: BenQ Zowie FK1

 

Model: HP Omen 17 17-an110ca CPU: i7-8750H (0.125V core & cache, 50mV SA undervolt) GPU: GTX 1060 6GB Mobile (+80/+450, 1650MHz~1750MHz 0.78V~0.85V) RAM: 8+8GB DDR4-2400 18-17-17-39 2T Storage: 1TB HP EX920 PCIe x4 M.2 SSD + 1TB Seagate 7200RPM 2.5" HDD (ST1000LM049-2GH172), 128GB Toshiba PCIe x2 M.2 SSD (KBG30ZMV128G) gone cooking externally Monitor: 1080p 126Hz IPS G-sync

 

Desktop benching:

Cinebench R15 Single thread:168 Multi-thread: 833 

SuperPi (v1.5 from Techpowerup, PI value output) 16K: 0.100s 1M: 8.255s 32M: 7m 45.93s

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
19 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

Toshiba TLC NAND, but it's inferior to many PCIe 3.0 x4 drives as it doesnt have DRAM and has lower than average speed (that speed rating is the max of the Phison E13T controller on it, which is by no means high end like the Phison E12)

Thanks. Can it be worse than the 660p? I had that drive and it was absolute garbage, that's how I know it slows down to that speed.

I'm looking for a drive for storage, mainly games. Windows is installed on a separate drive. And I'm looking for something that doesn't slow down to hard drive speeds.

Right now I was looking at this Gigabyte model and a Crucial MX500 which is Sata and both are the exact price for me. Between these two what you say it's the better option? Or do you know a better drive that's within the same price point as those two?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TheNamelessOne said:

Thanks. Can it be worse than the 660p? I had that drive and it was absolute garbage, that's how I know it slows down to that speed.

If you write a lot to it at a time during game installs (that's the 660p's main disadvantage), the Gigabyte NVMe should do a lot better. However on paper it's worse than the 660p in random reads due to lack of DRAM, which is a really common thing when running games.

 

12 minutes ago, TheNamelessOne said:

Right now I was looking at this Gigabyte model and a Crucial MX500 which is Sata and both are the exact price for me. Between these two what you say it's the better option?

I prefer the Crucial just because I know its actual performance and don't need to guess


CPU: i7-2600K 4751MHz 1.44V (software) --> 1.47V at the back of the socket Motherboard: Asrock Z77 Extreme4 (BCLK: 103.3MHz) CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 RAM: Adata XPG 2x8GB DDR3 (XMP: 2133MHz 10-11-11-30 CR2, custom: 2203MHz 10-11-10-26 CR1 tRFC:230 tREFI:14000) GPU: Asus GTX 1070 Dual (Super Jetstream vbios, +70(2025-2088MHz)/+400(8.8Gbps)) SSD: Samsung 840 Pro 256GB (main boot drive), Transcend SSD370 128GB PSU: Seasonic X-660 80+ Gold Case: Antec P110 Silent, 5 intakes 1 exhaust Monitor: AOC G2460PF 1080p 144Hz (150Hz max w/ DP, 121Hz max w/ HDMI) TN panel Keyboard: Logitech G610 Orion (Cherry MX Blue) with SteelSeries Apex M260 keycaps Mouse: BenQ Zowie FK1

 

Model: HP Omen 17 17-an110ca CPU: i7-8750H (0.125V core & cache, 50mV SA undervolt) GPU: GTX 1060 6GB Mobile (+80/+450, 1650MHz~1750MHz 0.78V~0.85V) RAM: 8+8GB DDR4-2400 18-17-17-39 2T Storage: 1TB HP EX920 PCIe x4 M.2 SSD + 1TB Seagate 7200RPM 2.5" HDD (ST1000LM049-2GH172), 128GB Toshiba PCIe x2 M.2 SSD (KBG30ZMV128G) gone cooking externally Monitor: 1080p 126Hz IPS G-sync

 

Desktop benching:

Cinebench R15 Single thread:168 Multi-thread: 833 

SuperPi (v1.5 from Techpowerup, PI value output) 16K: 0.100s 1M: 8.255s 32M: 7m 45.93s

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
18 hours ago, Jurrunio said:

If you write a lot to it at a time during game installs (that's the 660p's main disadvantage), the Gigabyte NVMe should do a lot better. However on paper it's worse than the 660p in random reads due to lack of DRAM, which is a really common thing when running games.

One more question and I'll leave you alone. I know you say on paper, but how worse can an ssd without dram cache on it, be in games? I mean do you think on one with cache the game will load in 19 seconds and on the one without it will load in 21 seconds?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TheNamelessOne said:

One more question and I'll leave you alone. I know you say on paper, but how worse can an ssd without dram cache on it, be in games? I mean do you think on one with cache the game will load in 19 seconds and on the one without it will load in 21 seconds?

Depends on how the game's optimized. Some play well with less stable SSD speeds, some don't. As for just loading into the game, it should only be 1-2 seconds difference.


CPU: i7-2600K 4751MHz 1.44V (software) --> 1.47V at the back of the socket Motherboard: Asrock Z77 Extreme4 (BCLK: 103.3MHz) CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 RAM: Adata XPG 2x8GB DDR3 (XMP: 2133MHz 10-11-11-30 CR2, custom: 2203MHz 10-11-10-26 CR1 tRFC:230 tREFI:14000) GPU: Asus GTX 1070 Dual (Super Jetstream vbios, +70(2025-2088MHz)/+400(8.8Gbps)) SSD: Samsung 840 Pro 256GB (main boot drive), Transcend SSD370 128GB PSU: Seasonic X-660 80+ Gold Case: Antec P110 Silent, 5 intakes 1 exhaust Monitor: AOC G2460PF 1080p 144Hz (150Hz max w/ DP, 121Hz max w/ HDMI) TN panel Keyboard: Logitech G610 Orion (Cherry MX Blue) with SteelSeries Apex M260 keycaps Mouse: BenQ Zowie FK1

 

Model: HP Omen 17 17-an110ca CPU: i7-8750H (0.125V core & cache, 50mV SA undervolt) GPU: GTX 1060 6GB Mobile (+80/+450, 1650MHz~1750MHz 0.78V~0.85V) RAM: 8+8GB DDR4-2400 18-17-17-39 2T Storage: 1TB HP EX920 PCIe x4 M.2 SSD + 1TB Seagate 7200RPM 2.5" HDD (ST1000LM049-2GH172), 128GB Toshiba PCIe x2 M.2 SSD (KBG30ZMV128G) gone cooking externally Monitor: 1080p 126Hz IPS G-sync

 

Desktop benching:

Cinebench R15 Single thread:168 Multi-thread: 833 

SuperPi (v1.5 from Techpowerup, PI value output) 16K: 0.100s 1M: 8.255s 32M: 7m 45.93s

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, TheNamelessOne said:

One more question and I'll leave you alone. I know you say on paper, but how worse can an ssd without dram cache on it, be in games? I mean do you think on one with cache the game will load in 19 seconds and on the one without it will load in 21 seconds?

I know you weren't asking me, sorry to be rude but to answer this with some detail:

 

If we take a game often used to benchmark load times (FFXIV) and use two drives with similar base hardware like the MX500 and BX500 - primary difference here would be the presence of DRAM - we can see that the improved 4K reads thanks to DRAM does have some impact. At 960GB/1TB (the TLC BX500) the difference is 0.542s or ~3.5% faster on the MX500 (source: TweakTown). If we instead compare to NVMe, like the popular SX8200 Pro, the difference between NVMe and SATA - keeping in mind the MX500 and SX8200 Pro have a similar-gen SMI controller, similar flash, similar DRAM, main difference being sequentials from channels (not important for loading) and thus only the protocol 4K performance advantage - results in the Pro is ~15% faster (source: Tom's Hardware). In my own testing that is about the extent of gains with NVMe - FYI that would be 18% over DRAM-less SATA. DRAM isn't as critical for NVMe drives esp. for this benchmark so for example the WD SN550 gets close to the Intel 665p.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Original PosterOP
On 1/23/2020 at 7:03 AM, Jurrunio said:

Depends on how the game's optimized. Some play well with less stable SSD speeds, some don't. As for just loading into the game, it should only be 1-2 seconds difference.

Understood. Thank you.

On 1/23/2020 at 7:39 AM, NewMaxx said:

I know you weren't asking me, sorry to be rude but to answer this with some detail:

 

If we take a game often used to benchmark load times (FFXIV) and use two drives with similar base hardware like the MX500 and BX500 - primary difference here would be the presence of DRAM - we can see that the improved 4K reads thanks to DRAM does have some impact. At 960GB/1TB (the TLC BX500) the difference is 0.542s or ~3.5% faster on the MX500 (source: TweakTown). If we instead compare to NVMe, like the popular SX8200 Pro, the difference between NVMe and SATA - keeping in mind the MX500 and SX8200 Pro have a similar-gen SMI controller, similar flash, similar DRAM, main difference being sequentials from channels (not important for loading) and thus only the protocol 4K performance advantage - results in the Pro is ~15% faster (source: Tom's Hardware). In my own testing that is about the extent of gains with NVMe - FYI that would be 18% over DRAM-less SATA. DRAM isn't as critical for NVMe drives esp. for this benchmark so for example the WD SN550 gets close to the Intel 665p.

First of all thank you, secondly never apologize for offering more information. It's always welcomed.

Both you and Jurrunio helped me. So once again thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×