QLC M.2 vs SATA SSD

[Crxcked]

I’m building a new B450 PC currently and have ordered most parts besides storage.

 

I am stuck between this QLC NVME m.2  or this TLC SATA one. (or something of the likes)

Given how new QLC technology has downsides and the advertised speed isn’t entirely maintained, should I just go for the safer MX500 option? I’ve seen QLC slow to a crawl after use.

 

I would have one drive that would share the OS, games, everything. The PC will have average use with gaming being the most intense activity.

 

Which should I go for? They are both in my budget.

 

[Oswin]

i'd get this instead, for not much more

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/9vWBD3/kingston-a2000-1-tb-m2-2280-nvme-solid-state-drive-sa2000m81000g

[dizmo]

The MX500 will have better sustained writes. But really, how often are you writing more than 150GB anyway?

If you can afford the drive @Oswin suggested, it is marginally better.

[Haro]

well the p1 is decent in some areas, but for a casual user/ as a boot drive. i wouldn't get it as it's well qlc. 

go for the a2000 like what @Oswin said. 

but if you're limited to both of these, i would get the mx500, as it's fast enough for a casual user anyways. 

[Crxcked]

1 hour ago, TofuHaroto said:

well the p1 is decent in some areas, but for a casual user/ as a boot drive. i wouldn't get it as it's well qlc. 

go for the a2000 like what @Oswin said. 

but if you're limited to both of these, i would get the mx500, as it's fast enough for a casual user anyways. 

As the Kingston is TLC. The Kingston is a no brainer compared to the MX500, correct? I can go up that little to get a stable M.2 that’s not QLC.

[Haro]

10 hours ago, Crxcked said:

The Kingston is a no brainer compared to the MX500, correct?

i mean for a casual user it wont make a huge difference but yea if you can afford it, go for it.