Saberent rocket 4 plus announced, with max speeds faster than the 980 PRO

[Smackaroy]

The new saberent rocket 4 plus nvme ssd has just been announced, with speeds even faster than the samsung 980 pro. It has a read speed of 7000MBs and a write speed of 6850MBs thanks to the new phison E18 controller. It comes in with capacitys of 500gb, 1tb and 2tb.

 

 

 

Quote

 "Enter the next generation of data storage technology. The rocket 4 plus delivers amazing speed and unmatched reliability."

 

I think with this new generation of ssds is going to be really exciting, because thanks to the ps5 games are going to start benefiting from faster storage, meaning near instant loading times and bigger and more detailed worlds.

 

 

https://www.sabrent.com/rocket-4-plus/

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/74842/sabrent-does-it-again-rocket-4-plus-ssd-packs-insane-7gb-sec-reads/amp.html

[Jurrunio]

They can do whatever they want about max speeds, I care about sustained speeds. No one's gonna leave their SSDs (that they bought) empty just to score well

[Doobeedoo]

Yeah cool, let's see how sustained and caching is. 

[Smackaroy]

3 minutes ago, Doobeedoo said:

Yeah cool, let's see how sustained and caching is. 

Let's wait and see.

 

[Murasaki]

*removes front sticker*

[Kisai]

3 hours ago, Smackaroy said:

The new saberent rocket 4 plus nvme ssd has just been announced, with speeds even faster than the samsung 980 pro. It has a read speed of 7000MBs and a write speed of 6850MBs thanks to the new phison E18 controller. It comes in with capacitys of 500gb, 1tb and 2tb.

 

 

 

 

I think with this new generation of ssds is going to be really exciting, because thanks to the ps5 games are going to start benefiting from faster storage, meaning near instant loading times and bigger and more detailed worlds.

 

 

https://www.sabrent.com/rocket-4-plus/

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/74842/sabrent-does-it-again-rocket-4-plus-ssd-packs-insane-7gb-sec-reads/amp.html

If you look carefully, the marking shows double-sided M2 boards. Also the heatsinks on those clearly are designed for desktops.

 

So laptop performance might not actually hit those speeds, but someone would have to benchmark it as such.

[Smackaroy]

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

If you look carefully, the marking shows double-sided M2 boards. Also the heatsinks on those clearly are designed for desktops.

 

So laptop performance might not actually hit those speeds, but someone would have to benchmark it as such.

do laptops even have pcie 4.0 yet?

 

[dizmo]

IIRC you won't see the insane load times of a PS5 because it's not implemented the same way. Even though you have the fast drive, it's completely different architecture for the way the system is laid out. 

[Letgomyleghoe.]

Unless they're is going to be a point for all of these super fast ssd's later on right now I fail to see the purpose of buying one.

[leadeater]

Also FYI performance measurements are for the 2TB model, the 1TB will be slower on writes. Either way I'd trust Samsung more to have more consistent performance and latency.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, comander said:

I'm still waiting for faster and smarter file systems on windows with well-done caching. When that happens random IO can mostly be handled on one drive and sustained reads by the other. 

I have given up hope.

Microsoft never developed a decent HDD file system so I kind of doubt they will develop a decent file system for SSDs.

 

 

Seems like a lot of functionality of Windows is directly tied to the way the file system works, so it's probably a nightmare trying to get it working on anything but NTFS. Hell, even ReFS which is in many ways very similar to NTFS isn't fully supported in Windows. You can only use it in certain editions and you can't even boot from it.

 

Would be cool to see Microsoft adopt F2FS or some other file system designed for flash drives. Probably won't happen though.

[Soppro]

Yep, here come the E18 drives. With no doubt a load more drives based on this controller on the way, I can see prices of PCIe 4.0 drives going down in the next year or 2, not that there are any use cases for it yet.

[leadeater]

2 hours ago, LAwLz said:

Hell, even ReFS which is in many ways very similar to NTFS isn't fully supported in Windows

I have no idea why this is even a thing either, I actually can't think of a reason to restrict it. ReFS was actually designed for SSD/Flash btw, the entire filesystem is built around metadata and checksums with referential data blocks. It's also why it's the preferred filesystem for Veeam backup storage as it gives you all the benefits of deduplication (without being "deduplication") without any of the performance draw backs and zero data re-hydration when reading it back.

 

What makes it look bad is it's basically always paired with Storage Spaces and that's too easy to implement badly and most of the options it offers sucks. Really it's Storage Spaces that needs massively improving because that just is not good enough outside perfect deployments with exactly the correct hardware.

[agent2]

4 hours ago, leadeater said:

Also FYI performance measurements are for the 2TB model, the 1TB will be slower on writes. Either way I'd trust Samsung more to have more consistent performance and latency.

As good as Samsung might be they are only riding on their reputation nowadays imo and I would happily go with the Sabrent SSD as that updated Phison controller actually performs well. 

I find it so stupid that people still buy those overpriced 970 EVOs and PROs even though they get outperformed by the newest PCIe 4.0 SSDs. Especially when people buy Zen 2/X570 rigs they still choose those overpriced things.

[LAwLz]

54 minutes ago, agent2 said:

As good as Samsung might be they are only riding on their reputation nowadays imo and I would happily go with the Sabrent SSD as that updated Phison controller actually performs well. 

I find it so stupid that people still buy those overpriced 970 EVOs and PROs even though they get outperformed by the newest PCIe 4.0 SSDs. Especially when people buy Zen 2/X570 rigs they still choose those overpriced things.

I think both leadeater and I have talked about this precise thing in the past and both of us agree that Samsung drives (especially the Pro models) aren't just "expensive because of the Samsung sticker".

The Pro models in particular perform MUCH better than than competing drives, but only in certain scenarios that aren't really applicable to most consumer workloads.

Increase the queue depth and start looking at latency and you will see why the Pro drives have such a high price tag compared to competing drives.

 

  

Quotes from this thread:

Leadeater:

Spoiler

 

On 6/10/2020 at 11:43 AM, leadeater said:

Yep, but even Samsung box figures are BS too but we all know box figures are worthless.

 

Here's a good example of what I mean though:

 

 

SQL workloads you've got the Pro and even the EVO hanging with Optane and for VDI the Pro is actually out performing Optane. Both punch way above their weight if you actually have a workload demand to show it and need it. VDI workload also makes it very clear why the Pro exists and the weakness of EVO.

 

Also yea I'm biased, I only buy Samsung SSDs for my important stuff, I'll put other things in to computers that are not my own that I won't be using but it's all Samsung for my stuff.

 

  

 

 

Me:

Spoiler

 

On 6/10/2020 at 12:56 PM, LAwLz said:

Quote

So it's pretty much a 80-100% price increase for the PRO model. Big difference is in endurance rating not speed however, speed difference isn't much between the two.

No, the speed difference is massive, in certain workloads.

@leadeater posted some good benchmarks to show this but I prefer Anandtech's "The Destroyer". It performs a bunch of different workloads, at lots of different block sizes and queue depths. It goes beyond what you will find in a typical desktop workload, but everything is based on real life workloads (just kicked up a few notches).

 

You can find a detailed explanation of it here and benchmarks of it here.

 

Here are some numbers which should highlight what a beast the 970 Pro is:

 

99% percentile read latency in ms:

970 Pro - 696

970 EVO - 2424

Difference - 71% lower latency in the Pro.

 

99% percentile write latency in ms:

970 Pro - 357

970 EVO - 2654

Difference - 86% lower latency in the Pro.

 

Average latency in ms:

970 Pro - 72.03

970 EVO - 214.03

Difference - 66% lower latency in the Pro.

 

Average data rate in MB/s:

970 Pro - 1261

970 EVO - 846

Difference - 49% higher throughput in the Pro.

 

 

Not worth the price for the average Joe since the difference in typical workloads will be far smaller than this, but there is a legitimate reason why Samsung calls it "Pro" and sell it at a significantly higher price.

 

 

 

 

[S w a t s o n]

Given the recent decision to use TLC in the 980 Pro, I dont see why anyone in this thread is like "wait and see" muh "sustained performance". Listen, the options to hide the TLC perf on each drive are going to be the same, dram cache and slc mode. The nand itself is probably of the same quality and probably running at the same MT rate to a controller that probably has the same number of channels. Given that we have a significantly higher rated sequential writes on the 2TB Rocket 4 Plus (something samshit also does, rating speeds on a 1TB+ model) I have to believe there is no reason the 980 pro will outperform it even in random or sustained writes or latency.

I really doubt the 980 pro offers anything worthwhile over this. Had Samshit used MLC, maybe yea

[agent2]

59 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I think both leadeater and I have talked about this precise thing in the past and both of us agree that Samsung drives (especially the Pro models) aren't just "expensive because of the Samsung sticker".

The Pro models in particular perform MUCH better than than competing drives, but only in certain scenarios that aren't really applicable to most consumer workloads.

Increase the queue depth and start looking at latency and you will see why the Pro drives have such a high price tag compared to competing drives.

 

  

Quotes from this thread:

Leadeater:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

  

 

 

Me:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

 

 

 

So if this SSD came out with MLC and the 1TB version cost 280, 300 tops, then I would consider it for high-performance workloads. But Sabrent has been known to offer their high-end SSDs (especially their Rocket 4.0) are very reasonable prices and I'd happily support the underdog that's doing the right thing instead of confirming Samsung's dumb pricing policy.

[LAwLz]

44 minutes ago, agent2 said:

So if this SSD came out with MLC and the 1TB version cost 280, 300 tops, then I would consider it for high-performance workloads. But Sabrent has been known to offer their high-end SSDs (especially their Rocket 4.0) are very reasonable prices and I'd happily support the underdog that's doing the right thing instead of confirming Samsung's dumb pricing policy.

But Samsung's "dumb pricing policy" isn't dumb. It's just that their SSDs which have a price premium have that price premium because of reasons that are not apparent to the average consumer.

 

I am not saying you shouldn't buy a Sabrent SSD. What I am saying is that it isn't as simple as going "Sabrent good, Samsung bad". It depends on which type of workload you are doing. 

Of course, I am talking about the older drives and things might change this upcoming generation, but I've seen people make comments similar to yours regarding the "current gen" and for that they are absolutely wrong.

[agent2]

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

But Samsung's "dumb pricing policy" isn't dumb. It's just that their SSDs which have a price premium have that price premium because of reasons that are not apparent to the average consumer.

 

I am not saying you shouldn't buy a Sabrent SSD. What I am saying is that it isn't as simple as going "Sabrent good, Samsung bad". It depends on which type of workload you are doing. 

Of course, I am talking about the older drives and things might change this upcoming generation, but I've seen people make comments similar to yours regarding the "current gen" and for that they are absolutely wrong.

Then if these specific workload-advantageous are so known, then why do consumers still buy them for day-to-day use even though they're better off spending 50$ less for the same capacity, and the same IOPS? Would you buy a 970 EVO Plus or a Rocket 4.0 (with same capacity) for the same price? I'd go with the PCIe 4.0 device please. 

If I believe you that the Pro is so much better, then why do people still pay those inflated prices for the EVO Plus models?

[leadeater]

3 minutes ago, agent2 said:

I'd go with the PCIe 4.0 device please.

This doesn't actually make that much of a difference, interface speed doesn't really change the quality of the product or why you would buy one over the other for an actual professional workload. There are SATA SSDs I'd buy over quite a few NVMe SSDs because they perform better, just not in burst speed.

 

But like, desktop usage is all burst speeds so as long as you don't fall outside an SSDs caching and SLC/MLC tiering capability it's really not going to matter what you buy.

 

We don't run IOmeter etc all day every day so like who actually cares about the burst speed anyway, 6000 vs 7000 of read or write just is not going to be noticed.

[Drama Lama]

19 hours ago, Smackaroy said:

do laptops even have pcie 4.0 yet?

 

It’s planned by intel 

[LAwLz]

21 minutes ago, agent2 said:

Then if these specific workload-advantageous are so known, then why do consumers still buy them for day-to-day use even though they're better off spending 50$ less for the same capacity, and the same IOPS?

I don't think the benefits of a Pro Samsung drive are very well known.

And why do people buy them? Because it's a recognized brand and once you get to this level of hardware it's less about getting the best bang for your buck and more about bragging rights.

It's harder to brag about having a Sabrent Rocket than it is to brag about having a 980 Pro.

The higher end you go, the less price matters.

 

21 minutes ago, agent2 said:

Would you buy a 970 EVO Plus or a Rocket 4.0 (with same capacity) for the same price? I'd go with the PCIe 4.0 device please. 

It depends on how they perform. Probably the Rocket 4.0 though. It seems like it will be way faster than the 970 Evo Plus. But I wouldn't pick the Rocket 4.0 over the Evo Plus because of PCIe 4.0. I could not care less about which interface standard the drive uses. What matters is performance. There will probably be PCIe 3.0 drives that perform better than PCIe 4.0 drives.

 

21 minutes ago, agent2 said:

If I believe you that the Pro is so much better, then why do people still pay those inflated prices for the EVO Plus models?

I don't believe the "pro is so much better". Stop being so hostile.

The 970 Pro is better than the competing drives on the market. But it's better in ways that won't matter to the average consumer.

 

As for why people buy the EVO Plus models? Well because until recently it was actually one of the best drives for the price. I also don't think people are too worried about a few tens of dollars here or there, and would rather go with a familiar brand name like Samsung over Sabrent. 

 

So to TL;DR:

1) The Samsung Pro models have clear benefits. They are way faster than competing drives, but only in some scenarios. These scenarios are not that important to the average user and therefore the Pro series is a bad buy for most people. However, people buy they for bragging rights.

2) The Evo series isn't bad. They still have benefits but they are not exactly the price:performance kings. But not everyone only looks at price to performance. Some also like buying stuff from trusted brands even if it means paying a bit more for a little less. Samsung has a fantastic track record with their SSDs. Maybe the best in the industry. Some people value that, some don't.

[RejZoR]

On 8/31/2020 at 3:57 PM, Jurrunio said:

They can do whatever they want about max speeds, I care about sustained speeds. No one's gonna leave their SSDs (that they bought) empty just to score well

And that's where Samsung has consistently been one if not the best performer.

[agent2]

10 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I don't think the benefits of a Pro Samsung drive are very well known.

And why do people buy them? Because it's a recognized brand and once you get to this level of hardware it's less about getting the best bang for your buck and more about bragging rights.

It's harder to brag about having a Sabrent Rocket than it is to brag about having a 980 Pro.

The higher end you go, the less price matters.

 

It depends on how they perform. Probably the Rocket 4.0 though. It seems like it will be way faster than the 970 Evo Plus. But I wouldn't pick the Rocket 4.0 over the Evo Plus because of PCIe 4.0. I could not care less about which interface standard the drive uses. What matters is performance. There will probably be PCIe 3.0 drives that perform better than PCIe 4.0 drives.

 

I don't believe the "pro is so much better". Stop being so hostile.

The 970 Pro is better than the competing drives on the market. But it's better in ways that won't matter to the average consumer.

 

As for why people buy the EVO Plus models? Well because until recently it was actually one of the best drives for the price. I also don't think people are too worried about a few tens of dollars here or there, and would rather go with a familiar brand name like Samsung over Sabrent. 

 

So to TL;DR:

1) The Samsung Pro models have clear benefits. They are way faster than competing drives, but only in some scenarios. These scenarios are not that important to the average user and therefore the Pro series is a bad buy for most people. However, people buy they for bragging rights.

2) The Evo series isn't bad. They still have benefits but they are not exactly the price:performance kings. But not everyone only looks at price to performance. Some also like buying stuff from trusted brands even if it means paying a bit more for a little less. Samsung has a fantastic track record with their SSDs. Maybe the best in the industry. Some people value that, some don't.

Sorry for letting off steam here in this thread I don't deny that Samsung SSDs aren't good. I'm just part of the gang that promotes SSDs that are as good as Samsung but are wayyy cheaper. So I just want to raise awareness to those buying SSDs for everyday use and and for gaming that you can buy e. g. a HP/Sabrent/Silicon Power or other which have similar IOPS, sequential R/W etc. for much less and use that saved money on something that will benefit their gameplay instead of the pro workload they are never going to encounter. 

So peace man. 

[LAwLz]

4 minutes ago, agent2 said:

I'm just part of the gang that promotes SSDs that are as good as Samsung but are wayyy cheaper. So I just want to raise awareness to those buying SSDs for everyday use and and for gaming that you can buy e. g. a HP/Sabrent/Silicon Power or other which have similar IOPS, sequential R/W etc.

That's good, and I think brands like Sabrent (or now SK Hynix with their Gold P31 drive) will be really good options for most people. 

But we should be careful with generalization and zealous behavior where we go "X brand is bad, always buy brand Y!".