Review: Corsair MP600 (2TB) PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD

Clearly, 2 decades, i'm really working hard to get so many posts, definition of spammer. You're comparing apples to oranges, crappy drive raid 0 vs expensive new controller single drive, yeah makes a lot of sense.. not

 

Well I think it's ok to compare RAID 0 NVMe against new PCIe 4.0 single drive NVMe. If RAID0 of PCIe 3.0 NVMe is cheaper and faster than this new single drive PCIe 4.0 NVMe then that's pretty relevant, and there's some sense to make that comparison. Not only is Q1 4KB quicker on his RAID 0 (from the screenshot), so are are the sequentials, that's quite a bit better.

 

Point is that this pci-e ssd is slower and way more expensive than a good pci-e 3.0 ssd like sx8200pro. Exept in seq read and write Double the prize for a bit higher seq performance, than 99.9% can't utilize in normal conditions

 

I have to kindly disagree. When I load competitive game (showing readiness of other players) from SX8200, I get to be 1st or match other M.2 user. And while I have to wait for few seconds for slowest player (therefore no benefit), It gets to show real world performance difference. I am sure that many of those other players have SSDs. Their ready statuses pop in over time and are faster than those with HDDs.
That means other advantage. In case game has bad logic for precaching of resources, player may run into situations when something has to be loaded from drive before next frame can be rendered... I/O based stutter. Effect of this is greatly diminished in comparison to SSD. And SSDs are incomparably better to HDDs.
I do remember this being an issue in older CoD games from around time when those 3 companies started to rotate one game release per year.

(Playing those crazy big games which have unique textures on every object must be night and day difference in between HDD and SSD. But there is always more to be gained from faster drive.)

 

Already said this in a previous thread.

25% increase in overall performance(r/w speeds and IOPS as median) for a 77% price premium over MP510. Math checks out Corsair.

Not that Samsung's 970 evo+ is any better pricing wise.

 

uhu, and everyone knows nvme slots grow on trees

 

It does

Pci-e m.2 cards. "infinity" m.2 ssd's

Was that all you got?

 

thats your net connection, ie being closer to the server.

these games don't even max out ssds.

 

Man, when are they bringing out 4TB NVMe drives?

 

Lol, yeah. Wrong as you can be. I can move game from HDD to SSD to NVMe. And I do that depending on needs of game, because there is difference.

 

Yeah, i just have every latency measurement ever for nand based devices to call you wrong on this, but whatever.

you do you.

 

Do I need latency to sequentially read texture that has not been precached? Like for higher LOD at closer distance? No, sorry.

 

NVMe is better than SATA SSD when it comes to game loading - I timed it when I switched from Sandisk 480GB Ultra II SATA to Sabrent Rocket 1TB NVMe in BF1 loading times from desktop to game menu, and NVMe was 1 or 2 secs faster (can't remember, one of the two). I've noticed that things like program installs happen faster, and restoring an image of the OS using Macrium Reflect is way faster, boot time is again a couple of seconds faster than SATA SSD. The biggest differences between NVMe and SATA for me so far have been anything to do with large writes - program installations, system image restorations. I'm not the ideal NVMe user though, because I don't edit large files or move large files around on a regular basis, but this NVMe SSD was actually cheaper than almost any SATA SSD out there in price per GB, so I thought why not have the faster one!

 

no it isn't, but keep telling yourself that while comparing a cheap end ssd to an nvme.

 

Errr, yes it is, I measured it, as I described in my previous post. And the differences in OS image restoration using Macrium Reflect were massive - from memory it was in the 7min area for SATA SSD, and for NVMe SSD it was 3min. And if you move around large files for editing purposes, then NVMe is gonna be even faster (but I don't do that). And I'm comparing a supposedly cheap end TLC NVMe SSD to a relatively cheap end TLC SATA SSD (definitely not the cheapest or worst performer) - and don't forget that the cheap NVMe SSD I bought (Sabrent 1TB Rocket - E12 Phison + TLC NAND) was cheaper per GB than any SATA SSD at the time I bought it.

 

Try to keep on subject, you inserted an off tangent context of os image restoration which had nothing to do with the conversation.

There is no game on the market which uses multithreaded disk reading and rarely does a game ever exceed chunks being read in excess of 100MB/s for an NVME to actually demonstrate an improvement.

Flash storage impact on games is nearly entirely based on the access times from one device to another and only a single title available actually shows a measurable difference in game loads, and thats Ark because it does a sequential read of game data and retains it in memory instead of streaming it like most do.

For most others (andi would say majority of) data is read from solid archive dats or similar and only what is needed in a particular level or region is read as it is needed.

But feel free to remain in opposition to every benchmark article and video ever done comparing ssd's to nvme for game load speeds.

 

I am curious to see though now that consoles are getting SSD's or something that might be a SSD or hybrid could we actually start seeing titles with game engines worked on to take effect of this, instead of a single thread for asset streaming having multiple threads and optimization towards a device capable of doing 100's instead of 10's of MB's for data reading and loading though RAM and other hardware also factor in for the overall speed and loading time benefits, streaming and potential stuttering and hitching or just less lengthy low to full quality assets.

By that point though PCI-E 4.0 should be more common as should development towards NVME controllers and what other benefits could be gained over what these early models might have.
But that will benefit SSD's in general and not just M2's going via NVME although the speeds afforded via PCI Express 3.0 and up could still yield some nice advantages though perhaps gaming isn't the main area where this comes into full effect.


EDIT: In short a slow gradual removal of the HDD as the standard data and storage unit in systems and a move towards SSD instead and reaping more of the benefits these offer by not limiting development though that's going to be a slow process as game engines and software are updated as SSD's start pacing out HDD's for anything not for data storage.
(Undoing the I/O bottlenecks even though SSD's are already showing gains due to the removal of seek times and latency plus the sustained read and write speed advantages but there has to be room for more and further gains.)

Or how to try to explain, combined with newer and faster RAM, CPU's with more cores and overall threading benefits and also perhaps low-level graphics API developments for DirectX 12 and Vulkan to maximize hardware utilization across every component.

Idealistic perhaps maybe ridiculously so as it's not going to be easy especially balancing and setting things up for 6 - 8 CPU cores and threading or more so it will take time and that is just one area out of several that is going to take time and work to see full benefits years from now though slight gains might be possible over time too.


EDIT: And of course also not just for gaming though apps and stuff like media creation might already be well on the way, yet another area I would need to read up more about and how things have changed these last few years.

 

I am on topic, we're not just talking about gaming here, we're talking about any type of PC use when it comes to NVMe vs SATA, no reason why this needs to be restricted gaming. Anyway, I've said my bit previously re NVMe vs SATA (including my own measurements comparing the two, both within gaming & outside of that context), so not gonna waste space typing it out again.

 

thinking of getting NVMe ,would i get some advantages over my old ssd (evo 850) on gaming ,been getting some random hitching on some games ,will this solve it ?

 

Assuming the 850 evo works properly and it's not full, I seriously doubt it's the cause off the hitchings/stuttering. Even now a good ssd is or should at least be fast enough to load/feed cpu whatever game resources needed without hiccups.

It could be anything from system instability(not saying it's the case here) down to just a old/bad sata cable. If the issue(s) is reproducible, you could run in windowed mode one of the games with the issue and check with task manager or similar monitoring programs to see what/if anything is happening when those occur.