News Unsavory Flash Swap: Re-Testing Crucial’s P2 SSD After QLC Downgrade

[Krotow]

QLC or DRAMless SSDs work fine. For mainstream end-users, there is hardly any difference compared to TLC. These 2 drives fair badly in sequential writes but people dont write 20-30 GBs of data on a daily basis. its mostly very small files.

Copying a batch of large files like movies and ISO images already will reveal the difference. And will cause countless issues among SDD drive reputation in general and in relations between computer techies and their clientele. Because techies who aren't aware about this kind of manufacturer con, will not understand why presumably good model SSDs from "reputable" manufacturer are suddenly too slow without sane reason.

Haha, dont worry. Bulk of micron's sales are to OEM. Pricing matters alot more than performance.

Correct. A lot of prebuilt office PCs with SSD drives that will work slower than HDD drives in near future 🙁

 

[escksu]

Copying a batch of large files like movies and ISO images already will reveal the difference. And will cause countless issues among SDD drive reputation in general and in relations between computer techies and their clientele. Because techies who aren't aware about this kind of manufacturer con, will not understand why presumably good model SSDs from "reputable" manufacturer are suddenly too slow without sane reason.



Correct. A lot of prebuilt office PCs with SSD drives that will work slower than HDD drives in near future 🙁

Not quite. Because most users only have 1 SSD in their PCs and also just 1 partition. When users copy a batch of movies/iso, it usually to backup onto network or USB drives.

When they are doing this, network and USB becomes the bottleneck instead. Vast majority are using USB 3.0 drives today. Its limited to max of around 200MB/s.

Thats why i have been saying the sequential transfer benchmarks are useless in most cases. Unless you have 2 identical drives and enjoy transfer large files between them, you will not see such speeds

 

[Krotow]

Not quite. Because most users only have 1 SSD in their PCs and also just 1 partition. When users copy a batch of movies/iso, it usually to backup onto network or USB drives.

Those who copy data without disconnecting the original drive, will feel it anyway.

 

[drajitsh]

Tom's Hardware should update its original review to point to this updated article. Crucial is banking on consumers finding the original reviews.

Also, in addition to the regular "Best..." and "Editor's Choice" articles, there should be one listing all the models that should be avoided, based on shady manufacturer changes and updated reviews.

@Admin As a regular reader I would urge the editors to consider the above suggestions.

 

[Krotow]

@Admin As a regular reader I would urge the editors to consider the above suggestions.

Agree. Would not hurt to have a list of known drive models with all properties interesting to us (name, capacity, interface, memory type, controller, significant features (DRAM buffer, faster NAND cache, encryption etc.), physical dimensions. And remarks about manufacturer made modifications for the same drive model. This will at least raise a flag for potential buyers about possibility to become scammed.

 

[El_Capitan]

Well, Crucial lost my business. I've been buying Crucial products since 2008, from memory kits to SSD's. My first Crucial SSD was the RealSSD C300. I will no longer buy ANY Crucial products, much like how I no longer buy any Kingston or ADATA products. Such a shame, too, because they DO make excellent products, but would much rather screw unwary customers just for money.