Question Which is the better M.2 SSD - - - Lexar NM790 NVMe 2TB or Kingston NV3 PCIe 4.0 NVMe 2TB ?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Daniel Youssef said:
Motherboard B550-F Asus Rog Strix

You mean games do not use that type of data or for sequential read/writes?

Also you mentioned that 580 is an Old tech? could you please tell me in which way?
Click to expand...
Sequential data....if you were a 10GB ISO file of a movie from one PCIe 4.0 drive to another PCIe 4.0 drive.
In normal, every day use (games), the files we see are much much smaller.

Running a CrystalDiskMark scan, the big number at the top is what is advertised.
But the smaller 4k numbers at the bottom are what really matter.

ex:
3 of the drives in my system.
Samsung 980 Pro, PCIe 4.0
Intel 660p, PCIe 3.0
Samsung 860 EVO, SATA III

The top line, outlined in blue, is what is advertised. "OMG! 10x FASTER!!"
The bottom line, outlined in red is where our actual daily ops happen. Incl and especially games.
ftEciHc.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daniel Youssef
USAFRet said:
Sequential data....if you were a 10GB ISO file of a movie from one PCIe 4.0 drive to another PCIe 4.0 drive.
In normal, every day use (games), the files we see are much much smaller.

Running a CrystalDiskMark scan, the big number at the top is what is advertised.
But the smaller 4k numbers at the bottom are what really matter.

ex:
3 of the drives in my system.
Samsung 980 Pro, PCIe 4.0
Intel 660p, PCIe 3.0
Samsung 860 EVO, SATA III

The top line, outlined in blue, is what is advertised. "OMG! 10x FASTER!!"
The bottom line, outlined in red is where our actual daily ops happen. Incl and especially games.
ftEciHc.png
Click to expand...
Wow that is actually surprising, basically your slowest part which is the SATA would just be x2 less performant than your 980 Pro, but if someone were to view both based on read/writes they'd actually say it's around as much as x10 (which is not what would be needed for games)

So to sum up basically the Sequential data is for huge file moves? like moving 100GB of games or something, right? this is the only operation that I may find noticeable difference ?


I was viewing a channel that has reviewed the SN580 and did a benchmark comparing it to other SSDS, surprisingly, in gaming and other benchmarks, it is one of the highest scored SSDs.
Would you happen to know more about the SN580 WD? Have you seen reviews or anyone have it? is it really good and should I just go for it?

Note: I noticed that you disliked companies that change parts without notifying customers about it, While I was searching, I found Linus doing a video for the exact same thing on the SN550 WD
 
Daniel Youssef said:
Wow that is actually surprising, basically your slowest part which is the SATA would just be x2 less performant than your 980 Pro, but if someone were to view both based on read/writes they'd actually say it's around as much as x10 (which is not what would be needed for games)
Click to expand...
Exactly!

SSDs main benefit is the near zero access rate. Which holds across ALL SSD types.

Daniel Youssef said:
So to sum up basically the Sequential data is for huge file moves? like moving 100GB of games or something, right? this is the only operation that I may find noticeable difference ?
Click to expand...
Correct.
 
USAFRet said:
Exactly!

SSDs main benefit is the near zero access rate. Which holds across ALL SSD types.


Correct.
Click to expand...
So sorry, one last thing I forgot to ask is, does the sequential read/writes also affect things in games like shaders? (Whenever loading or compiling game shaders at the beginning)

If I get better read/writes then it would be even better for shaders or ?
 
Daniel Youssef said:
So sorry, one last thing I forgot to ask is, does the sequential read/writes also affect things in games like shaders? (Whenever loading or compiling game shaders at the beginning)

If I get better read/writes then it would be even better for shaders or ?
Click to expand...
A "faster" drive is rarely a bad thing, if everything else is equal. Price, warranty, etc, etc.

But it is unlikely you'd see any real user facing difference.
 
Just something to keep in mind virtually every single manufacturer will swap out parts on cheaper SSDs. SK Hynix/Solidigm and Samsung are the only companies who use in house NAND and controllers which means they're less likely to be caught swapping components.

Lexar is not the company they used to be as they're a subsidiary of a Chinese memory company now. Their drives are very cheap, but I don't that know the current designs have been on the market long enough to really say whether or not they're a good buy.

Personally speaking I've only used SK Hynix, Solidigm, Samsung and Western Digital. Depending on regional costs the SN770 from WD is a great DRAMless drive. The Solidigm P41 Plus is a decent QLC drive if the price is cheap enough.
 
USAFRet said:
A "faster" drive is rarely a bad thing, if everything else is equal. Price, warranty, etc, etc.

But it is unlikely you'd see any real user facing difference.
Click to expand...
But in essence the sequential read/writes dont really affect shader loading as part of it ? It is how fast in benchmarks and other aspects of the storage itself?
thestryker said:
Just something to keep in mind virtually every single manufacturer will swap out parts on cheaper SSDs. SK Hynix/Solidigm and Samsung are the only companies who use in house NAND and controllers which means they're less likely to be caught swapping components.

Lexar is not the company they used to be as they're a subsidiary of a Chinese memory company now. Their drives are very cheap, but I don't that know the current designs have been on the market long enough to really say whether or not they're a good buy.

Personally speaking I've only used SK Hynix, Solidigm, Samsung and Western Digital. Depending on regional costs the SN770 from WD is a great DRAMless drive. The Solidigm P41 Plus is a decent QLC drive if the price is cheap enough.
Click to expand...
So Lexar is pretty much not the same and their controller parts may not be the best (since it is vague what they use). You mentioned WD SN770 but currently it is only available as 1TB here, the 2TB is not really available and based on prices it is close to 200$ in my region, what's you opinion on the SN580 ?
 
Daniel Youssef said:
So Lexar is pretty much not the same and their controller parts may not be the best (since it is vague what they use). You mentioned WD SN770 but currently it is only available as 1TB here, the 2TB is not really available and based on prices it is close to 200$ in my region, what's you opinion on the SN580 ?
Click to expand...
Looks like the SN580 is pretty similar to the SN770 mostly just slower sequential. WD also specifies that they're using their own TLC NAND which should mean it's a pretty safe buy in terms of getting the same device as reviewers did a year or more ago. I think it would be a good budget secondary SSD buy.

The XPG drive you mentioned doesn't have very clear specifications so I wouldn't be surprised if performance varied.
 
thestryker said:
Looks like the SN580 is pretty similar to the SN770 mostly just slower sequential. WD also specifies that they're using their own TLC NAND which should mean it's a pretty safe buy in terms of getting the same device as reviewers did a year or more ago. I think it would be a good budget secondary SSD buy.

The XPG drive you mentioned doesn't have very clear specifications so I wouldn't be surprised if performance varied.
Click to expand...
Im sorry for asking but all i know about QLC or TLC is that they store bits or voltage in different ways, why would that mean that it is more reliable ?
 
Daniel Youssef said:
Im sorry for asking but all i know about QLC or TLC is that they store bits or voltage in different ways, why would that mean that it is more reliable ?
Click to expand...
It's the number of bits per cell that's being referred to and QLC has lower overall write capacity while also being slower (there are ways to mitigate it, but relatively little of this is implemented at the consumer level).

The reason I noted WD citing their own TLC is that a lot of the more budget oriented drives don't really specify performance or say what their NAND is. This allows them to substitute whatever happens to be the best price after the first run of the drives. That's why you might hear stories of people getting varied performance out of the same drive. In the case of the SN580 they do specify the NAND and multiple performance metrics which means all of the drives should be the same.
 
thestryker said:
It's the number of bits per cell that's being referred to and QLC has lower overall write capacity while also being slower (there are ways to mitigate it, but relatively little of this is implemented at the consumer level).

The reason I noted WD citing their own TLC is that a lot of the more budget oriented drives don't really specify performance or say what their NAND is. This allows them to substitute whatever happens to be the best price after the first run of the drives. That's why you might hear stories of people getting varied performance out of the same drive. In the case of the SN580 they do specify the NAND and multiple performance metrics which means all of the drives should be the same.
Click to expand...
Does lower write capacity affect games and performance?
And So I shouldn't be worried by the SN580's slower sequential reads/writes like affecting shaders loading ...etc ?

Edit: I dont know how much I should rely on these benchmarks but doesnt this show NV3 as a better SSD?
Kingston NV3: https://ssd-tester.com/kingston_nv3_1tb.html
WD SN580: https://ssd-tester.com/western_digital_wd_blue_sn580_2tb.html
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: cAllen
USAFRet said:
Gen 3 or Gen 4.
Makes little or no real different in games.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YoRKQy-UO4

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DKLA7w9eeA

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ9LyNXpsOo
Click to expand...
I have been viewing these videos recently, and while I see no difference, the crucial P3 2TB is the same price or slightly higher (3 to 4$ higher) than the WD580 for example, and thus closer in price to Kingston NV3 ...etc

based off of these prices :
Crucial P3: 125$
WD580: 121$

Which do you think I should go for, I'm looking for a decent performance overall for games and just something that is reliable so that if anything goes wrong, and by going wrong I mean companies that swap controllers or chips for the worse, or famously known to do so.
 
Daniel Youssef said:
I have been viewing these videos recently, and while I see no difference, the crucial P3 2TB is the same price or slightly higher (3 to 4$ higher) than the WD580 for example, and thus closer in price to Kingston NV3 ...etc

based off of these prices :
Crucial P3: 125$
WD580: 121$

Which do you think I should go for, I'm looking for a decent performance overall for games and just something that is reliable so that if anything goes wrong, and by going wrong I mean companies that swap controllers or chips for the worse, or famously known to do so.
Click to expand...
Both of those are well seasoned, and not likely to be the victim of parts swapping.
 
USAFRet said:
You're getting deep into Analysis Paralysis.
There isn't a meaningful difference between the two.

Flip a coin, buy one or the other.
Click to expand...
You are right, I do sometimes tend to over think these types of things. But I'll have it logically then as WD is know to be reliable, efficient and not likely to switch the chips or controllers on this one and since the price is also the same as the crucial gen 3 then It seems reasonable to go for it.

Thank you so much for bearing with me and my so many and useless questions, I appreciate your assistance with everything
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom