When using our links to make a purchase, we may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. This does not affect how we rate products (see our Editorial Policy).
Faster storage will speed up most of your PC activities – all the way from booting up your OS to loading apps and game assets. But not all SSDs are created equal. If you have an NVMe-capable M.2 slot on your motherboard, then this is where to install your system drive.
Some of the fastest M.2 drives right now depending on interface are:
- PCI-Express 5.0 (Gen5): WD_Black SN8100
- PCI-Express 4.0 (Gen4): Samsung 990 PRO
For full compatibility with Gen5 SSDs, your system must be based on AMD’s AM5 platform (X670 and B650 motherboards or later), or Intel’s Arrow Lake Z890/B860 chipsets or later. Specific Z790 boards (Raptor Lake) also come with a Gen5 M.2 slot.
A Closer Look at the Best Gen5 & Gen4 M.2 SSDs
Some of the latest Gen5 SSDs come very close to maxing out the new interface, but these drives are fairly expensive and some require bulky cooling solutions. However, power efficiency is improving and there is far more competition in 2025 compared to last year.
Last update on 2025-06-17 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API
The biggest news in 2025 (so far) is not that Western Digital SSDs are now officially SanDisk again, but that any drive from any manufacturer can now almost compete with the old Intel Optane drives in real-world performance scenarios.
SanDisk’s WD_Black SN8100 is currently well ahead of the M.2 competition in the popular 3DMark Storage Benchmark and other tests based on real-world workloads. Even the similarly new 9100 PRO from main competitor Samsung is clearly beaten.
If you are still on Gen4, on the other hand, the Samsung 990 PRO remains the fastest Gen4 SSD we’ve tested – although there are usually better bargains in the Gen4 space.
Best SSDs Sorted by Gaming Performance
The aim here is to rank SSDs based on their performance where it matters. In our case, that would be gaming, which happens to correlate with many normal user workloads. Our benchmark of choice remains UL’s 3DMark Storage Benchmark.
This popular benchmark consists of a range of gaming-related workloads that also apply to other usage scenarios. Scores are based on the average bandwidth from a variety of tasks, including loading, installing, saving, moving, and recording specific games.
1. The 2025 Speed King: WD_Black SN8100
In the past couple of years, nearly all PCIe 5.0-capable M.2 SSDs have been built using the same Phison E26 controller and different types of NAND memory chips from Micron.
The WD_Black SN8100 instead uses a custom Silicon Motion SM2508 eight-channel controller along with SanDisk/Kioxia BiCS8 TLC 3D CBA NAND. These 218-layer chips run at a very fast 3,600 MT/s, contributing to the drive’s strong performance.
Another major advantage over its Phison E26-based competitors is that the SN8100 is far more power-efficient, meaning that you don’t need an oversized heatsink.
Shopping links (2TB): Amazon, Newegg
2. Samsung 9100 PRO
Much like WD/SanDisk, Samsung was not in a hurry to enter the high-end Gen5 space. It was worth the wait, however, as the Samsung 9100 PRO is both slightly faster and more efficient than the E26 competition.
The 9100 PRO uses Samsung’s in-house controller and NAND combo to reach a sequential throughput of up to 14,800 MB/s, and random performance of up to 2.6M IOPS.
This is enough to give the drive a small lead over the E26 competitors in key benchmarks, but the best part is that it uses less power in doing so. In other words: no massive heatsink is required.
Shopping links (2TB): Amazon, Newegg
3. Crucial T705 (and Similar Competitors)
Crucial’s previous speed king, the T700, was dethroned by its T705 successor, as well as the similar Sabrent Rocket 5 and MSI Spatium M580. Like the vast majority of early Gen5 SSDs, these drives also use Phison’s E26 controller, but stand out by using the latest and fastest NAND memory chips from Micron.
As a result, they almost max out the PCIe 5.0 interface bandwidth with sequential transfer rates as high as 14,500 MB/s. That said, you are unlikely to notice the difference compared to some earlier E26-based revisions like the T700, Teamgroup T-Force Z540, and Corsair MP700 Pro, which all reach as high as 12,400 MB/s.
A downside of these early Gen5 SSDs that you will want to keep in mind is that they require efficient cooling to avoid thermal throttling. If you don’t have a decent heat spreader on your motherboard, you should opt for a model with a heatsink.
Shopping links (2TB): Amazon, Newegg
4. Seagate FireCuda 540 (and Other, Earlier E26-based SSDs)
The Seagate FireCuda 540 is another recent addition to the Gen5 space and it uses the same E26 controller as all of its current competitors. It is also equipped with the same 232-layer TLC NAND as all but the Crucial T700, meaning that it runs at 1,600 MT/s.
This translates to 10,000 MB/s sequential read/write speeds for the 2 TB model, while the 1 TB capacity is a bit slower at 9,500 MB/s (read) and 8,500 MB/s (write).
What sets the FireCuda 540 apart from the competition is the Seagate firmware and, perhaps more importantly, a significantly higher endurance rating. The 2 TB model is backed by a 2,000 TBW (terabytes written) rating and half of that for the 1 TB FireCuda 540.
Shopping links: Amazon, Newegg
Other Phison E26-based Gen5 SSDs with the same NAND and nearly identical performance include:
- Aorus Gen5 10000
- SSTC Tiger Shark
- Inland TD510 (Micro Center)
- Corsair MP700
- Adata Legend 970
5. TeamGroup T-Force GE PRO
You may have noted that there is very little difference between the leading Gen5 SSDs, as practically all of them use the same Phison E26 controller.
TeamGroup’s T-Force GE PRO, launched in mid-2024, brings something completely new to the table in the form of an Innogrit IG5666 controller and 232-layer NAND from YMTC (Yangtze Memory Technologies).
Its sequential performance is near the top of the charts at 14,000 MB/s (read) and 11,800 MB/s (write) for the 2 TB and 4 TB models. However, it still lags behind its E26 competitors somewhat in gaming and productivity benchmarks.
6. Samsung 990 PRO (Best Gen4 SSD)
Samsung was an undisputed leader in the SSD space for years, but more recently, the Korean electronics giant has often been unable to stay ahead of the competition. The 990 PRO is a return to form, with Samsung now retaking the lead in many key benchmarks that reflect real-world use.
This is perhaps not readily apparent when just looking at the sequential transfer rates, where the Samsung 990 PRO, much like the competition, basically maxes out the PCIe Gen4 bandwidth. It does excel in the random performance area, however, at up to 1.4M/1.55M IOPS read/write.
The drive uses Samsung’s proprietary Pascal controller, 176-layer NAND, and an LPDDR4 DRAM cache, which taken together have stood the test of time and still offer excellent performance in mid-2024.
Shopping links (1TB): Amazon, Newegg
7. Corsair MP700 Elite
Based on the Phison E31T controller, the Corsair MP700 Elite is a DRAM-less Gen5 SSD that offers sequential transfer rates of up to 10,000 MB/s (read) and 8,500 MB/s (write). Random performance is similarly high at up to 1.3M/1.4M IOPS, and enough to make it perhaps the fastest DRAM-less SSD to date.
It is roughly on equal footing with the Samsung 990 PRO in the 3DMark SSD gaming test, which is very impressive for a drive with no on-board DRAM buffer. Most likely, the MP700 Elite is the first of many SSDs to use the E31T chip, as it has the added advantage of not generating as much heat as E26. In other words, there is no need for bulky cooling solutions.
8. Crucial T500
A somewhat surprising addition to the list of top performers is the Phison E25-based is the new (as of November 2023) Crucial T500. What makes it an unlikely leader is that the E25 controller only has four NAND channels, compared to the eight more commonly found in high-end SSDs.
The magic ingredient appears to be its 232-layer NAND from Micron, which can propel this drive to the top of several benchmark charts versus other Gen4 drives. We have recently observed the same trend even in DRAM-less SSDs like the impressive Teamgroup MP44, but the Crucial T500 does employ an LPDDR4 DRAM buffer that gives it an edge in many workloads.
Shopping links (2TB): Amazon, Newegg
9. SK Hynix Platinum P41
SK Hynix is the world’s second-largest memory chip manufacturer (after Samsung). It is however only recently that the company has started to sell consumer products under its own brand name. This should not be taken lightly by the competition, as the Platinum P41 is one of the best M.2 SSDs to date.
Released in May 2022, the SK Hynix Platinum P41 is an entirely in-house design based on the manufacturer’s own 176-layer TLC NAND chips and uses a proprietary controller dubbed Aries. It also includes an SK Hynix LPDDR4 DRAM cache. Sequential performance is up to 7,000/6,500 MB/s (read/write) and random performance is up to 1.4M/1.3M IOPS. More importantly, it performs exceptionally well in real-world-oriented benchmarks such as 3DMark and PCM10.
The only downside is that the Platinum P41 so far has been limited availability, as it’s still hard to find in the US and Europe.
Shopping links (1TB): Amazon, Newegg
10. Western Digital WD Black SN850X
Launched in 2020, the original WD Black SN850 was and still is one of the fastest M.2 SSDs on the consumer market. Two years later, the drive was updated with higher-density 112-layer BiCS 5 NAND memory chips. Improvements are mainly seen in random read/write performance, which has gone from 1M/720K IOPS to 1.2M/1.1M IOPS in the 2 TB capacity.
This appears to be more than enough to propel the SN850X to the top of the charts in real-world benchmarks such as PC Mark 10 and 3DMark’s SSD gaming test. As is the case with most of the leading SSDs, the 2TB and 4TB capacities are the strongest in the lineup due to the advantages of parallelism. For more details on how it compares to the Samsung 990 Pro, visit this page.
Shopping links (1TB): Amazon, Newegg
What is NVMe and why do I need it?
The performance of any storage device boils down to how quickly it lets you move data from storage (non-volatile, slower) to DRAM (volatile, faster).
The NVMe protocol – short for non-volatile memory express – was created to make the most out of solid state drives in combination with the PCI-Express (PCIe) interface. It replaces AHCI (paired with SATA), which was originally designed for mechanical hard drives. The newer protocol includes many efficiency improvements to deal with parallel transfers and the low-latency nature of SSDs.
High-end NVMe SSDs are also slowly but steadily becoming even faster in gaming PCs thanks to GPU acceleration via Microsoft’s DirectStorage API. AMD and Nvidia are implementing this technology under the names Smart Access Storage and RTX IO, respectively. A couple of AAA titles that use DirectStorage technology include Square’s Forspoken and Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart.
Which is the Best M.2 SSD for Gaming?
The difference between an SSD and a hard drive regarding user experience is very noticeable. To date, the effect of shifting from one type of SSD to another is not necessarily apparent, but it depends on the game. In addition to the previously mentioned 3D Mark Storage Benchmark results, here is some of my data from the standalone Final Fantasy XIV: Shadowbringer benchmark:
In this benchmark, multiple scenes/levels are loaded, and the above are the total loading times for these levels. While the difference between budget and high-end SSDs is noticeable, it is crowded at the top. Any SSD will be much faster than any hard drive in games – even if it’s an external SSD in an enclosure.
Although it is now a bit dated, this comparison by HardwareUnboxed is also quite illuminating:
Until recently it was safe to assume that a comparison of individual high-end M.2 PCIe SSDs would result in small differences in terms of gaming performance. The gap has however grown wider between Gen3 and high-end Gen4 or Gen5. Microsoft’s DirectStorage may widen it further as the API makes its way into more new releases.
Will it Work on my Laptop/Desktop PC?
PCIe Interface Version
| Interface | Transfer Rate per Lane | Throughput x1 | Throughput x4 (M.2 SSD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCI Express 3.0 | 8 GT/s | 0.985 GB/s | 3.934 GB/s |
| PCI Express 4.0 | 16 GT/s | 1.969 GB/s | 7.877 GB/s |
| PCI Express 5.0 | 32 GT/s | 3.938 GB/s | 15.754 GB/s |
Each PCIe interface version doubles the bandwidth over the previous generation. This doesn’t equate to twice the performance, but even though newer versions are backward-compatible, there is no use in paying more if your system can’t use the extra bandwidth.
To make full use of a Gen5 SSDs, AMD’s AM5 platform (X670 and B650 motherboards or later) is a minimum. Intel platforms supports Gen5 SSDs starting with Arrow Lake Z890/B860 chipsets or later. There are also some high-end Raptor Lake Z790 boards with a compatible slot.
Keying and Sizes
M.2 SSDs (and other M.2 cards) come in different sizes and some motherboards – particularly in laptops – will only hold a drive up to a certain size. They also have different sets of notches (keying) that will prevent you from installing it the wrong way.
M.2 Keying and Size
Three different key types or ‘notch styles’ may be used by M.2 SSDs: B, M, or B&M. The socket can be either B or M, but not both.
High-end SSDs and recent motherboards use an M-key slot, as this is the only type that provides four lanes of bandwidth, or 20 Gbit/s, also known as PCIe x4. B-key supports ‘only’ PCIe x2 or 10 Gbit/s.
On many motherboards, the connector itself or the PCB next to it will be labeled with the keying. Otherwise, check the specs or the manual. Likewise, M.2 card length might be stamped on the board, looking something like this:
High-capacity drives have additional memory chips mounted on the card and may require more space in some cases. The M.2 standard allows for cards of five different lengths, with the number format meaning width-length in millimeters. All sizes are the same width, so the two most common, 2280 and 2242, are 80mm and 42mm long, respectively (and so on). All sizes and usage examples:
- 2230 – SSD in Steam Deck, and other compact devices. Also WiFi adapters.
- 2242 – Some ultrabook-type laptop SSDs and (more rarely) WiFi cards
- 2260 – Small form-factor laptop SSDs (very rare)
- 2280 – Most common form factor for NVMe SSDs in desktop PCs/laptops
- 22110 – Mainly enterprise SSDs
Most PCs including laptops can accommodate the common 2280 size (the format used by all of the drives listed above). 22110 drives will fit on many desktop motherboards but are extremely rare in the consumer market. The 2230 and 2242 form factors are more often used for WiFi cards than for SSDs. However, 2230 drives like the Corsair MP600 Mini have seen an upswing in popularity as it’s the format used by the Steam Deck.
Also, don’t confuse M.2 and mSATA, which is another, older standard. These slots may look similar on the motherboard, but they’re not compatible. M.2 SSDs may also use the SATA interface, but that doesn’t mean it’s an mSATA drive.
It is a bit confusing, but fortunately, M.2 2280 is the most common standard by far, so it’s harder than it looks to get it wrong.
Checklist Before Buying an M.2 SSD
- Check the drive’s interface and M.2 keying, e.g. B+M-key/M-key (all PCIe x4 SSDs are M-key).
- Make sure it matches the slot on your motherboard or in your laptop. You can usually find this information on the specs page.
- Also, ensure that the length of the drive is supported, e.g. 2280 or 2242 (numbers in bold are millimeters).
To sum things up about keying and interfaces: it might sound complicated, but isn’t. If you are building a PC based on modern standard components, it will practically always have at least one M-key slot for a 2280 M.2 SSD. And if so, most of the popular M-key or B+M-key drives will work. But there may be rare exceptions, so it’s best to double-check.
Choosing the Right Capacity
You can hardly ever have too much storage space, but all of it doesn’t have to be super fast. There is no reason to use an expensive, high-end SSD to store family photos or your Steam library backups.
Most importantly, you want to boot from your fastest drive. That means it must be able to store the OS and all of its associated files (such as caches and swap). And it’s not that much:
- Windows 11: 64 GB minimum requirement
- Windows 10 (64-bit): 20GB
- MacOs Catalina: 12.5GB
- Ubuntu 20.04: 25GB
- Manjaro 18/19: 30GB
- Linux Mint 20: 20GB
- Elementary OS 5 (Debian/Ubuntu): 15GB
- Fedora 30 Workstation: 10GB
- OpenSuse Tumbleweed: 40GB
Those numbers may or may not be a minimum requirement, but also add – at the very least – the amount of RAM in your system to be on the safe side (to make room for the swap file). Office apps are usually not that demanding either, with MS Office taking up about 4 GB of space on your SSD. Games tend to use a lot more but can range in size from a few hundred megabytes to well over 100 gigabytes, i.e. a lot more demanding in terms of storage space.
If you just want a really fast computer for work (and who doesn’t?), you can probably get by with as little as 128 GB and use mechanical hard drives for general storage. However, when looking at the price/performance ratio (performance is usually improved in larger capacities), 1–2 TB is a reasonable price point with few compromises.
MLC Vs. TLC Vs. QLC NAND
In any SSD context, you will inevitably run into the MLC, TLC, and QLC abbreviations. What these signify is the number of bits that can be written to each cell in NAND (Not-AND) memory chips. In the early days, just one bit could be written to each cell, hence the name single-level cell, or SLC. Solid state drives using SLC memory were (and now only in very rare cases, are) extremely durable but also prohibitively expensive.
Consumer SSDs became common once density increased to two bits per cell, also known as multi-level cell or MLC. Most high-end drives today use the even denser triple-level cell, or TLC, memory type, whereas some budget SSDs use quad-level cell or QLC NAND.
The downsides to increased densities are – all other things being equal – worse performance and durability. Adding additional bits per cell adds to the complexity and cells will be worn down in fewer write/erase cycles.
Nevertheless, today’s TLC-based drives are far faster than older MLC drives thanks to some highly innovative use of buffering and caching technology, whereby data is first written in SLC mode and then to the slower TLC memory. The durability problems have also mostly been solved using, among other things, spare capacity (overprovisioning) to spread out the wear over time. On the whole, today’s TLC-based SSDs are not only much faster but also durable enough to outlast most other PC parts for the average user.
I’m glad to see more Gen 5 models making an appearance, they’re definitely the future of SSD technology. Can’t wait to upgrade my old Gen 3 drive with one of these beasts!
Yup, I’m also looking forward to more affordable options in the Gen5 space. Should be more of those arriving throughout 2024.
What’s the best drive to use for an external SSD to edit from
max speed would be thunderbolt 4 – so 3.8GB/s 3.1GB/s best case.
price v performance
Hi G. Even if it’s for a fast TB enclosure I would pick an affordable DRAM-less drive. There are many that will easily max out the interface. The Teamgroup MP44 is one (https://www.gamingpcbuilder.com/teamgroup-mp44-2tb-review/) or WD Black SN770 (https://www.gamingpcbuilder.com/wd-black-sn770-2tb-review/). If you won’t use it for intensive (high P/E cycle) workloads, an even cheaper QLC-based drive like the Crucial P3 Plus may offer great price/performance.
Samsung 980 and 990 Pro models are widely reported to have bad lifetime in the real world – they have a new firmware version out that ALLEGEDLY fixed the issue, but it appears to only be updateable if you run Windows and the latest version of Magician – which makes these drives BAD choices under LINUX.
WD SN850x drives also have issues with Linux, related to power cycling issues, that do NOT appear to have been fixed.
I am after recommendations for a 1000+ TBW M.2 SSD with at least 5k read and 3k write. i dont mind the storage size as its just for the OS
I was thinking of team group T-Force A440 as it has very high TBW.
Fastest is this now = https://www.crucial.com/products/ssd/crucial-t700-ssd
Thanks for the comment, Aman! Yes, it should definitely take the lead if it becomes available before the upcoming 2400 MT/s NAND models.
This one apparently uses 2000 MT/s chips as opposed to the current Gen5 drives’ 1600 MT/s.
Hey, your review is incomplete as you didn’t include the TeamGroup MP34. I have been running my Dell T3610 with the Teamgroup MP34 for > 3 years now and running CrystalDiskMark 7 says it delivers 3289 Mbps read speed and 2980 Mbps write speed with 65% of the 1 TB used. It was 3358 Mbps read speed and 2950 Mbps write speed in Dec. of 2019 when it was new and only 15% was used. With > 3 years of moderate use and still going flawlessly the TeamGroup MP34 should not be overlooked.
Not including the very popular TeamGroup MP34 is a glaring error.
Hi,
This review is incomplete! The magician software is necessary for performance optimization on each system (I’ve been using Samsung SSD’s since 840 Evos, built dozens of systems with them). Nowhere in this article does it mention the magician software; it may be because they couldn’t have the 990 pro listed as #1 if they had. The magician software has not worked correctly, thus the drives do not run optimized, since 980 pro. I currently have 2 systems: a Dell Precision 7560 with a 980 pro and an MSI B560M PRO-VDH ProSeries system I built yesterday with a 990 pro. Magician’s functions do not work on either; according to crystal disk mark both drives are significantly underperforming in reads and writes.
You are better off purchasing a drive that does not rely on optimization software to run correctly; from now on I will only go with drives like Western Digital WD Black SN850X which are significantly less expensive and more reliable.
Hello, i just want to thank
you because after all this years.. this is still a very helpful and well written article..
I want to ask for your opinion. I have a 2021 asus tuf gaming laptop with pcie 3.0 slot.. should i go with the 970 evo plus or the aorus gen 4 ssd. Weirdly enough, these are priced the same in my country, while the rest of ssd’s in the list are expensive by atleas 10 to 20 dollars
Is there a disk available in the Pcie x4 2242 form factor?
Hi, do you mean Gen3 x4 (four PCIe lanes) or PCIe 4.0 (Gen4)? If it’s Gen3 x4 there are a few, including the Sabrent Rocket 2242 and Samsung PM991. Also some Kioxia and SK Hynix OEM products I believe. There are no 2242-size Gen4 drives that I know of.
Thank you for your reviews. Please start including temperature testing results in your reviews. I am looking at upgrading my current gaming laptop’s PCIe NVMe drive but want to get one that runs cooler.
Thanks for your comment, PLK. This is definitely a good point and worth keeping an eye on, especially as temperature-challenged PCIe 4 (and eventually PCIe 5) drives make their way into laptops.
For what its worth if you are eyeballing the Kingston KC3000, get it from Kingston’s website. Its $70 cheaper then on Amazon. Not sure if you guy get a cut of the links. If so sorry. But I was stunned at the price difference.
Awesome article! I agree with the list and i learned some new stuff. I would add T-Force Cardea A440 Pro (PhisonE18/176L) to 4th place and Acer Predator GM7000 to 10th place right above Aorus7000s. Also i can’t wait for Rocket 4 Plus 8TB! Cheers.
Jasper, People keep telling you that your speeds are wrong and you keep pointing out size differences. And, the downside is it’s so much more than that. Your data is inaccurate and not sourced properly.
Your Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus Data is epically off. Yes, the 4TB is 7100 and 6600 which is not the same as the 1TB but the 1TB isn’t anywhere close to what you listed either.
It’s 7000 and 5300.
Own your mistakes instead of trying to come up with excuses. You did not do your homework thoroughly enough to write this article. It’s called due diligence.
Hi Christoper,
On the contrary, I’m happy to have errors pointed out and will correct them ASAP.
As you mention, this is not the first time that the Rocket 4 is mentioned. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe this is perhaps due to both the Rocket 4 Plus and Rocket 4 (non-Plus E16-based) being mentioned in the article, whereas only the slower non-Plus model has its specs listed? This is indeed a bit confusing and I should edit to clarify.
Umm Sabrent Rocket G plus??
Thank you for giving some information about NVMe, M.2, and SATA. This article is very helpful for selecting the Fastest drives.
Hello, my name is DON. I have been acquiring internal parts for my build since 2019. That’s when I got my large full ATX case. Thermaltake Core X71 Tempered Glass case. It can hold everything I need for my build. I have three CPU’s to choose from all AMD and all Ryzen they are 7-5800x, 9-3900x, 9-5950x My motherboard Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master 1.2, DEEP COOL Assassin III CPU Cooler, Two PSU’s-1200w PSU and 1600W, Two GPU’s- XFX RX 6700x , AMD RX 6700x. With that being said I had planed on using the one PSU dedicated for the GPU, and the other for the motherboard and everything else. That way it wont be taking power away from it or them, the GPU’s or anything plugged into/onto the motherboard. I had planed on getting “DELTA” fans for the case and Switching out the cooler fans for the DELTA FANS since they can run at a higher RPM for more air flow to keep it cool. I’m trying to get unbuffered ddr4 udimm ecc memory but have been having a hard time locating the correct kind and amount. 32GB a stick @ 3200 GHZ for a total of 128GB or 16GB a stick for a total of 64GB for all four motherboard slots. That along with the M.2’s, three of them. I’m also going to be putting in 2.5 sata SSDs. Yes this will be a very large build. It will be something like a “SERVER” but not used as one. Now onto the question. What do you think of it so far? Do you have any suggestions on anything? ANY CHANGES? Better or Bigger case? How much TB for the M.2’s? How many 2.5’s and how much TB for them? I know this is a lot to take in and I never stop learning, even at my age! LOL!! Thank you in advance for your help and suggestions.
Sincerely Don
What is the most endurance (TBW) NVME?
You forgot about ADATA S70 NVME?
OR
You skipped it?
Hi Mahesh,
Yes, I did miss that one. Will add it. Thanks for pointing it out!
The Optane info needs to be updated. Optane Memory H10 is available with 512 GB and 1 TB capacities, curiously with PCIe 3.0 interface. Maybe time to comparo test them?
Perhaps a little advice before doing a speed test on the Gammix S70 m.2 It would be advised to update the firmware before actually using it. I have not done the firmware update and have achieved speeds of R/W 7425/5844 running on MSI X570 Tomahawk wifi
Good luck.
I quite curious about m.2 slot which has gen4 and gen3 in x570 mobo. If i use 1TB gen4 card into m.2 gen4 slot and 500gb m.2 gen4 into m.2 gen3 slot, can both m.2 of gen4 card run together smoothly??
Or it is still need same size of memory with different type of gen. Or you can have different type of memory with different type of gen?
They will work together smoothly, capacity and memory type is not an issue as it might be with RAM. However, a Gen4 SSD in a Gen3 slot will be capped at Gen3 speeds.
20GB for Windows? My folder C:\Windows is 70BG FeelsBadMan
Refreshing an article such as this — over a year — can result in errors. You’re actually missing the truly fastest Gen 4 SSD, possibly due to their confusing nomenclature: Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus 2TB.
Via Tweaktown: “Boasting sequential speeds in excess of 7,100 MB/s read and 6,600 MB/s write, the Rocket 4 Plus is capable of the highest throughput we’ve seen to date from any retail SSD…the first of its kind retail Phison E18 powered SSD.”
Your article only covers the “Sabrent 1TB Rocket NVMe 4.0 Gen4″…which is considerably slower. It uses the Phison PS5016-E16 controller.
Thanks for your comment. You are absolutely right, I edited this page right before the Rocket 4 Plus was launched. Based on the reviews available so far, I’d be hesitant to call it the fastest of its kind, but there is no doubt it’s among the best. I have an SN850 here and I’m hoping to pit a Rocket 4 Plus against it soon!
If WD BLACK IS FASTER THEN SAY SO…. DONT SAY THE SAMSUNG IS KING… IF IT IS NOT.
You have the PNY XLR8 CS3030 listed as having a total terabytes written endurance of 1650 TBW. Is this a typo, or is this particular drive special in some way? The others in the same category are only around 600 TBW. TBW is actually one of the most important stats for my decision making. If the listed rating is true, this is the clear winner for the money in my book.
Yes, it’s an odd but correct number:
https://www.pny.com/file%20library/company/support/product%20brochures/solid%20state%20drives/xlr8-ssd-cs3030-sell-sheet.pdf
And I definitely agree that it’s important. Most high-end drives will likely last much longer than their specified TBW indicates, but a high number is always reassuring (and could say something about spare capacity/overprovisioning, which is hardly ever made clear in the specs).
Thank you for responding. I think you are absolutely right, the “spare capacity/overprovisioning” would perfectly account for the higher TBW despite the lower generation, as simply a space allocation decision on their part. It would also account for the odd 1650 number, at odds with the factors of the other TBW numbers. I expect as a result however, this SSD actually has slightly less usable memory than the others. It is however a tradeoff I am happy to have. My existing boot drive SSD has already had a couple of errors after only three years, including one that crashed the system. My upcoming new system needs a boot drive that can operate reliably for six years.
It seems the spec sheet you linked has much lower TBW, can you check again?
1Tb = 360
2Tb = 660
you stated 1650 for 1Tb and the doubled down. This is a make or break item for my use case. Please help clarify. PNY CS3030
Hi Willem,
This is interesting. You are clearly right about the numbers, meaning that PNY must have revised the specs and significantly lowered TBW across the board.
Previously, the same spec sheet definitely said 1,665 TBW for the 1TB capacity (see e.g. here: https://www.guru3d.com/news-story/pny-releases-xlr8-cs3030-nvme-ssd-with-proper-tbw-values-and-perf.html). I haven’t seen any press release from PNY that clarifies these changes.
In any event, I will update the article to reflect the change. Thanks for mentioning this issue.
Adata xpg S70
Yes! Looking forward to seeing how that one performs in the real world. Will add it once it’s available.
Very comprehensive and direct to the point. Well written article. Good job Jesper and thanks for this.
Many thanks Dennis!
MB/s Mega BYTES per sec
Mb/s Mega bits per sec
Mega meaning 1,000,000 or an even 1 million
I see this expressed incorrectly a lot, the disk manufacturers do it constantly to try and make their drives seem faster.
Since a pcie 3.0 lane max’s out at approximately 2Mbits/sec (pre-encoded using the 128b/130b standard) there is no way an NVME device can read 7000 or write 5000 Mega Bytes per second. The theoretical maximum transfer rate is actually about 985 mega bytes per second per lane or for a x4 (by 4) link 3940 mega BYTES per second. Not bad, and way way better than a mechanical HDD. In a quick test on 2 i9-9900k systems i got around 2800 Mega Bytes/sec throughput
Pcie 4.0 is faster, about double that of pcie 3.0, or 16 Gbits/sec for a by 4 link which boils down to approx 8,000 Mega Bytes per second (theoretically)
In real world scenarios, even with pcie 4.0 I would expect half the theoretical, perhaps maybe a little better. There are just so many other bottlenecks that slow things down.
Another thing is the queue, I would not expect any normal desktop user to have a workload that makes use of a queue depth of more than 2 or 3 in the worst of cases so the 60,000 depth for desktops is mostly a wash
Thanks for the interesting comment. The 7,000/5,000 MB/s reads/write are only claimed in the PCIe 4.0 space though. Of course, and as you mention, these are theoretical sequential figures seen in e.g. ATTO.
I think you may even be underestimating the difference between theoretical performance vs real-world scenarios for the average desktop user. I’ve seen a lot of comparisons of loading times (and made some myself). A high-end SSD will certainly improve things a bit on average over an entry-level model, but you get diminishing returns compared to the vast difference when compared to a mechanical drive.
It will be interesting to see how much of an effect technologies like Microsoft’s DirectStorage will have on removing the bottlenecks and make the performance figures somewhat (or hopefully a lot) less theoretical.
Thank you for this. I’m so tired of seeing lists based on advertised read and write speeds.
Sorry but 970 Evo Plus has 1200tbw and not 600tbw.
Hi Leonardo. The 2TB capacity is 1,200 TBW but the above mainly compares 1TB capacities, and the 1TB EVO Plus is 600 TBW. Did I get this mixed up somewhere?
Keep in mind once PC games (and hardware) start supporting DirectStorage, a good NVMe drive will become a larger asset. I suspect games developed for the next-gen consoles will see optional support for DS on PC. Obviously the impact will vary based on how aggressively developers use it, your game settings (textures and so forth that would exceed available RAM), and how much memory you have to play with in the first place.
Consoles will still benefit the most, obviously. They have a comparatively small amount of total available RAM, and they have fixed specs, so developers can really fine tune streaming algorithms. They’ll have to be more conservative on PC, and it will be optional, so the impact won’t be as large for many (most?) configs.
Even so, I’m glad to see them bring DirectStorage to PC, it’s about time we actually taxed these high-falutin’ NVMe drives in-game.
sorry for the duplicate comment. I noticed I said I was connecting via USB 3. it actually is USB-C. full corrected comment is below. thanks again!
—–
hello, Jesper!! great article with great info!
I’m an audio professional and some of my DAW sound/sample libraries require that I install them on SSD drives. to keep from taking up space on my boot drive, I’m looking to move them to external storage and the NVMe SSD seems to be the smartest route.
I’ll be connecting via USB-C to a 2018 Mac Mini and putting the SSD in a USB-C enclosure. I’m currently looking at the Samsung 970 PRO or EVO (512GB), but can you recommend a drive and enclosure combo (for external storage, not booting) where I can get max read speeds and reliability at a reasonable price? thanks in advance!!!
Hi Garfield, and many thanks!
Although you could theoretically connect an external Thunderbolt drive to your 2018 Mac Mini, I would personally not spend money on anything that fast, and certainly no 970 PRO/EVO (which I would only use as an internal drive) + enclosure.
I don’t know about your exact working environment of course, but I am currently using Logic (audio recording + samples) on a 2012 MacBook Pro (SATA SSD) with no lag whatsoever.
It’s unlikely that you would have an issue with any external SSD on the market. My tip would be to simply maximize the amount of GB/$
I appreciate the info, suggestions and response!!
I used to run Logic Pro X from a 2012 MBP as well with a Samsung SSD and it was a great solution!! the 2018 Mini has DEF been an upgrade, and the Logic Pro, Studio One and Native Instruments samples are currently on an external 7200rpm and running with no problems.
however, my instruments from UAD LUNA are suggested to run on SSD (from UAD) and I use several sample-based Acustica Audio plugins that sound great, but are VERY heavy on the computer both in CPU load and space required. my thought was that the fastest possible SSD drive solution would be the smart bet. also, since the Samsungs are top notch in terms of quality, and I’ve installed them in both of the 2012 MBP in our home with great results, I just assumed I’d stay in the Samsung family… so in that scenario, you still say the Samsung EVO would be the least efficient option (because of cost)? thanks again!
Thanks for the clarification, though I’m not familiar with those plugins, so I won’t pretend that your situation is perfectly clear to me 🙂
I still get the impression that storage bandwidth might be a lesser issue, but if you are intent on taking this route then I agree that a 970 EVO/EVO Plus would be one of the best-performing options.
Is it usually possible to move the M.2 plastic post on motherboards, to accommodate the various lengths? I’ve never encountered this before and while it looks possible (mine is a pale blue plastic post), I’m reluctant to break it, if they’re normally immovable
You are absolutely right, good point! On many motherboards, the post is a metal screw that can simply be moved to another position. The issue rarely comes up though since the vast majority of consumer M.2 drives use the 2280 form factor. Maybe this will change once really large capacities are more common.
Crucial P5 500Gb & 1TB 2280
jb, excellent work- info is spot on.
please update with the additional NVME’s ..
ive been performing similar ATTO and Crystal Disk tests. the only mfg that actually understates the r/w speed is crucial. please verify the P5 NVME 500 & 1TB 2280’s ..let me know your thoughts and if i can assist.
sped
I have to say you are the first tech writer who’s back doesn’t go up and get all snotty and defensive when someone has a dissenting opinion. You handle yourself with intelligence and diplomacy. Kudos to you and thank you for your informative articles.
Many thanks for reading, and for taking the time to leave a kind comment!
Agreed!
Has anyone done a good performance shootout ranking PCIe 4.0 SSDs? Preferably the 2tB models?
I have the Gigabyte AORUS 2tB and I’d like to know how it stacks up against the others. I bought it because the specs looked so good, and I am VERY impressed with its performance. Windows 10 boots up lightning fast, and games are super speedy too.
Yes, there are several. Here’s one comparison:
https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/storage/pcie_4_0_nvme_ssd_roundup/6
All of the current Gen4 drives use the same controller/NAND though, so the difference between them is basically negligible.
Thanks , very helpful article
what about Toshiba like :Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04 2TB Internal M.2 2280 NVMe Solid State Drive (SSD)
This wasn’t included in comparison, my Dell XPS came originally equipped with same Toshiba but 1TB, I am trying to upgrade to 2TB, I was thinking between Samsung 970 EVO Plus 2TB , Sabrent Sabrent 2TB Rocket NVMe PCIe M.2 2280 Internal SSD High Performance Solid State Drive (SB-ROCKET-2TB)and Toshiba XG5-P KXG50PNV2T04 2TB, what would you advise ?
Thanks , appreciated
Thanks, Walid!
Your current Toshiba XG5-P is a high-end OEM SSD, so it’s probably safe to say that you won’t experience any real-world difference outside of synthetic benchmarks with either the Samsung or the Sabrent (or a 2TB XG5-P).
The Samsung EVO Plus is a great drive that performs well in almost every area, but personally I would have opted for one of the others at this time due to the large price difference and small real-world performance difference.
Here’s a review that compares the Sabrent with the Samsung in the 2TB capacities: https://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/9434/sabrent-rocket-nvme-2tb-ssd/index.html (I haven’t seen any review of the XG5-P yet).
You are just quoting advertised speeds and that is completely misleading. I can tell you, Samsung drives don’t perform anywhere near the advertised speeds. I have tested 21 drives. The random speeds are particularly poor. Overpriced trash. I expect all other drives will experience similar speed differences. What really matters is real world performance, and I’ve yet to see a NVMe drive that performs anywhere near the marketed speeds.
Thanks for taking the time to comment. I agree that max. sequential speeds don’t paint the whole picture but they still tend to be quite accurate when tested with e.g. ATTO. As for the Samsung drives, I’ve also tested most of them since the 830 and they have usually been among the best in most areas (except when compared to the Intel Optane drives in terms of latency/random data).
Thanks
This article was really helpful. I want to buy an M.2 SSD for my Acer TravelMate P449-G2-M-50S9 (Part Number NX.VFUAL.001) but I wanted to know which ones were compatible with my device. Is any M.2 PCIe 2280 going to work with my laptop? I was trying to buy some models which didn’t appear in userbenchmark so I’m not completly sure if they’ll work or not.
For example I was wondering if some of these are compatible with my laptop:
Kingston SA2000M8/250G 250GB
XPG SX6000 PCIE GEN3X2 M.2 2280
SSD 256GB SEAGATE M.2 2280 BARRACUDA 510
ADATA SWORDFISH PCIe Gen3x4 M.2 2280
Thanks in advance!
Thanks for reading! It’s difficult to give advice for specific laptop models, but if yours has an identical motherboard as the one tested here: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-TravelMate-P449-G2-M-i5-7200U-FHD-IPS-Laptop-Review.239754.0.html (which in this case is equipped with an Intel 600p
… then yes, any of those M.2 models should theoretically work (with the possible exception of the Adata Swordfish, which has a heatsink that might not fit).
Of the drives you mention, the Barracuda 510 is the strongest performer. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/seagate-barracuda-510-ssd,6150.html
Thanks! In this case my laptop has an HDD and the model is Pavo_Grus_SK
Ok, I couldn’t find any info about your specific model. However, when quickly looking it up I did notice that others have been asking about this issue on the Acer forums, dealing with the P449-G2-M in general. https://community.acer.com/en/discussion/583639/acer-travelmate-tmp449-g2-m-additional-harddisc
“If you just want a really fast computer for work (and who doesn’t?), you can probably get by with as little as 128 GB and use hard drives for the rest. ”
Price difference of 128GB and 240GB is only ~10 euros so for normal user there is no point to get only 128 GB. Going 128 GB needs special conditions.
A very good point, thanks. I’ve updated the article to reflect this.
Corsair MP600 has a TBW of 3600 not 1800
https://www.corsair.com/ww/en/Categories/Products/Storage/M-2-SSDs/Force-Series%E2%84%A2-Gen-4-PCIe-NVMe-M-2-SSD/p/CSSD-F2000GBMP600#tab-tech-specs
3600 TBW is for the 2TB model. 1TB drives are compared in the table and the Corsair MP600 1TB offers half of the 2TB so 1800 TBW.
The Addlink S90 should be included on the list near the top if not the number one spot. It performs even faster than what it advertises.
Dont know how the Seagate NVME PCIe 4.0 Firecuda 1TB didnt make this list. It’s the fastest by far in real world file transfer speeds. Blew the Sabrent away in a side by side comparison video I saw. They all have the same Phison controller but Seagate uses its own proprietary firmware or something.
Your specs are all wrong, for chart under heading, “”12 of the Fastest M.2 PCIe NVMe SSDs in 2020″” Please update!
They should be this: (consider adding Gen3 for comparison)
Gigabyte Aorus PCIe Gen4 (500GB) – 5000/4400
Gigabyte Aorus PCIe Gen3 (500GB) – 3500/2500
Sabrent Rocket PCIe Gen4 (500GB) – 5000/2500
Sabrent Rocket PCIe Gen3 (500GB) – 3400/2500
ADD:
Corsair MP510 PCIe Gen3 (480GB) – 3480/3000
All the rest seemed okay…
Thanks for your comment. I believe that you are mistakenly referring to the read/write specs for the 1TB+ models, which are higher than the 500GB ones listed here (write speeds in particular).
That said, it would make more sense to compare the 1TB drives, which is probably the most common capacity these days. I’ll change this in the next update.
As of now, there are still no Samsung EVO (or PRO) M.2 drives on the market that run on Gen4. The Gen4 Samsung 980 PRO was announced at CES this year, but I’ve seen nothing of a release date yet.
See:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/15352/ces-2020-samsung-980-pro-pcie-40-ssd-makes-an-appearance
All the links for Samsung EVO (and what I can find online) are for PCIe Gen3 drives, not Gen4
5 TB/s ?
I WISH!!!
Thanks Brad for spotting the typo! Changed it.
There will probably be another few years before these things are a thousand times as fast… 🙂
/Jesper
hello, Jesper!! great article with great info!
I’m an audio professional and some of my DAW sound/sample libraries require that I install them on SSD drives. to keep from taking up space on my boot drive, I’m looking to move them to external storage and the an NVMe SSD seems to be the smart route.
I’ll be connecting via USB 3 on a 2018 Mac Mini and putting the SSD in a USB 3 enclosure. I’m currently looking at the Samsung 970 PRO or EVO (512GB), but can you recommend a drive and enclosure combo where I can max read speeds and reliability at a reasonable price? thanks in advance!!!
I would suggest using a thunderbolt enclosure instead of a usb one
(visually its the same port, usb-c connector, but the thunderbolt protocol vs the usb is superior)
Whatt is the best seagate firecuda 520 or samsung 980 pro
Hi Mohamed,
The 980 Pro is considerably faster (theoretically) than the Firecuda 520 and all other drives with the same controller (until now, all PCIe Gen4 SSDs).
In terms of sequential speeds, the 980 Pro offers up to 7,000 MB/s (read) and 5,000 MB/s (write), compared to the FireCuda’s 5,000/4,400 MB/s. Random performance is 1,000,000 IOPS (Samsung) Vs. 760,000 IOPS (Seagate).
This large difference will however not be anywhere near as apparent as the numbers indicate outside of synthetic benchmarks. But it’s definitely faster overall.
Very thorough article!
You mentioned the Corsair MP600 was available with & w/o heat spreader, but could not locate one w/o it?
Not even on Corsair’s website, on their online store, was it possible to purchase w/o, so I’m guessing you can’t and you assumed that you could buy w/o?
Thanks Dan!
It looks like I mixed these drives up and got it wrong about the MP600 being available without the heat spreader. The article is now updated, thanks a lot for pointing this out.