The Fastest M.2 NVMe SSDs in November 2021
Gaming PC Builder is reader-supported. When using links on our site to make a purchase, we may earn an affiliate commission.
Faster storage can shave seconds off most of your PC activities – from booting up your OS to loading apps and games. But not all SSDs are created equal. If you have a spare PCI Express (PCIe) M.2 slot on your motherboard (desktop or laptop), then this is where to install your system drive. The best M.2 drives also use the modern storage interface protocol NVMe.
Table of Contents
- What is NVMe and do I need it?
- Fastest Gen4 & Gen3 M.2 SSDs
- Best M.2 NVMe SSDs 2021 (November)
- What drive is best for gaming?
- Will it work in my desktop/laptop PC?
- How to choose the right capacity
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 PCIe interface. It replaces AHCI (paired with SATA), which was originally intended for mechanical hard drives. The newer protocol includes many efficiency improvements to deal with parallel transfers and the low-latency nature of SSDs.
When shopping for a new SSD, it’s important to remember that M.2 is just a form factor that says nothing of the device’s performance. Some M.2 SSDs use the SATA interface and have the same performance limitations as any 2.5″ drive. If you have a relatively modern motherboard, it most likely has a PCIe/NVMe-capable (and therefore much faster) M.2 slot, so this is the type of drive to look for. In addition, you have to account for multiple generations of the PCIe interface itself.
The PCI Express 4.0 (or Gen4) interface offers twice the bandwidth compared to PCIe 3.0 (or Gen3). But to take advantage of a Gen4 SSD, you also need a motherboard and processor (CPU) combo that supports the interface. That includes either Intel’s latest 11th-gen Core platform or any recent AMD counterpart (an X570, B550, or TRX40 motherboard combined with a 3000- or 5000-series Ryzen or Threadripper CPU).
In other words, there is no need to invest in a more expensive Gen4 SSD for use in a Gen3 system. Although Gen4 drives are backward-compatible, they offer no performance benefit in a Gen3 system.
If you own one of the aforementioned platforms, however, the Kingston KC3000 is currently the fastest M.2 SSD overall. It is closely followed by the Seagate Firecuda 530, which is based on the same hardware. In the PCIe 3.0 generation, the Samsung 970 EVO Plus is still an excellent choice – not least because it’s significantly more affordable than the best PCIe Gen4 SSDs.
Last update on 2021-11-21 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API
The Kingston KC3000 uses the same Phison E18 controller and 176-layer TLC NAND from Micron that recently propelled Seagate’s FireCuda 530 to the top of the charts. However, the KC3000 model manages to outperform the FireCuda in several benchmarks. This makes it a leading choice if you are building a PCIe Gen4-compatible system that does not compromise on storage performance.
The main disadvantage compared to the FireCuda 530 is that the latter comes with a higher endurance rating at 1,275 TBW versus the KC3000’s 800 TBW (1 TB capacities). Another detail worth noting is that, much like the FireCuda 530, you have to opt for the 2TB or 4TB models to get the best possible performance.
2. Runner-up: Seagate FireCuda 530
Like the Kingston KC3000, the Seagate FireCuda 530 is equipped with the same winning combination of a Phison E18 and Micron’s recently-launched 176-layer Flash chips. In its 2TB and 4TB capacities, the drive reaches its maximum 6,900 MB/s sequential write throughput (compared to 6,000 MB/s for the 1TB model). What makes the FireCuda 530 particularly attractive in the high-end SSD space is the drive’s endurance ratings. Even the 500GB capacity offers higher endurance than its 1TB Samsung and WD competitors at 640 TBW.
3. Western Digital WD Black SN850
Both the SN850 and Samsung’s 980 PRO are strong competitors to the Seagate FireCuda 530 – and ahead of it in some benchmarks. Western Digital’s SN850 in particular is an exceptionally fast M.2 SSD with sequential read speeds of up to 7,000 MB/s (read), 5,300MB/s (write) as well as up to 1,000,000 random 4K IOPS. The WD SN850 performs better than the Samsung 980 PRO in a majority of benchmarks, although the 980 PRO remains ahead in some.
4. Samsung 980 PRO
Samsung’s 980 PRO was launched in late 2020 and was the definite market leader before the WD SN850 arrived. And to be fair – even after the arrival of the FireCuda 530 and other competitors, it is still the best M.2 SSD in some benchmarks. In other words, it remains a good choice for any high-end PCIe Gen4-capable system. At the time of writing (November 2021), you can often find it at a slight discount compared to the competition, which makes it even more attractive.
Notably, the 980 PRO is more of a successor to the 970 EVO Plus than to the 970 PRO. Previously, the PRO lineup has been exclusively based on higher-end MLC (multi-level cell) NAND memory chips. With the 980 PRO, Samsung has opted for the same cost-effective TLC chips that all of its competitors use. The newer Samsung 980 (non-PRO), on the other hand, is a DRAMless budget M.2 SSD that competes in the Gen3 category.
5. Best Price/Performance: Crucial P5 Plus
The Crucial P5 Plus was released as recently as August 2021. It’s a high-end Gen4 drive positioned as a marginally slower but also more affordable alternative to the market leaders from Samsung and WD. It uses a proprietary controller and sequential reads and writes are rated at up to 6,600 MB/s and 5,000 MB/sec, respectively. Random reads and writes are also a bit more modest than the fastest M.2 SSDs at 630/700K IOPS but this seems to be more than sufficient to earn a price/performance mention.
Check prices (1TB): Newegg
6. Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus
Outside of storage behemoths like Western Digital and Samsung – who develop and produce SSDs from the ground up in their own fabs –, Sabrent is one of the most interesting manufacturers. Although the company is a comparatively recent addition to the storage industry, it has consistently managed to be first on the market with a variety of attractive products, be it high-capacity M.2 drives, early PCIe Gen4 drives, or affordable QLC-based models.
This is also the case with the Rocket 4 Plus, which takes advantage of the new Phison E18 controller. On the whole, it looks like this drive is highly competitive compared to the flagship devices from WD and Samsung, though not quite on par in most cases.
7. Corsair MP600 Pro
Another drive based on the same E18 controller is the Corsair MP600 Pro that also arrived in 2021. Reviews are currently rolling in, and unsurprisingly, its performance seems to be largely comparable to that of the Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus. Maxed-out sequential transfer rates are the headline features of the MP600 Pro as well, but like the Rocket 4 Plus, it lags a bit behind the Samsung and WD flagships in most other benchmarks.
An advantage of the MP600 Pro over the Rocket 4 Plus is that Corsair’s drive includes a heat spreader. It’s even available in an extravagant ‘Hydro X’ version with a water-cooling block. At the time of writing, the MP600 Pro is a bit more expensive than the Rocket 4 Plus, but unlike the latter it comes with a large heat spreader.
8. XPG Gammix S70
Adata’s former flagship M.2 SSD, the Gammix S50, was and is one of many drives to use the ubiquitous Phison E16 controller. The XPG Gammix S70 brings something new to the table in the form of Innogrit’s IG5236 “Rainier” controller, which places the S70 among the leaders in terms of sequential performance.
With read/write transfer rates of up to 7,400/6,400 MB/s, it will outperform even the SN850 and 980 PRO in certain scenarios. On paper, it should be the fastest M.2 drive overall at the moment, but in spite of a few firmware revisions, it has not yet managed to surpass the leaders in a majority of benchmarks. The Gammix S70 is nevertheless an exceptionally fast SSD.
Check prices (1TB): Amazon, Newegg
9. Gigabyte Aorus 7000s
Like some of the aforementioned high-end M.2 alternatives on the market in late 2021, Gigabyte’s Aorus 7000s uses a combination Phison’s E18 controller and 96-layer TLC NAND from Micron. As a result, it offers about the same performance, which is to say quite a lot.
Officially, sequential performance amounts to 7,000 MB/s read and 5,500 MB/s write for the 1 TB capacity, with 350K IOPS random read throughput. The 2 TB version is however faster with up to 6,850 MB/s sequential write speeds and 650K IOPS random read.
The PCIe 3.0 Leaders: Samsung 970 PRO and EVO Plus
No single drive will take home the crown as the fastest M.2. SSD in every benchmark or use case. However, one of the best general performers in the PCIe 3.0 segment is still the MLC-based Samsung 970 PRO. Samsung’s performance and reliability track record in the SSD segment has been almost flawless for a decade, so this drive is a very comfortable recommendation.
The 970 PRO comes with Samsung’s proprietary controller and MLC chips, as well as an excellent endurance rating of 1,200 TBW (1TB) or 600 TBW (512GB). When looking at the performance/$ equation, the 970 PRO has always been a somewhat questionable choice, but it might be a sensible investment for the most demanding users
Samsung’s 970 EVO Plus is a lot more affordable than the PRO but very close in terms of actual performance. Although it doesn’t use high-end MLC NAND, this drive is still among the very best in the PCIe Gen 3 category.
Other Gen4 M.2 SSDs: The Phison E16 Lineup
Right until Samsung launched the 980 PRO, all PCIe 4.0-capable SSDs for consumers were based on the same Phison PS5016-E16 controller and 3D TLC NAND combo. What this means is that all of these drives offer roughly the same performance of up to 5,000 MB/s (sequential read) and 4,400 MB/s (sequential write). Some of the nearly identical drives are:
|Name||Max. sequential read/write (MB/s)||4K random read/write performance (IOPS)||Endurance rating (terabytes written)||Check Price|
|Gigabyte Aorus Gen4 (1TB)||5000/4400||750K/700K||1800 TBW||Amazon
|Sabrent Rocket Gen4 (1TB)||5000/4400||750K/750K||1800 TBW||Amazon
|Patriot Viper VP4100 (1TB)||5000/4400||800K/800K||1800 TBW||Amazon
|Seagate Firecuda 520 (1TB)||5000/4400||760K/700K||1800 TBW||Amazon
|XPG Gammix S50 (1TB)||5000/4400||750K/750K||1800 TBW||Amazon
|Corsair MP600 Gen4 (1TB)||4950/4250||680K/600K||1800 TBW||Amazon
Overall performance is about the same with any of these drives, and all come with the advantage of superb endurance ratings compared to the competition. They are also known to run relatively hot, so unless you have a motherboard with an included heat spreader (often supplied with Z590 and X570 motherboards), this might be a useful addition. Although the E16 drives are no longer in the lead, they are now strong alternatives in the affordable M.2 NVMe category for anyone looking for Gen4 performance on a budget.
If your system is not PCIe Gen4 ready, you can save quite a lot by opting for a Gen3 drive, without losing much in terms of real-world performance. The following list includes some of the best-performing M.2 SSDs from the past couple of years. They are ordered by sequential performance first, random second. Because of the drives’ different controllers and memory types, these numbers are only an indication of actual performance.
|#||Name||Max. sequential read/write (MB/s)||4K random read/write performance (IOPS)||Endurance rating (terabytes written)||Check Price|
|1||Samsung 970 PRO (1TB)||3500/2700||500K/500K||1200 TBW||Amazon
|2||Samsung 970 EVO PLUS (1TB)||3500/3300||600K/550K||600 TBW||Amazon
|3||Adata XPG SX8200 Pro (1TB)||3500/3000||390K/380K||640 TBW||Amazon
|4||PNY XLR8 CS3030 (1TB)||3500/3000||N/A||360 TBW||Amazon
|5||HP EX950 (1TB)||3500/2900||410K/370K||650 TBW||Amazon
|6||Corsair Force MP510 (960 GB)||3480/3000||280K/700K||720 TBW||Amazon
|7||WD Black SN750 (1TB)||3430/3000||515K/560K||600 TBW||Amazon
|8||Intel SSD 760p (1TB)||3230/1625||340K/275K||576 TBW||Amazon
|9||Intel Optane SSD 800P (118GB)||1450/640||250K/140K||365 TBW||Amazon
High-End Alternative: Intel Optane 800p
The last drive on our list is also a high-end option. Although its sequential performance might not sound like much, Intel’s Optane 800p is faster than all other M.2 SSDs in certain areas. Its extremely low latency makes random performance at low queue depths particularly good, which is an advantage for a system drive. The reason why it’s hard to compare it with other SSDs is that it uses Intel’s proprietary 3D XPoint memory instead of ‘normal’ NAND Flash.
Unfortunately, it also comes with a much higher cost/GB than competing drives and is only available in two tiny capacities – 58 GB and 118 GB. Also unfortunate is that the 800p is being discontinued by Intel and has no direct successor. Read more about it here, or head straight to AnandTech for the most detailed review online.
All storage-intensive tasks that move lots of files around will be affected by an SSDs capability. But a faster SSD will not necessarily shorten loading times in games by noticeable amounts. Here’s an interesting test from the web, comparing an M.2 PCIe SSD (970 Pro) versus an older 2.5″ SATA SSD (plus a mechanical hard drive) when loading various games:
Here’s a summary of the data:
|Game||Loading from |
2.5" SATA SSD
970 Pro (PCIe/NVMe)
(NVMe Vs SATA)
|Deus Ex: Mankind Divided||71s||27s||21s||-22%|
|Far Cry 5||25s||10s||11s||+10%|
|Path of Exile||23s||3s||3s||+0%|
|World of Warcraft||36s||7s||6s||-14%|
|Skyrim Special Edition||20s||9s||12s||+33%|
Source: YouTube user Alexandr iuneWind
With these results in mind, it is probably safe to assume that a comparison of individual high-end M.2 PCIe SSDs will result in small differences as far as gaming is concerned. The usual price/performance calculation will serve you well. Of course, all seconds saved add up to minutes and hours in the long run, so a fast M.2 NVMe SSD is still a key component in a high-end PC. But in most cases, you should not expect the sort of radical performance gains that you see when coming from a traditional hard drive.
In order for the aforementioned drives to work with your computer, it must have the proper slot and support for PCIe/NVMe. But there may be exceptions: Even without an M.2 slot on your (desktop) motherboard, you may still be able to use one in a full-size PCIe x4 slot using an adapter. But if you want to run your OS from the drive, your motherboard must still support booting from PCIe, which is no guarantee with older motherboards.
All recent, high-end ATX-size motherboards, on the other hand, include at least one M.2 slot and will be able to run a modern SSD at PCIe 3.0 speeds at a minimum. With an older board, you might not be so lucky. In any event, it’s always best to check the manual before buying a new drive.
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, as well as recent motherboards, will have to 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:
Not all motherboards – and much less all laptops – can accommodate the longest cards and some might not even support the common 2280 size (the format used by most of the drives listed above). 22110 drives are however very rare.
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.
Yes, it really is a bit confusing, but fortunately, M.2 2280 is the most common standard by far, so it’s actually hard to get it wrong. But just to be safe:
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 really isn’t. If you are building a high-end PC based on a Z170, Z270, B350/B450, X370/X470 chipset, it will likely have an M-key slot. And if so, most of the popular M-key or B+M-key drives will work. But there are a few exceptions, so it’s best to double-check.
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.
What capacity you need is always a personal question. 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), 500/512 GB drives offer a much more attractive entry-level price point. If you want to install any larger number of games, 1 TB should be considered a minimum size.
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 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 dozens of gigabytes, so there is no simple answer. On the other hand, loading games from a slower device (but preferably still an SSD) is still a viable option, as seen above.
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.