add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube

Which storage option

Comments

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

The Crucial drive is NVMe, and the ADATA drive is SATA. They're nearly the same price ($13 more for an NVMe drive is nothing IMO), so for me it's a no brainier, Crucial P1. NVMe performance, no cables, great price.

You would only get the ADATA at this point if you couldn't use NVMe in your system, like no more available slots or couldn't afford to have any SATA slots disabled by a second NVMe.

SSHD need not apply. Although if I absolutely had to buy an HDD, I might talk myself into a SSHD. But those hybrid drives have always had a niche appeal and even that's kind disappearing with how cheap SSDs are becoming.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

That is what I was thinking but was wondering if the NVMe was known to be bad for how cheap it is. I know NVMe is impressivly fast.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

No, budget NVMe's aren't as fast as the top end ones (970 evo, 970 pro and the like), but you hardly notice it in real world most of the time. I can't tell when I'm hitting my 970 evo or my Intel 660p (similar to the Crucial P1 in price, performance durability) by load times or whatever. And a budget NVMe is still going to be loads faster than the nicest SATA drives. So the only thing one might quibble about TBW, because it's not a crazy huge number compared to something like an 860 evo or 970 evo. But it would take you 5.5 years of writing 100GB a day, without fail, to hit the 1TB Crucial P1's TBW warranty limit. Which is not even remotely in the conversation of normal use.

So the performance is decent, the price is decent, and the drive will fit most users needs until they're ready to throw out a 1TB NVMe drive because no one cares about them anymore. So, win, win, win as far as I see it.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

I've heard reports of that particular model overheating. For the same price, you can get the Intel 660p, which I'd recommend over either of the other options listed.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Do you have a percentage because there are tons sold but if there is a 1:100 even I would take it.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

Oof, I confused the P1 with the ADATA XPG SX6000. Ignore my previous statement.

I'd still go with the 660p due to being a bit more read-oriented than write-oriented; in my opinion, you would probably spend more time loading programs like games than doing large amounts of installs. Plus if you were looking to write huge files frequently, QLC performs dismally, so a better budget drive like the SX8200 Pro or HP EX920 would be a good idea.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

So it is personal preference because let’s be real it won’t affect speed no matter what I chose for between the two. If I waste a second of my life a day then oh well.

  • 6 months ago
  • 1 point

The 660p is a QLC NVMe SSD while the WD Blue is a SATA SSD. SATA SSDs are cheaper and slower than NVMe, even budget units like the 660p.

Sort

add arrow-down arrow-left arrow-right arrow-up authorcheckmark clipboard combo comment delete discord dots drag-handle dropdown-arrow errorfacebook history inbox instagram issuelink lock markup-bbcode markup-html markup-pcpp markup-cyclingbuilder markup-plain-text markup-reddit menu pin radio-button save search settings share star-empty star-full star-half switch successtag twitch twitter user warningwattage weight youtube