Role of Crucial P1 and P2 NVMeM.2 SSD?

• 

  Hybroid on 08/08/2022 - 22:14

  +4

  Real world difference for average person's use is nil. The P2 has slightly faster read/writes and better TBW & IOPS on average if you're writing constantly to it. If not then again, zero difference. Don't get hung up on it.

  I'll add that P1 has a DRAM controller so better for cache so use that for the OS & live environments and the P2 for storage, particularly if constantly downloading content to it.

  • 

    OMGJL on 09/08/2022 - 01:58

    if you're writing constantly to it

    both drive is QLC(unless you have a first batch P2 which I doubt). so if you're writing constantly to either, it will slow down like crap.

    • 

      Hybroid on 09/08/2022 - 02:06

      +1

      Yes if copying hundreds of GBs constantly. Not really if occasional game install or Linux ISO download. No real world noticeable difference that it would matter. Far too many people are pedantic on paper specs.

      • 

        OMGJL on 09/08/2022 - 02:07

        +1

        If it was used as a secondary game drive what you said is definitely correct 100%.

        but if it was used as a OS drive where your swap/virtual memory/cache/windows update/other crap is going on all the time, story become different.

• 

  AustriaBargain on 08/08/2022 - 23:48

  +2

  The better drive should be used as the primary drive (the "C" drive), and all of your important apps and scratch disk should be on that drive, and that drive should be large enough capacity to store all that stuff with ample spare room for scratch disk (if you have any apps that need it).

• 

  OMGJL on 09/08/2022 - 01:56

  +1

  I apologies if I hurt your feelings, but both crucial p1 and p2 is crap, both are QLC drives and is worse than their own mx500 (SATA) in almost every scenario except sequenial read.

  actual good SSD experience depends on 4k random read —- how fast is it to read a whole bunch of really small files, which isn't great on either this 2 SSD.

  both should be used as secondary drive to store non-important & re-download-able files.

  • 

    freefall101 on 09/08/2022 - 09:32

    It's much faster on everything over shorter bursts. Copy a 100GB and yes, it'll be as slow as dirt, but for smaller bursts (which is 99% of what people do on a computer) it'll be faster than a SATA drive.

    It's worth looking at things like load times of games (real world examples). It's nowhere near as good as most NVME SSDs but it's still faster than SATA ones or spinning rust. Personally, I'd use the P1 for OS and P2 for games.

    • 

      OMGJL on 09/08/2022 - 11:28

      99% of what people do on a computer

      would require 4k random read speed. MX500 achieve 47.05MB/s, and Crucial P1 achieve 47.56MB/s without active cooling As you can see there's almost no difference.

      Sequential read speed almost never matter unless you copying the file away, or reading a large piece of data front to back (can't be a part of a large file, have to be specifically a big piece, front to back), your everyday software are always broken into smaller pieces of .dll file and resource files, so is your documents, the preview of your photo and video, your browser, your email program and everything else.

      While sequential read serves little purpose, sequential write on P1/P2 both are a joke, because QLC, you've mentioned that too.

      I can't think of a scenario where one would need a fast sequential read speed ONLY (combined with shit sequential write speed), as if you are going to read large piece of data from the drive, you'd have to copy those data to the drive before hand.

      let alone Windows have virtual memory, windows updates, software have cache and all sorts of random things need to write to the drive every so often, the drive is unlikely at their peak performance during the usage of "99% of what people do on a computer".

      Since OP have bought both wither or not knowing if those drives are QLC, the only thing I can do is to point it out (although it may hurt his/her feelings), so he might re-think the scenario…. on the bright side, he/she might have 2 PC and use both as a secondary drive on each PC right?

      • 

        slowmo on 09/08/2022 - 11:58

        there is a very viable use-case for sequencial read drives… and that's windows restore :P

      • 

        freefall101 on 09/08/2022 - 18:26

        If what you do on a computer is 1GiB of 4K random reads then sure. 99% of people don't do that.

        Even the 970 pro is slower than a cooled P1. So the answer seems to be cool your P1 and use it like a normal person.

  • 

    AusBargains on 09/08/2022 - 21:39

    I apologies if I hurt your feelings

    My feelings weren't hurt

    But Crucial said he is sad because he tried his best to make these SSDs and promises to try better

• 

  garetz on 09/08/2022 - 02:47

  Whichever has the higher endurance should be your boot, and the 2ndary that doesnt require alot of writing, you can use as a games/storage disk.

• 

  OMGJL on 09/08/2022 - 11:41

  just to add…. preferably buy a TLC drive as your bootable, and use both crucial as secondary drive (wither or not if they are in the same PC). If you really don't have another drive and have to use one of them as your boot drive, use the P1, the DRAM cache will help a bit.

• 

  AusBargains on 09/08/2022 - 21:33

  I prefer something better quality for an OS drive so I'll leave my P1 and P2s as storage and wait until the next good SSD ozbargain deal

  Probably the Crucial P5, WD or Samsung

  • 

    OMGJL on 09/08/2022 - 23:08

    P5 isn't too great either, reason is that a Chinese SSD repair engineer purchased multiple Crucial P5 among other TLC SSDs to run month long life test, and P5 dies wayyyyy earlier than other SSDs.

    I know one would argue "but it does die after running out rated TBW". But samsung on the other hand long lived almost doubled their rated TBW, whilst Samsung have a bigger TBW value in the first place…

    I'd buy a Samsung non-QVO or WD non-Green myself.