This was posted 8 months 16 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Gigabyte AORUS 2TB PCIe Gen 4 NVMe M.2 2280 SSD $156.29 Delivered @ Amazon US via AU

840
Gigabyte AORUS 2TB PCIe Gen 4 NVMe M.2 2280 SSD $156.29 Delivered @ Amazon US via AUAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
Look Up on 11/08/2023 - 23:43 amazon.com.au (1657 clicks)
Last edited 21/08/2023 - 00:40 by 1 other user
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Dispatches within 1 to 2 months

All time low
Dual sided copper heatsink with very high endurance suited for content creators
Gigabyte's equivalent of a FireCuda 520 at a nicer price and better build
PS5 compatible
Note: Shipping speed currently showing as "Usually dispatched within 1 to 2 months"

GP-ASM2NE6200TTTD

Controller: Phison E16
Memory: Kioxia/Toshiba BiCS4 96L TLC
DRAM Cache: 2GB DDR4
Sequential Read: 5000 MB/s
Sequential Write: 4400 MB/s
Random Read: 750,000 IOPS
Random Write: 700,000 IOPS
Endurance (TBW): 3600 TB
Warranty: 5 Years

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.
Computing 2TB Computer Component Gigabyte M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace
Amazon Global Store
Amazon Global Store

closed Comments

  • wetwork on 11/08/2023 - 23:48
    +4

    Nice drive but a lot can happen in the SSD world in 1 to 2 months.

    • morebunnings on 12/08/2023 - 11:11

      Consumer PCI-E 5 controllers hitting 14gb/s sustained are being unveiled at the moment and will be released in ~6 months. Exciting times.

      They will require a motherboard that supports it though. This would be good for an existing PC or PS5.

      • virtual81 on 12/08/2023 - 12:07
        +3

        And another 2 years before the consumer beta testing is out of the way, stock is available and prices are sensible.

        • FujinShu on 12/08/2023 - 23:54
          +1

          And then newer products on newer standards get demo’d and it’s back to square one again.

  • manity on 11/08/2023 - 23:51
    +3

    Nice. Hopefully there's a 4tb version soon.

    • JPerez on 12/08/2023 - 07:34

      Patiently waiting for the MP34 4TB to go on sale

      • CptnObvious on 12/08/2023 - 16:25
        +1

        Why do you need 4tb for MP3s?

  • Mingles on 12/08/2023 - 00:10

    Have had one of these for a couple of years now - rock solid!

  • maverickjohn on 12/08/2023 - 00:24
    +2

    Bought this for $380 back on the day for when ps5 first supported m.2 SSD and has been installed since then. Works very well.
    Heat sink and SSD are compliant. Although after the update speed was no longer reading at 5.5k read speed and now matches the spec listed on the sheet of 5k reads

  • Theek on 12/08/2023 - 00:48
    +4

    Mine failed after 2 months

    • duckduckering on 12/08/2023 - 08:04
      +1

      I feel like someone says this every thread with every drive.

      Troll comment or actually anecdotal?

      • cski on 12/08/2023 - 09:15
        +1

        The failure rate of stuff is 1 in a million

        Maybe this people should invest in buying a lottery ticket

        • netsurfer on 12/08/2023 - 10:19
          +1

          The failure rate of stuff is 1 in a million

          That's a load of misinformation. I had 5 SSDs failed so far and I have not purchased 1 million SSDs (not even hundreds). Perhaps you should open an SSD insurance business and give people full refund when their SSDs failed. Then you will realise it is not 1 in a million.

          • DeToxin on 12/08/2023 - 10:48
            +2

            @netsurfer: That's not how statistics work. You may have had bad luck and bought a bunch of faulty drives but there may have been 5 million other drives sold that were fine.

            I do agree though that cski has no way of actually knowing the failure rate for these drives. I would imagine something like 0.01% - 0.1%

            Edit: for example I have bought 3 nvme drives and countless sata drives, none of which have failed. That doesn't mean they don't fail though

            • netsurfer on 12/08/2023 - 16:36
              -3

              @DeToxin: 3 + some SATA SSDs, that's your sample size?

              I have SSDs which are 10 years old. Also, you guys probably started using SSDs a bit later. Samsung's first gen planar TLC is bad. I also have ones which come with a mini PC. Also, have you guys heard of OCR?

              Kingston, Samsung, WD, basically so far, no SSD has a perfect record. I have Micron/Crucial ones as well, but one of them has a health rating of 65%.

              • DeToxin on 12/08/2023 - 16:38
                +3

                @netsurfer: Did you even read my comment?

                My point is exactly that, whatever you or I have experienced personally is no indication of the actual failure rate.

                • netsurfer on 12/08/2023 - 16:40
                  -3

                  @DeToxin: Then read some articles on SSD failure rate. You don't know my SSD failure percentage, you guys just assumed 5 is a lot in my collection. 3 of them I did find out they will fail due to user experience (they were ticking time bombs). But if you guys want to believe other people's environments are just dodgy (considering Australia is much dryer than rest of the world), then that's fine.

                  There was 1 SSD which I knew had close to 50% failure rate (OCZ), but years ago, it was dirt cheap. The retailer told me not to bother with replacement and arranged a full refund for me after 3 weeks.

                  Quoting SSD failure rate is 0.0001% on average is really brave. Generic failure rate quoting is bad. Failure rate of SSDs is model dependent, just like HDDs. Some models are just bad. Sometimes, it comes down to certain batches.

          • CptnObvious on 12/08/2023 - 16:27
            +4

            @netsurfer: Maybe it's your environment that's causing the failure, like short circuits.

          • cski on 12/08/2023 - 17:12
            +1

            @netsurfer: i was hypothesizing a value I do not know the absolute market failure rate that each manufacturer has chosen in their business forecasts.
            no need to take it so personally

            that said i have purchased a commercial batch of 100x Samsung 850 Pro SSDs, 20 840 Pro SSDs and none ever failed for 3 year life cycle in workplace.
            Seagate Ironwolf about 60x 960GB and only one failed after 2 years

            I had 2x OCZ 120GB at some point and after 6 weeks both died within days of another
            and Samsung evo 850 died on me after 1 year
            I even bought a WD Green SSD , 1 year before it died (corrupted its data), Blue 6 months
            Sandisk 120GB lasted me 2 weeks

            In my case my bad luck brand is WD SSD, Sandisk SSD and OCZ
            and obviously Samsung is my trusted brand, but obviously had no issue with Seagate enterprise either

            Factor is well
            1 Luck, you could just be unlucky,
            2 environment of storage and operation,
            3 too quick to diagnose and judge a product as failed when the real cause is something else.
            Like poor compatibility, unstable power or connectivity. I even saw someone say a disk was broken because it was not formatted,
            there was a bug years ago where certain SATA chipsets in some brand SSDs were incompatible with certain I think it was SIS system SATA chipsets

            • netsurfer on 12/08/2023 - 20:05

              @cski: At least 4 out of the 5 failures had known hardware issues or high failure rate:

              • The OCZ one, as I mentioned, that one has high failure rate, even the retailer knew it.
              • Samsung 840. Let's be frank here, Samsung knew that SSD has old data read problems and offered ZERO firmware update to fix it. Samsung did offer one for 840 Evo. Samsung 840, I trusted Samsung too early and tried out its first gen planar TLC SSD. It was kinda good it failed within a year because Samsung did give me a 850 Evo as a replacement.
              • The one from a Mini PC. Again, people reported that one included has problems. I don't know the exact brand, but it does use Samsung NAND (though the cheaper grade one).
              • Kingston one, once again, after I bought it, I started reading reports people having issues. I was hoping mine won't fail, but after 4 years, it failed.

              Samsung 850 Pro, I think the failure rate is low. 840 Pro… honestly, I have one that has issues, but it is on a relative's laptop and it is overseas. I assume it could be a software issue, but not quite sure yet (plane ticket too expensive, haven't had a chance to visit that relative). It is embarrassing because I picked it years ago for that relative thinking Samsung SSDs normally have low failure rate and 840 Pro at the time had decent reputation.

              I had 2x OCZ 120GB at some point and after 6 weeks both died within days of another
              and Samsung evo 850 died on me after 1 year
              I even bought a WD Green SSD , 1 year before it died (corrupted its data), Blue 6 months
              Sandisk 120GB lasted me 2 weeks

              If so, I find your statement: The failure rate of stuff is 1 in a million doesn't make sense. WD Green, not a surprise. WD Blue, interested to know which model. Likewise for Sandisk.

              So for mine:

              4 of them are poor manufacturing or known issue with NAND chip. 1 could be just unlucky. The problem is with SSDs, first gen products tend to have higher failure rate. Samsung 840, 950 Pro for example. Low end models could cheap out on some basic components. There are people who flat out blacklist Silicon Power SSDs.

              If it is mostly luck, then let's just all get el cheapo AliExpress dirt cheap SSDs and if they failed, let's just blame luck or storage and operation.

              Very earlier on, when SSDs started become available years ago, the failure rate was high. AnandTech's advice at the time was proceed with caution. The recent news on Samsung 980 Pro and 990 Pro SSDs. Some people are cynical whether Samsung really fixed the issue with the firmware update or there are still issues (and the new firmware just hides them better).

              • cski on 12/08/2023 - 21:07
                +1

                @netsurfer: You are quoting products from 7 years ago as an indication of todays rate of failure
                You don't like ssd go buy a slate and chisel
                Don't waste anyone's time

        • fastnet on 13/08/2023 - 14:25
          +2

          It's actually even higher. Looking at the spec sheet,

          Mean time between failure (MTBF): 1.77 million hours

          So that's,
          1.77 million hours / 24 hours/day ~ 73,750 days
          73,750 days / 365 days/year ~ 202.05 years

      • netsurfer on 12/08/2023 - 10:17
        -2

        No SSD has 0% failure rate. We know all Phison E16 based SSDs have unusually high TBW. I have had multiple SSDs failed (including Samsung SSDs - yes multiple). SSDs have a higher chance to suffer sudden death than HDDs. Zero of my failed SSDs ever had more than 2TB of TBW. In fact, SSDs which are rarely used had higher chance to fail.

        • RI4V4N on 12/08/2023 - 15:34
          +3

          None of mine have ever died.
          Move your PC from next to the fireplace.

          • netsurfer on 12/08/2023 - 16:39
            -4

            @RI4V4N: You think your SSDs stay at 100% health? In case you are unaware, a lot of SSDs hide stats to prevent apps to mark down its health rating quickly.

            I had been an early adopter of TLC and Samsung's mess on first gen TLC was something I experienced. It is better to let people know SSDs do fail and do proper backup, rather than banking on SSDs not failing. It is well known certain models of SSDs are ticking timebomb. I was hoping one of my Kingston wasn't as bad as what other people had reported. Unfortunately, it was just a bad model from Kingston and it did fail. Lucky the retailer was great and gave me a full refund after 4 years.

          • netsurfer on 12/08/2023 - 20:26
            -1

            @RI4V4N: Will cook my Apple Macbook Pro to make sure the SSD last longer.

            Jokes aside, SSD info software does gradually lower the SSD health rating based on its wear level and TBW. I have Apple Silicon Mac SSDs which already has high TB written and some old SSDs with high wear level. That said, all my SSDs which failed so far had really low TB written.

      • Theek on 14/08/2023 - 19:44

        Not a troll comment, just returned the failed drive today. I saw quite a few reviews with the same experience and chose to give it a shot as it was on sale. Thought I'd let you guys know.

  • Osiris on 12/08/2023 - 00:54
    +1

    Nice find OP would have grabbed this if not for the long time frame.

  • Larsson on 12/08/2023 - 02:12

    Is this or the latest silicone power deal (@$96) better?

    • maverickjohn on 12/08/2023 - 07:57
      +3

      This has dram, TLC nand and much higher TBW
      So a different league really.
      The SP is really cheap per tb but quality is inferior qlc, cheap controller, low TBW. Also reportedly high failure rate compared to other brands.

    • netsurfer on 12/08/2023 - 10:26
      +1

      Depends on your usage and whether you are willing to accept QLC.

      When running in SLC mode, that Silicon Power SSD can this one most of the time, thanks to a newer, more powerful controller. However, when doing QLC native write, it does get ugly (HDD write speed). People will mention the really high TBW on these, but these Phison E16 based SSDs have dated NAND and its write performance is really more like a PCIe gen 3 x4 SSD.

      The reality is that neither is a good deal. You are better off waiting for another Amazon SSD sale on a flagship class WD or Samsung SSD.

      • Larsson on 12/08/2023 - 20:12

        Very helpful, thank you!

      • patrick321 on 12/08/2023 - 23:10

        @netsurfer "You are better off waiting for another Amazon SSD sale on a flagship class WD or Samsung SSD"
        Can you be more specific?
        Samsung 990 pro but what would be the WD you recommend?
        Still searching for something for my laptop :0

  • VerticallyIntegrated on 12/08/2023 - 08:15

    What’s the best enclosure to make the most of this?

    • chartparker on 12/08/2023 - 08:29
      +11

      A PC with pcie4.0 m.2 slot

      • Cheap Rich Guy on 12/08/2023 - 18:56

        A USB 4 or Thunderbolt 4 enclosure with a throughput of 40 Gb/s. Those enclosures were around $100 or more on Amazon last time I looked though.

        • Larsson on 12/08/2023 - 20:14

          More like $200. Please link it for the rest of us if we are missing something.

    • Agret on 12/08/2023 - 08:54

      USB-C 10gbps nvme but this drive is overkill for it.

      Something like this https://www.scorptec.com.au/product/hard-drives-&-ssds/enclo…

  • easternculture on 12/08/2023 - 08:54

    suited for content creators

    Aka Tiktok, OF and PH

  • kawara888 on 12/08/2023 - 09:57
    +1

    Price can be further brought down by adding a eligible cheap item.

    such as https://www.amazon.com.au/gp/product/1338233580

  • linux012 on 12/08/2023 - 10:58

    Could anyone shed light on how to make (2 For $278.20), mentioned in the topic?

    • Clear on 12/08/2023 - 11:09
      +2

      You add 2 to the cart and checkout as normal.

  • timmy2beers on 12/08/2023 - 13:52

    Anyone in Newcastle want to go halves in two?

  • Lz ShifTy on 12/08/2023 - 13:56
    -1

    Thanks got x10

  • Brooksby on 12/08/2023 - 15:12

    I assume the casing is removable?

    • cski on 13/08/2023 - 18:15

      i'd imagine high performance parts the warranty is predicated on the thermal casing remaining intact

  • Look Up on 21/08/2023 - 00:40

    Deal back on

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join