This was posted 5 months 10 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Crucial T500 2TB PCIe Gen 4 NVMe M.2 2280 SSD $174.96 (2 For $328.92) Delivered @ Amazon US via AU

510
Crucial T500 2TB PCIe Gen 4 NVMe M.2 2280 SSD $174.96 (2 For $328.92) Delivered @ Amazon US via AUAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
Look Up on 18/11/2023 - 09:56 amazon.com.au (1725 clicks)
Last edited 24/11/2023 - 13:46
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

Stack with the 6% off GCX gift card deal to get a final price of $164.46 (1 drive) and $309.18 (2 drives)

Significant price drop from the earlier deal for this top tier drive
Tom's review: T500 has lower latency and higher performance in real world benchmarks than the 990 Pro and power efficiency better than the reigning SK Hynix P44 / P31 drives
PS5 compatible

CT2000T500SSD8

Controller: Phison E25
Memory: Micron 232L TLC
DRAM Cache: Micron LPDDR4
Sequential Read: 7400 MB/s
Sequential Write: 7000 MB/s
Random Read: 1,180,000 IOPS
Random Write: 1,440,000 IOPS
Endurance (TBW): 1200 TB
Warranty: 5 Years

Price History at C CamelCamelCamel.
This is part of Black Friday / Cyber Monday deals for 2023
Computing 2TB Black Friday Computer Component Crucial M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD

Related Stores

Amazon AU
Amazon AU
Marketplace
Amazon Global Store
Amazon Global Store

closed Comments

  • vid_ghost on 18/11/2023 - 10:05
    +1

    WOW this is a great price for the worlds fastest PCIe 4.0 drive

    The T500 is faster and uses less power VS a Samsung 990 Pro so i guess its the NEW KING of PCIe 4.0 drives with its big brother the T700 the king of PCIe due to it being a PCIe 5.0 drive

    Issues:
    if its going to take you longer then 15 Minutes to copy a file at 7400Mbps get something else <— This maybe fixed with a firmware update
    its not the best with a PS5 but i guess its new so there could be a fix coming from sony or a new firmware update but don't bet on it.

    https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crucial-2tb-t500-ssd-re…

    Pros
    + Excellent all-around performance
    + Efficient and single-sided
    + Optional heatsink at 1TB/2TB
    + Software and encryption support

    Cons
    - High MSRPs ( not if you get this deal above )
    - Inconsistent sustained write performance
    - 4TB still waiting in the wings

    • GrabOzB on 18/11/2023 - 10:22

      Is the optional heatsink worth it or is there a better heatsink you'd recommend?

      • vid_ghost on 18/11/2023 - 10:31

        No idea… Most motherboards have heat shields already.. those are good enough… i got myself the be quiet! MC1 M.2 SSD Cooler when it was on sale for $23 on amazon but the $13 generic ones are more then good enough. Check the user reviews and if its going to take 1-2 months to come from china or if its local… If sold form amazon.com.au it should be delivered within the week There are options on ebay too - the SilverStone TP02-M2 M.2 Aluminium Heatsink is a good brand one if that what you want.

        $11 from umart
        https://www.umart.com.au/product/silverstone-tp02-m2-alumini…

  • leyton01 on 18/11/2023 - 10:16
    +3

    Strange how the product selector sayys 4tb but description says 2tb.

    • BrokeBish on 18/11/2023 - 10:17

      yeah that just got me, I ended up buying the 1tb by accident!

    • vid_ghost on 18/11/2023 - 10:19

      100% a glitch they need to fix.. NO way a T500 4TB drive is $174.96 ..

    • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 11:09

      4TB version of T500 doesn't exist yet. Crucial will release it, but not able to see 4TB on Crucial Web site. Therefore, it is best to assume you will get the 2TB version.

      Wouldn't surprise me if ChatGPT already did the check and that's why he posted 2TB.

  • agentzero on 18/11/2023 - 10:19
    +2

    The review here isn't exactly glowing with praise https://www.storagereview.com/review/crucial-t500-ssd-review

    • vid_ghost on 18/11/2023 - 10:25

      That review came out November 1, 2023 … This drive is very new and has issues.. Look out for a firmware update to possibly fix these soon.
      If i had to get a 990 Pro or this drive i would get this due to the price being less and a possible firmware improving the sustained write issues and it uses less power vs the 990 Pro

      I think the 990 Pro lost some power efficiency when they released the firmware update that fixed the driving killing itself issue.
      All of the reviews of the 990 Pro were POST must have firmware update

      • shreav on 18/11/2023 - 10:48
        +2

        So we'd be betting on this improving. That's a huge improvement if it needs to go from "one of the poorest performing drives" to better than a 990 Pro, don't you think?

        • Look Up on 18/11/2023 - 11:36
          +2

          That's a huge improvement if it needs to go from "one of the poorest performing drives" to better than a 990 Pro, don't you think?

          Tom's positive review is based on everyday workloads
          SR's negative review is based on server workloads

          So we'd be betting on this improving.

          This comment is a good take on the T500

          Knowing Micron, they will very likely release a new Crucial P6 Plus with custom E25 implementation that improves performance in the areas where the T500 is weak

          • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 12:47

            @Look Up: From Tom's Hardware:

            The T500 is an underdog with its four-channel controller, but the fast bus and DRAM help it to compete with some of the best.

            Crucial T500 is a compelling solution (kinda like Lexar NM790, except less dodgy). Crucial could use T500 to win the price war vs Samsung 990 Pro. It just needs people to think more in a pragmatic manner and realise PCIe gen 4 x4 SSDs are overkill and most of us are not running super duper servers at home.

            4 channel controller isn't going to beat 8 channel controller in tests which really hammer the SSD. 8 channel controllers do have more cores and they help in recovering SLC cache.

          • agentzero on 18/11/2023 - 14:20

            @Look Up: I did notice Techtesters pinned a comment on their review regarding potential issues.

            Update - 31/10 10:30 (CET): We're currently looking into a potential firmware issue with the T500. Apparently, some others hadreported issues with post-SLC performance, mentioning speeds can drop to 300MB/s in sustained writes. Our (two) drives didn't show any issues in the last few weeks we've had them, and part of testing is copying two sets of 500GB to the SSD, which it handled perfectly, three runs in a row. Similarly, PC Mark 10 Consistency pushes close to 30TB through the drive, and it did all those runs perfectly as well. SSDs with poor base level (once pushed through dram/slc cache) performance always show issues there.

            But, following up on the reports, we are able to produce some issues with the T500 if we run the tests more often, sometimes causing it to crash almost completely (dropping to ~10-30MB/s even). Seeing this only happening sometimes does suggest some sort of firmware issue rather than some actual component issue, but we'll look into it more and have asked Crucial for a response as well.

            So people are hoping a firmware update will fix it's issues, that could take multiple revisions or just one, or it may not be resolved. Crucial has made no comment yet since TT reached out. Given some of the top line SSD's with no such question marks can and will be had for within $20 it's a pass for me.

            • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 17:23

              @agentzero: The fundamental issue is likely the Phison E25 controller. Crucial needs a new controller to work with the 232L TLC NAND. However, it also needs to keep the cost down somehow. Generally, StorageReview is good at pointing out SSDs which are not suitable for server like usage. However, there are areas of concerns currently for T500. Its mixed usage result (read + write) even for Crystal DiskMark isn't great, suggesting controller isn't properly optimised or lack sufficient raw power to handle more complex tasks.

              I see T500 more of a competitor to NM790. T500 does have DRAM, but in tests where it suppose to shine due to having DRAM, the controller (hopefully firmware) issue hampered its performance. If you do care a lot about StorageReview or consistency test results, then you pretty much need to stick with traditional flagship SSDs.

              I don't see T500 as a true flagship. It is basically playing the same trick as NM790, except it seems to show its weak side easier than NM790.

          • MHLoppy on 18/11/2023 - 17:43

            @Look Up:

            Tom's positive review is based on everyday workloads
            SR's negative review is based on server workloads

            As an aside, I'd argue that anyone buying a high-end drive that doesn't care about intensive workload performance is throwing money away by buying a high-end drive. Light workloads are extraordinarily unlikely to have a perceptible difference compared to a decent value / mid-range drive.

            • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 19:58

              @MHLoppy: It's not as clear cut. First of all, this price point isn't really flagship. It is more higher mid tier price. Have a look at this chart:

              50GB File Folder Copy Transfer Rate - bear in mind T700 is a PCIe gen 5 x4 SSD. So, T500, in that "everyday workload" is the top PCIe gen 4 x4 2TB SSD. It is technically not a very fair comparison as Samsung only puts 232L NAND in 990 Pro 4TB. FYI: T500 does beat NM790 (1934 MB/s) in that test (I checked NM790 review to get the figure). Most of us don't pick SSDs based on which one is the best for running SQL server.

              Even with T500's vulnerable sustained write test, it is somewhat relative as well. If we were to write less than 400GB worth of large files when the SSD is empty, it will likely be at the top spot for PCIe gen 4 x4 or at least the top 3. After 400GB, obviously T500's result is disappointing.

              T500, currently, is an unbalanced SSD. Crucial needs to release a firmware update to clean up / address some of the issues. Like NM790, if you know the strengths of T500, you could get flagship class experience in everyday usage. Obviously, if you run SQL server(s) at home, then T500 is not for you.

              • MHLoppy on 18/11/2023 - 20:08

                @netsurfer: I guess I don't consider a large file copy (to/from two high high-speed I/O sources) to be "everyday"; I don't think it's a relevant workload to over 90% of home users.

                To or from one high speed device to a slower speed I/O source (SATA device, internet), sure, but there's no point being able to do beyond the speed of the slower I/O source in that case.

                • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 20:43

                  @MHLoppy: How about gaming? T500's controller has a general usage latency that's comparable to 990 Pro. Also, it has DirectStorage optimisation baked in the firmware. A lot of the flagship SSDs currently don't have that optimisation in the firmware yet.

                  On file folder copy transfer, I think it is better to assume other OZBers have deep pockets. Early last year, an OZBer indicated he has a B550 high end board which has 3 PCIe gen 4 x4 m.2 support (all wired to CPU lanes directly, due to x8 x4 x4 bifurcation + 1 x4 included).

                  It is not easy to tell people that they should ignore Crystal DiskMark result. These 232L NAND based SSDs are formidable. Don't get me wrong, I have your so called proper flagship SSDs, but it is how technology works (new tech will come out). Bear in mind Crucial has a product that pairs 232L with a 8 channel controller, it's T700 (PCIe gen 5 x4), so don't underestimate these 232L NAND, they are initially designed for PCIe gen 5 x4.

                  ChatGPT did post a 990 Pro 4TB deal recently. If you have a deep pocket, that's a PCIe gen 4 x4 DRAM SSD with a 8 channel controller.

                  • MHLoppy on 18/11/2023 - 21:26

                    @netsurfer: Having the technical capacity to do something as a home user doesn't automatically make the workload relevant to home users!

                    If a motherboard has support for multiple m.2 drives, it doesn't automatically mean they're actually being populated by most users.

                    Even if they are being populated, it doesn't mean large files are being moved between them by most users.

                    There might've been a misunderstanding - I think the drive is fine for the price, hence why I upvoted the deal (!). However, I also think most home users are wasting money if they buy this*, and people with "hardcore" use cases should probably consider something else due to the quirks of the drive.

                    * (but the same is true for most of the high-end SSDs! if the speed difference between two well-performing drives is imperceptible in real world usage, that performance difference is largely irrelevant for buying decisions)

                    • netsurfer on 19/11/2023 - 11:21

                      @MHLoppy: I was trying to present a different perspective. While it might make sense to buy the most cost effective or the best, it is often not the case for a lot of people.

                      For example, even though a SATA SSD is good enough for most people as an OS boot drive, when you zip up a folder on a NVMe SSD and it took basically 1-2 second vs the equivalent operation taking 5-6 seconds on a SATA TLC SSD with DRAM, general consumers can and do feel the sequential read/write advantage of NVMe SSDs.

                      From a pure tech perspective, true flagship SSDs or just get best $/GB SSDs make more sense. However, from a non-tech point of view, that's not the case. That's why it is not as clearcut. People are happy that their NM790 is cheaper than their 980 Pro and run faster in a lot of general usage (including gaming). Sure, in consistency test, 980 Pro is 30% faster. However, people who actually have that type of usage generally know to get a high end SSD.

                      These latest gen mid tier, tweaked / optimised for general usage SSDs' main selling point is you can get top flagship experience in general usage, using less power, and cost less. People know these NVMe SSDs are overkill, but spending less is still a plus.

                      • MHLoppy on 19/11/2023 - 12:08

                        @netsurfer: I apologise, but I don't follow what point you're trying to convey. I never suggested that everyone stick to SATA SSDs, as per your example. But let's say you have two identical systems and the only difference is that one is using a high end PCIe gen 4 drive (whichever is your preference), and the other is using a decent gen 3 or 4 drive that costs 20-50% less for the same capacity. As far as I've ever been able to find, in a home user's day to day tasks, it would not be possible to tell which is which when blindly swapping between each of the two systems. In the LTT test a few years back between SATA and NVMe drives, enthusiast users couldn't even tell the difference between those.

                        I'm also not sure about your example with the zip, but you don't normally see a measurable difference like that on an ordinary compression workload? That stuff isn't bound by disk I/O (unless you're talking about something other than a literal zip file and using the term colloquially).

                        Zipping up a copy of Deep Rock Galactic (~3GB) using 7-zip on a 10 year old Samsung 840 EVO 500GB takes my 5950X roughly 49 seconds. On a 1 year old Seagate 530 2TB (granted running at gen 3) it takes roughly 48. The difference is measurable with a timer, but functionally imperceptible since it's within a few percent. In case you're worried about it being an issue with random vs sequential I/O, I did the same thing with a 10GB MP4 and the result was similar (but obviously slower for both) - the 530 was measurably but not meaningfully faster than the 840 EVO, and the difference is a single-digit percentage. Like I said, not a good example because that's not bound by disk I/O, but it's the example you brought up.

                        I'm definitely not suggesting people should go out and buy 10 year old SATA SSDs, but rather that for most people (of course not all people) there is no sensible reason to get a high-end or close-to-high-end NVMe drive (and pay extra for it) instead of a value/mid-range drive that will perform perceptibly the same but save the buyer some money. I haven't found evidence that any home user with a typical workload will be telling the difference between this and one of the Lexar NM790s that was posted on here a bunch, or between this and a Samsung 990 Pro, or Kingston KC3000, or WD SN850X. What is tangible there is the difference in cost!

                        • netsurfer on 19/11/2023 - 18:16

                          @MHLoppy: You don't need to apologise, I understand what you are coming from in terms of tech. I do apologise for my wrong zip test result, it appears there was some weird RAM caching going on. There is a difference, but not that big for zip file.

                          Basically, I've been tying to respond to this:

                          I'd argue that anyone buying a high-end drive that doesn't care about intensive workload performance is throwing money away by buying a high-end drive

                          We tech savvy people are telling people that, but (1) we don't do that ourselves and (2) general public don't really see it that way. Seagate 530 on PCIe gen 3 x4, honestly, isn't the best way to use that SSD (but don't get me wrong, I too have a PCIe gen 4 x4 SSD (Kingston NV2) running on a slot that only supports PCIe gen 3 x4).

                          I have a SN850X and it is an overkill for me, so yes, I basically threw some money away (and no, I am not going to setup a database server).

                          will be telling the difference between this and one of the Lexar NM790s that was posted on here a bunch, or between this and a Samsung 990 Pro, or Kingston KC3000, or WD SN850X. What is tangible there is the difference in cost!

                          Yet you and me put a PCIe gen 4 x4 SSD in a PCIe gen 3 x4 slot and under that setup, are we really going to be able to tell the performance difference between that and a decent PCIe gen 3 x4 SSD? WD SN570 2TB (which was $118 last week) has a 900GB SLC dynamic cache when the SSD is empty, I doubt NM790 can beat that in PCIe gen 3 x4. It's easy for me to tell people NVMe SSDs are overkill for most of us, but the problem is that if I cannot even resist the marketing hype, I am not going to tell people don't buy them.

                          I pointed out a 2TB NVMe SSD (PCIe gen 3 x4) selling at $109 early in the year. Most people weren't interested. Compared that to Lexar NM790 2TB at $129. Honestly, while I do nitpick these SSDs, at the end of the day, people will make their own decision.

                          Anyway, currently, due to component swaps, there aren't any decent PCIe gen 3 x4 TLC SSDs which are very well priced. It will be interesting to see NM790's 2TB RRP now being $149 will mean people will go for PCIe gen 3 x4 SSDs which offer better $/GB. I personally doubt it.

                          • MHLoppy on 19/11/2023 - 20:35

                            @netsurfer: Hah, you're definitely right my use of the 530 "wastes" the drive to an extent, but I didn't buy it to max its sequential performance or because I think I could notice the difference in day-to-day performance — and definitely don't put myself in the "typical home user" box!

                            I unironically need to do large file transfers with just enough frequency that I don't want to sit around waiting 10-30 minutes when a drive with weak sustained write exhausts its SLC. At the time of purchase, the 530 fulfilled that need, even if that meant awkwardly gimping its maximum performance a little! My buying philosophy is to look at my needs and try to get the product that matches them, as crazy as that sounds :P

                            are we really going to be able to tell the performance difference between that and a decent PCIe gen 3 x4 SSD?

                            For day-to-day? No, I don't expect so. But again I bought to address that one specific need of now and then soaking up huge sequential writes in a way that interrupts my workflow as little as practical. I'm not as familiar with the SSD landscape as you are (especially now that I'm no longer researching for the year-old 530 purchase!), but the difference for that use case appears to be very noticeable (and TH and TPU both suggest the 570's SLC cache is small?) I would notice my occasional 500GB transfer taking several times as long, yes!

                            I pointed out a 2TB NVMe SSD (PCIe gen 3 x4) selling at $109 early in the year. Most people weren't interested. Compared that to Lexar NM790 2TB at $129. Honestly, while I do nitpick these SSDs, at the end of the day, people will make their own decision.

                            One of the big issues is people buying what they know, which is in some areas not well-aligned with what's actually best for them (and tend to recommend others follow this too, which compounds the issue for buyers doing cursory research). Some people have still been going around recommending the CM Hyper 212 for the past decade, even though it's been about as long since it was the best value option in that price category!

                            Part of that is also super valid — unless you keep up with tech for fun, it can be a lot of work to figure out what the best option at the time is, so a lot of people stick to what's known as a shortcut for avoiding making a bad purchase (myself included at times for areas I don't keep up with closely enough to make an informed decision independently). The NM790 seems to have gotten into the "OzBargain approved" products so it's easy for people to see a deal on it and upvote / recommend it.

                            Anyway, currently, due to component swaps, there aren't any decent PCIe gen 3 x4 TLC SSDs which are very well priced.

                            Yeah this has been a depressing reason for sometimes not being able to recommend the mid-range drives that I want to, and a small (imo valid) justification for leaning towards "known good" drives at times — even when they're probably worse buy on average they help avoid some of the "wtf, this isn't the drive measured in the reviews" moment haha.

                            • netsurfer on 20/11/2023 - 18:37

                              @MHLoppy: SN570 2TB is different. For some reason, WD uses a totally different SLC dynamic cache scheme. Yes, 1TB or below the dynamic SLC cache is small. SN570 2TB was a pain for me to test sustained write, I had to keep the app running and let it test over 900GB worth of write. The main reason I decided to give it a try was because I saw a few youTube videos where multiple people reported being able to write a large amount of data at SLC cache speed.

                              Sustained write, yeah, that's generally our "excuse" to get PCIe gen 4 x4 flagship SSDs. I have a B550 based PC in which I could have 5 PCIe gen 4 x4 all wired directly to the PC, but I am not going to do a flagship to flagship clone often. Also, a lot of these reviews don't do a full drive write, a lot of the so called flagship SSDs do suffer yet another significant drop when the SSD is filled above 80%. Furthermore, even if you do a format after a complete fill, it doesn't mean you get the SLC cache back completely. The recovery time is still required. That's the case for Seagate 530. Quoting Tom's Hardware review on 530 2TB:

                              But in our testing, it did not recover the SLC cache within our idle rounds. The cache spans roughly 225GB on our 2TB sample when empty and will write at up to 6.9 GBps until full.

                              To be fair, pretty much majority of the SSDs have slow recovery issue, especially if you do more than 2 rounds of full drive write. I do hope WD won't change SN570 2TB in future batches and keep that aggressive SLC cache setup. Its dynamic cache when the drive is empty is larger than Seagate 530, NM790, SN750 etc… So, if it is PCIe gen 3 x4 and you only write 900GB of data to that 2TB, SN570 will finish first. I did test SLC cache recovery on SN570 2TB, it did recover after the standard idle round, but only once.

                              Dynamic SLC cache is cheating, and it does carry a penalty. Understanding that idle time period is important. For example, there are multiple batches of NV2, one batch has subpar SLC recovery time (needs more time).

                              • MHLoppy on 20/11/2023 - 20:01

                                @netsurfer: If what you're saying about the 2TB version holds up, and if I could reliably get that hardware — which I'm a bit unsure about with everyone playing musical chairs with their components — then I probably would've been happy to have bought that instead of the 530 and pocketed the price difference :( Around that time it was actually one of my preferred models to recommend to PC-building friends since it performed well even when close to full and was aggressively priced (though I remember it being not as well-priced in Australia when I checked - idk).

                                There's a modest difference in rated endurance compared to the 530, but projecting my usage forward it shouldn't be a problem. In the ~10ish months of usage I've only written a little over 25TB, and I doubt I can average more than 50TB a year without intentionally doing more writes that i normally would.

                                Really weird to have such a large difference between the two capacities with the SN570! I guess since there was no 2TB model on release any juicy info about it didn't end up circulating widely.

                                • netsurfer on 20/11/2023 - 23:43

                                  @MHLoppy: SN570 2TB was pricey when I bought it. Its price has dropped a lot recently because the 1 month Adobe CS trial promotion has ended I think. Or perhaps WD has done some component swaps to cut cost.

                                  Western Digital WD Blue SN570 2TB SSD File Copy Test [230GB File Size]. When the drive is empty, 230GB is walk in the park for SN570 2TB. After I saw that youTube video, I took a gamble, bought one and found that SN570 2TB's dynamic SLC cache is big / aggressive.

                                  Once you put Seagate 530 in a PCIe gen 4 x4 slot, it is superior. 7000MB/s sequential read, write is something I can at least trick my brain to use. For the same 230GB file test, at PCIe gen 4 x4, Seagate 530 2TB will finish 2x faster than SN570 2TB. By getting SN570 2TB, when I eventually copy the files to a gen 4 x4 SSD later on, they will still be limited to gen 3 read speed.

                                  It's easy for me to come up excuses to get NM790 or T500. Sure, sustained write can be disappointing after SLC cache is used up. However, we do need a source SSD to pump data into a flagship SSD such as Seagate 530. Sequential read performance on NM790 and T500 is impressive (compare to say SN770). Their random 4K read Q1 is impressive as well. Sure, high queue depth random 4K writes is disappointing, but still, compare to most gen 3 SSDs, they are still acceptable (not to mention we hardly ever use random 4K write high queue depth in general use).

                                  Your next PC will surely have PCIe gen 5 x4 m.2 SSD slot(s). Though gen 5 SSDs are super overkill.

    • APD2022 on 18/11/2023 - 10:28

      Thanks for the heads up!

  • leyton01 on 18/11/2023 - 10:38

    What would be the easiest way to image a existing 500GB nvme s.2 drive to this?

    • vid_ghost on 18/11/2023 - 10:48

      minitool shadowmaker free download .. not 100% sure if the clone disk is still free.. i guess you can check but they may have moved it to the paid version

      Samsung gives you Data Migration free but it may only work if you have at least 1 Samsung drive.
      https://semiconductor.samsung.com/consumer-storage/support/t…

    • vinataba on 18/11/2023 - 10:54

      I used Clonezilla, it's a command line tool but quite straight forward.

    • BROKENKEYBOARD on 18/11/2023 - 11:29
      +1

      I think Crucial provides a free copy of Acronis

      • leyton01 on 18/11/2023 - 12:53

        Also suggestions for hardware to use when performing the clone?

        Already have both slots on motherboard full - OS drive and storage drive.

        Lots of external drive enclosures with dodgy descriptions about compatibility

        • BROKENKEYBOARD on 18/11/2023 - 13:11

          Already have both slots on motherboard full - OS drive and storage drive.

          If you have two slots, can't you just take out the drive that you're not cloning?

          • leyton01 on 18/11/2023 - 13:34

            @BROKENKEYBOARD: I have been shuffling storage between the 2 - desktop and docs and some big programs stored on second drive. Not sure how well it will boot with just one. Sure it will work but last time it messed up desktop icons and a few programs.

  • vinataba on 18/11/2023 - 10:55
    -1

    Nice, it shows 4TB @ 174.96$ for me

    • mjae01 on 18/11/2023 - 13:41

      I see that also. When I add it says 4TB capacity but the listing says 2TB? Which is it 2 or 4??

  • Cipher zzz on 18/11/2023 - 11:25

    This or sn850x $190

  • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 11:37
    +7

    This SSD is new and I will "try" to provide an objective view on this. However, please understand my view is generally quite subjective (i.e. biased).

    T500 uses Phison E25, which is a 4 channels controller. Typically, a high end flagship PCIe gen 4 x4 SSD uses a 8 channels controller, DRAM, TLC NAND. However, we have seen Lexar NM790 (which is 4 channels, DRAMless, TLC) doing well in some benchmark tests. T500 is 4 channels, with DRAM and TLC. So, how can these latest new 4 channels controller give high end PCIe gen 4 x4 8 channels based SSDs a run in many benchmark tests?

    Basically, most, if not all 8 channels controllers (including Phison E18) don't use 100% of the PCIe gen 4 x4 bandwidth (because 8 channels is more demanding). That opens the door for these newer 4 channels controller which utilises higher bandwidth to take advantage of the situation, especially in low load, low queue depth workload. It is like a freeway with 4 lanes but a speed limit of 240 Km/hr vs 8 lanes with 200 Km/hr. It's more demanding to manage 8 lanes of traffic, but if the controller can, it can achieve better result if all 8 lanes can be utilised.

    By using the latest gen Phison chipset, despite with a lower core count, it gets some of the low latency advantage. It also uses WD SN770's playbook in terms of aggressive dynamic SLC cache (this approach helps in most game related benchmark tests). However, that does mean T500 carries heavy foldback write penalty thus its subpar write speed after SLC cache is used up.

    It's an interesting design. It feels kinda like Lexar NM790, but with DRAM, plus it doesn't have some of NM790's latency penalty. Also, T500 uses Crucial NAND (same type used in PCIe gen 5 x4 SSDs), not YMTC. However, like NM790, it is unbalanced in performance and by using a more aggressive SLC cache, its sustained write after SLC cache is depleted is inferior. The main issue is the SSD pricing situation is clear as mud at the moment, it is hard to decide how much of a bargain this is.

    • patrick321 on 18/11/2023 - 12:23

      Nice info.

      The main issue is the SSD pricing situation is clear as mud at the moment, it is hard to decide how much of a bargain this is.

      Yes pricing is not as regular as before.

    • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 12:37
      +1

      There is currently a bit of confusion in terms of Phison E25, whether it supports 4 channels or 8 channels. I am using Tom's Hardware, TechPowerUp and TweakTown's information. Furthermore, taking the test results, pricing and Phison E26 into consideration, 4 channels with latest gen core design makes sense.

  • patrick321 on 18/11/2023 - 12:19

    Have been waiting and waiting for the 790 to drop or the P31 but nothing… Now am looking at this and am thinking I have waited long enough, black friday or not.

    • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 12:56
      +1

      It's good to have some competition. This SSD is basically Crucial + Phison version of NM790 and it has DRAM. It's a pity it uses a very aggressive SLC cache (it needs to, due to WD SN770). There are pros and cons of each approach.

      • patrick321 on 18/11/2023 - 17:18

        It's good to have some competition

        Yes but the choices can confuse a novice like me. Have to wade through- controllers, DRAM, SLC, TBW and all the franken SSD's and the dodgy company's who cut corners to save a buck.

    • IslandBreeze on 18/11/2023 - 13:16
      +2

      I want to say I saw a comment from the Lexar rep saying they're cooking up some black friday deals. I was in the same boat and jumped on this because netsurfer is handsome and said big words that looked positive.

      • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 16:38
        +1

        Just to be clear, my current view on this SSD is that it is too early to judge this SSD at this price. It uses some of the newer techniques to do well in some benchmark tests. However, fundamentally, it did cut cost on the controller.

        Like all 4 channel controller based SSD products (which don't get the most powerful controller chip), they all have weaknesses and can have uneven performance. While I think it is good to have this type of products (more choices is good for consumers), they are not for professional grade usage. For T500, I do recommend you install Crucial's Storage Executive software. I reckon Crucial will release new firmware to address some of those slightly uneven performance issues later on. That's something better than Lexar at the moment (i.e. there is a good chance you get firmware updates from Crucial).

      • patrick321 on 18/11/2023 - 17:13
        +1

        I did get the NM790 4tb for my offline windows box but am now looking for a 2tb for my laptop- for online, daily tasks, VM's and autocad.

        He always uses big words, I heard there is a netsurfer fan club but you have to have minimum 6 NVMe M.2 slots to join. Unfortunately I fall short. :(

        • IslandBreeze on 18/11/2023 - 17:21
          +1

          Falling short is the story of my life :(

        • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 17:33
          +1

          You should do your own checks and read proper reviews. It's hard to be objective on these, especially I don't own a T500. I do have a NM790 SSD so I don't want to come out being too pro NM790.

          If we want to be nice, NM790 and T500 both bring latest TLC NAND chips to consumers at an affordable package. If we want to be strict, they both use a new way to cheat (better NAND, but inferior controller in heavy usage situation, but because it needs to support higher bandwidth, it shines in general usage tests).

          you have to have minimum 6 NVMe M.2 slots to join

          The new requirement is 8 slots. Only kidding. I am not good at explaining things in a simple way so you shouldn't follow.

          • patrick321 on 18/11/2023 - 23:44

            @netsurfer:

            The new requirement is 8 slots

            Then I have no chance.

            I am not good at explaining things in a simple way so you shouldn't follow.

            I would say you are wrong there, very helpfull.

            (better NAND, but inferior controller in heavy usage situation

            So if I want something that best suits 'heaver usage' which would be a good option - T500, 970 evo plus (Elpis), P31, 990?

            • netsurfer on 19/11/2023 - 11:36

              @patrick321: Which motherboard? If it has multiple m.2 slots, which slot is still available and which SSD you currently have?

              Heavier usage… any chance to be more specific? What do you intend to do with the new SSD? Do you intend to upgrade to a new system soon? Generally, people will shortlist some SSDs and wait for one of them to be discounted. Of course, with Black Friday sales, there might be some deals which are very attractive and trigger a FOMO purchase.

              • patrick321 on 22/11/2023 - 00:36

                @netsurfer: For Laptop ThinkPad T14s Gen 2 AMD Ryzen 5, from specs I think it has a SSD heat sink. (gen3 ssd slot)
                Using for = Linux - online, web surfing and daily tasks, VM's (running windows with autocad).

                Generally, people will shortlist some SSDs and wait for one of them to be discounted. Of course, with Black Friday sales, there might be some deals which are very attractive and trigger a FOMO purchase.

                I was waiting for 970 evo plus (Elpis), P31 in that order but not much luck, now looking at the 990 as it seems to come on special more. 2TBs
                As always my main concern is getting one that runs as cool as possible.

  • Bazzaaa on 18/11/2023 - 13:40

    This or the 990Pro for my PS5?

    • vid_ghost on 18/11/2023 - 14:32
      +1

      990 pro or 850x or 980 pro. All those are better for the PS5

    • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 17:47

      Look at Tom's Hardware's chart and decide.

      PS5 SSD Read Test - Tom's Hardware

      • Bazzaaa on 18/11/2023 - 18:17

        Thanks. I'll wait for a 990pro sale then 👍

  • frnaky on 18/11/2023 - 14:25
    -1

    4tb $174??

    • netsurfer on 18/11/2023 - 16:21
      +2

      No, this has been explained earlier and in the previous deal. Crucial currently doesn't have a 4TB version of T500. The expectation is Crucial will release one later, but such SKU currently doesn't exist.

      I was tempted when I saw someone pointed out Amazon is showing this is 4TB, but checked reviews and Crucial Web site. If it is really 4TB at this price, it would be OZBargained by now.

  • magnitude on 18/11/2023 - 17:56

    how does it compare with the KC3000 for productivity??

  • julianrubio on 20/11/2023 - 01:32

    Do you guys reckon it's worth getting this rn or wait for black friday for possibly better deals?

  • oringal on 21/11/2023 - 16:47

    the price when down to $130.48, if the OP wants to update the post

    edit: oh don't worry, the 4TB option is the 2TB drive

  • shoppingpenguin on 27/11/2023 - 07:30

    Is anyone else having problems getting this delivered? My order has been returned to seller, it never made it out of the US, and Amazon will be refunding :(

    • GrabOzB on 27/11/2023 - 07:38

      Mine is marked as delayed at customs

      • shoppingpenguin on 27/11/2023 - 07:55

        All the best. I have no idea what went wrong with my order, but interested to know if others are getting through

        • GrabOzB on 27/11/2023 - 11:52

          Just received it now! So not sure what happened with your order

    • Trumble on 08/12/2023 - 01:19

      I placed an order for 2 on 24 November. Still not shipped yet. Date for arriving given as 26 Dec 2023 - 27 Jan 2024.

      • shoppingpenguin on 08/12/2023 - 07:12

        Apparently my initial order was damaged so it was sent straight back to the sender. I ordered again on the 27th Nov and just received it yesterday. Can't believe they haven't shipped your order at all :(

        • Trumble on 08/12/2023 - 16:59

          Thanks for the update shoppingpenguin. I checked with Amazon and got this response:
          "currently the item is out of stock with the seller from the USA, they're procuring the items there were some item when your order came in but the item that was reserved for you was defective and infeasible". Seems like they can't do anything to expedite the order and I'll just have to wait.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join