Kingston SNV3S NV3 1TB PCIe Gen4 NVMe M.2 SSD $79 Delivered ($0 VIC/ NSW/ SA C&C, in-store) @ Centre Com

350
Kingston SNV3S NV3 1TB PCIe Gen4 NVMe M.2 SSD $79 Delivered ($0 VIC/ NSW/ SA C&C, in-store) @ Centre Com
Go to Deal
Meteor Anarcom on 03/05/2025 - 01:08 centrecom.com.au (1249 clicks)
Last edited 12/05/2025 - 22:57
NEWDELHI

Not saying this NV3 is decent, but much better than this $87 P3 Plus deal with $5 gift card rebate. It is suspicious that post could get those many upvotes.

Kingston NV3 is better than Crucial P3 Plus from all aspects.

Surcharges: 0% for bank deposit, Afterpay & Zip Money. 1.2% for VISA / MasterCard & PayPal. 2.2% for AmEx.

Free shipping excludes WA, NT & remote areas.

Edit: just realized this was $78 few days ago, see this comment. If you're really in a hurry, this is a choice, otherwise I don't recommend this.

Computing 1TB Computer Component Kingston M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD

Related Stores

Centre Com
Centre Com

Comments

  • Steven Reece Lewis on 03/05/2025 - 01:42

    I have one of these. The write speeds are only about 75 percent of what's advertised on mine.

    • Meteor Anarcom on 03/05/2025 - 01:48

      Is your M.2 slot PCIe 3.0? It's not normal. It should be at least around 90% of what it advertised

      • parad0x on 03/05/2025 - 03:27

        Oh yes, 3.0, good point. That would bottom out at around the same. Probably the most likely case

      • Steven Reece Lewis on 03/05/2025 - 08:25
        +6

        PCIe 4.0. Honestly, I'm trying to figure it out. I've read the previous NV2 model would start to slow down when you exceed 50 percent of the capacity with no explanation and buyers were pissed. I am using this as a windows 11 OS drive. It is split into 2 partitions with C drive being 250 gigs and the remaining being where I install my games. I am buying a heatsink to see if that helps as it's running at 58-62 Celcius during Crystal Mark tests. Kingston were also caught out swapping components for cheaper slower parts years ago after their drives good great press reviews.

        Update: Just did another CrystalDiskMark pass this morning after leaving this comment and the drive has recorded speeds at the advertised even slightly faster and the temperature did not go over 40 degrees Celsius (no heatsink).

        Update 2: Okay, it's a heat thing from what I can tell. As the drive gets hotter the results on the write speeds decrease noticeably. Even operating within the 70 degree Celsius bandwidth. Once the drive exceeds 50 degrees, it displays slower writing behaviour. Since 50 degrees is no real thing, this is a bit of a disappointment but you might not notice this depending on your type of use. Read speeds remain the same though. I will retest with a heatsink in the next few days.

        • Steven Reece Lewis on 05/05/2025 - 10:04
          +1

          Put on a heatsink. Temps are much much better. No longer getting thermal throttling occuring. More consistent subsequent CrystalMark testing results in line with advertised speeds. I don't have any air flow passing directly over the drive as I'm using a small form factor case so the passive cooling from the heatsink has solved the throttling. I used this single sided 10 mm heatsink as the drive is single sided btw: https://amzn.asia/d/5etjLiD

    • parad0x on 03/05/2025 - 03:25

      75%?
      So…. 3000mbps - 384MB/s?
      On a 1TB model?

      I'd say you're spot on expectation.

      • GordonD on 03/05/2025 - 09:21
        +2

        So…. 3000mbps - 384MB/s?

        No, 3000 MB/s = 3000 MB/s.

        Some things get measured in megabits or gigabits per second, like USB ports.

        Other things get measured in megaBytes or gigaBytes per second, like M.2 NVMe SSDs.

        • parad0x on 06/05/2025 - 05:31

          Yeh no shit, don't need the ELI5 version, just point out that I screwed up,.the rest is obvious..

          Yes….. My statement is still true however, 3000mbps is 384MB/s every day of the week and trice.6664 Monday morning.
          Anything that can be measured in bits, can be measured in bytes. So like your USB ports can equally be muweured6 in bytes, just as your NVMe can be measured in bits.
          Just as that which can be measured in 1's can also be measured in 10's for our familiar base-10, bits and bytes are the base-8 equivalent.

          Really the only issue was I quoted the speed of the drive incorrectly

      • hollykryten on 04/05/2025 - 11:09
        +1

        I don't know how you tried to do maths. But 384MB/s is slower than a SATA 3 SSD.

        75% of the specified max write speed. Means it loses 25% of the max speed.

        This drive is specified for 4000MB/s write. So 75% of that max speed is 3000MB/s. It's still nothing to sneeze at.

        • parad0x on 06/05/2025 - 05:40
          +1

          I don't know how you define maths but it's got nothing to.do with speed or SSD's. My math is just fine

          • hollykryten on 06/05/2025 - 11:35
            -1

            @parad0x: I see. You were trying to do your maths by Mbps (megabits per second) which was a mistake as this or any other NVMe SSD drive is specified at MBps (megabytes per second also known by MB/s). As in megabytes and not megabits per second. So it's no wonder you got it wrong. The drive is rated at 4000MBps (4000MB/s) write. At 75% of the rated speed of this NVMe SSD is 3000MBps (3000MB/s) write.

            And i don't even know where you got 384MB/s from as 3000Mbps (megabits per second) is 375MB/s. So your maths was completely wrong there in the first place. But as i said the drive goes by MBps (megabytes per second or MB/s).

            • parad0x on 07/05/2025 - 22:04
              -1

              @hollykryten: No shit, I established that but nice diversion to shift the focus from your own stupidity.

              3,076Mbps - as any system using 8/10bit encoding will use true definitions of bits and bytes. I was having a conversation regarding SAS prior to my reply. This put me in the mindset of Mbps and also uses 8/10bit encoding, thus bringing about 384MB/s.

              So would you like to continue to tell me my masters that included a heavy math component, not to mention my ability to switch between Base2, Base8, Base10 or Base16 without much thought is so insufficient that some clown on the internet who has no idea what they're talking about, but points for trying so damn hard to make yourself right. You acrewed up, grow up and own it. I did.

              Anything that is measured in MB/s can also be measured or expressed in mbps.yout statement is the equivalent of saying drives are purchased in 10s but we all know I can go buy 1.

              Please do continue attempting to fault me because I corrected you, I cant wait for another intelligent conversation with an argumentative techno-juvenile. I'll be here

  • teddiebear on 03/05/2025 - 02:01
    +19

    Lmao they coulda picked a better code than 'FLASHMOM' HAHAHAHA.
    Besides, being an aussie site, i think someone has been reading too many yanky sites. Should be 'mum' and not 'mom' unless i'm reading the promo wrong.

    • xoape on 03/05/2025 - 09:35
      +4

      It stands for flash media on motherboard and only applicable to m2s

    • vid_ghost on 03/05/2025 - 14:27
      +3

      YES .. all mothers wants a 1TB Nvme drive for FLASHMOM day

  • parad0x on 03/05/2025 - 03:21
    +3

    All aspects except one uses Micron flash and the other whatever they can find. I'd take the P3

  • mrkorrupt on 03/05/2025 - 06:53
    +5

    Please don't flash your mum

  • Commodore64 on 03/05/2025 - 07:42

    320 TBW isn't the worst - it's better than the crucial P4 by 50%, but there are better drives such as MP33 with 600 TBW. While not as fast, data endurance may be more important for some.

    • Dsiee on 03/05/2025 - 08:57
      +2

      For any nonserver use any of them will be fine endurance wise. Most consumer device will only do a few dozen drive writes over the lifespan of the device anyway.

      Obviously, consider your own use case. A cache drive is going to have a completely different set of requirements to a steam library drive.

      • Commodore64 on 03/05/2025 - 10:06

        Well said. Obviously something like a plex server can thrash it even with its metadata and caches more than you'd expect at face value. That said, 320TBW is respectable and with that speed and iops I've bought a couple for a mongoDB mirror.

        • awph on 03/05/2025 - 16:05
          +1

          The WD SN5000 has 600TBW for $12 more, might as well go with that instead. Was thinking of putting together a nas with these drives a while ago, but still can't find an affordable machine with good cooling. Probably have to put one together myself with a board that can do bifurcation, so I can use those quad M.2 adapters in an x16 PCIe slot.

          • Shootinputin89 on 08/05/2025 - 19:42

            @awph: Both this and the SN5000 will die quick deaths if used as a cache drive or with Proxmox ZFS write amplification city. Pay up and get a server grade 2.5" SSD or M.2 NVME. I know this from experience. Then you have things like PLP (Power loss protection) that are not found in these consumer drives. It's just sad how expensive the good drives are. Brand new Samsung 893 960GB cost me nearly $300, and I'm looking at getting a Kingston Enterprise DC600M 960GB which will be another $300. You can try the used market - but you never know what you'll get. I bought two used Intel DC drives, and they had low writes, but over 6 years power-on. The latter of which shouldn't be a big issue for SSD (no moving parts), but I like having the peace of mind that the drives I've bought have 5years warranty.

      • Shootinputin89 on 08/05/2025 - 19:45

        Yeah, I found that out the hard way with a Samsung 850 Pro, which did not like being a cache drive in UnRaid. Made sure I properly paid up for a server drive before trying out Proxmox. Plus you have other features like power loss protection.

  • vid_ghost on 03/05/2025 - 14:25
    +3

    Luck of the draw if you get -

    Kioxia 162-Layer (BiCS6) QLC flash
    OR
    BiCS6 TLC flash
    OR
    Whatevers cheapest at the time flash

    on this drive! TLC being better

    Quote > https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ssds/kingston-nv3…
    "At 500GB, given the performance specifications, the NV3 is more likely to have TLC flash. At 2TB and 4TB, QLC flash is more likely. And we’ve seen both TLC and QLC flash at 1TB."

    • parad0x on 09/05/2025 - 23:50

      The NV3 isn’t going to be using old flash with its performance specifications, so there’s no worry there, but the coin flip for flash type might deter some buyers.

      Kingston promises that all variants of the NV3 will meet the baseline performance specifications.

      Quite simply, Kingston’s choice of controllers provides them a pathway forward for extending the working lifespan of the NV3 without having to make any major compromises down the road.

      For the most part, this is still plenty of performance, especially for a budget SSD..

      tailoring the drive’s specifications so that it fits a wide range of hardware while limiting it to respectable hardware. It currently uses either the SMI SM2268XT2 or Phison E27T controller, both excellent budget controllers. The flash, BiCS6 TLC and QLC flash will be most common at launch, and it's underrated. It’s more power-efficient/.

      Amazing what 1 phrse taken out of context does

  • awph on 03/05/2025 - 15:56
    +2

    If endurance is something you care about, the WD SN5000 is much better at 600TBW for the 1TB model. It's $91 after the $6 coupon, so $12 more for almost double the endurance. The 500GB, 1TB and 2TB SN5000 drives are TLC, and the 4TB model is QLC (Datasheet). Both the NV3 and SN5000 are better than those trashy crucial drives in my opinion.

    • Meteor Anarcom on 03/05/2025 - 16:14

      Agree, also SN580 1TB is now $89

  • flipmode on 03/05/2025 - 16:32

    noob question, is this compatible with mac mini M4?

    • TheMoose on 03/05/2025 - 16:40
      +2

      M4 mac minis don't have NVMe ports.
      If you buy an external enclosure to use via USB-C (like I do) then yeah, they are fine for that.

  • arst on 03/05/2025 - 22:11

    Is Chia still alive?

  • MrGareth on 03/05/2025 - 22:40

    What's the cheapest reliable 1Tb TLC based drive these days? Perhaps the WD SN580 1Tb for $95 (Centrecom?)… but the reviews on that model are quite old now so I don't know if they've part-swapped to QLC. I'd much prefer a TLC drive as the boot / system disk :)

    • Meteor Anarcom on 03/05/2025 - 23:56

      SN5000 is the newer version of SN580. SN580 is TLC

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join