Asrock B550 PG Riptide review
be quiet! Dark Rock TF2 review
Basemark GPU v1.2 benchmarks with 36 GPUs
Corsair MP600 Pro XT PCIe 4.0 M.2 NVMe review
Teamgroup MP34Q 2TB NVMe SSD review
Lian Li SP750 (750W PSU) review
Teamgroup Cardea Z44Q 4TB NVMe SSD review
Asus ROG Swift PG32UQX monitor review
Plextor M10P 2TB NVMe PCIe 4.0 SSD review
ASRock RX 6600 XT Phantom Gaming D 8GB OC review
Sabrent Rocket Q 1TB NVMe SSD M.2 review
Posted by: on: 06/09/2020 10:12 AM [
19 comment(s) ]
We review the Sabrent Rocket Q 1TB, a fast M.2 SSD that you can purchase for 129 USD these days. Labeled with Reads and Writes in the 3200/2000 MB/s ranges there however is an oddity to be found with this series, as that Q in the naming implies a substantial difference. Wanna know what that is?
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2 3 4
Deleted member 281913
Unregistered
Unregistered
Posted on: 06/10/2020 12:36 AM
You can't be seriously writing this...
A game save is not the entire game, but a 10-25MB file, so your maths are completely wrong. Also, when a game has an update, not all of it is getting rewritten. Very rarely even a major update is more than 300MB.
You can't be seriously writing this...
A game save is not the entire game, but a 10-25MB file, so your maths are completely wrong. Also, when a game has an update, not all of it is getting rewritten. Very rarely even a major update is more than 300MB.
Thunk_It
Senior Member
Posts: 288
Senior Member
Posts: 288
Posted on: 06/10/2020 04:04 AM
Hilbert, I really appreciate the level of thoroughness and professionalism in this review. And it is a great review!
Hilbert, I really appreciate the level of thoroughness and professionalism in this review. And it is a great review!
Reardan
Senior Member
Posts: 418
Senior Member
Posts: 418
Posted on: 06/10/2020 04:23 AM
This is wrong enough that it should be deleted. Math this bad is way more harmful to discourse than insults and curse words will ever be.
I don't agree with those maths. I have 3 8GB HDD full with steam games, which usually update, sometimes once a day or a week. If I fill a 1TB SSD with QLC with 700- 1000 endurance. and I play a game on daily bases and save it every 5min over the same file, I would be able to update that file 700 times (remember SSD is full so the only way is to update the file rather than place it in other part of the SDD). The disk will last 175 days playing 8h a day. Great investment $129 per less than a half a year
This is wrong enough that it should be deleted. Math this bad is way more harmful to discourse than insults and curse words will ever be.
Ottoz
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Junior Member
Posts: 6
Posted on: 06/10/2020 06:58 PM
I don't see any wrong, if you write 700 times over same sector your SSD is as good as dead. This can be achieve in many ways. 1TB database change 700 a record and your SSD is dead. A SSD completely full at 100% and updating the same same 700 and boom your SSD is dead. 700 cycles is rubbish.
The only way to achieve 9PB in that SSD, it is using in a DVR, that will be a waste of dollars
I don't see any wrong, if you write 700 times over same sector your SSD is as good as dead. This can be achieve in many ways. 1TB database change 700 a record and your SSD is dead. A SSD completely full at 100% and updating the same same 700 and boom your SSD is dead. 700 cycles is rubbish.
The only way to achieve 9PB in that SSD, it is using in a DVR, that will be a waste of dollars
pages 1 2 3 4
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Junior Member
Posts: 6
I don't agree with those maths. I have 3 HDD 8TB full of steam games, which usually update, once a day or a week. If I fill a 1TB SSD with those games using a SSD QLC with 700- 1000 endurance. and I play a game on daily bases and save it every 5min over the same file, I would be able to update that file 700 times (remember SSD is full so the only way is to update the file rather than place it in other part of the SDD). The disk will last 175 days playing 8h a day. Great investment $129 per less than a half a year