For that price they should come with some rgb

"It's a milestone of some sort, but 8TB consumer-grade SSDs have arrived." Technically, we've had 8TB SSD's for a while, but only a few models and most not nearly hitting these specs. Most prominent model I can think of is the Samsung 870 QVO 8TB. But that's a SATA drive with QLC NAND, albeit for half the price.

I'll take one. Have it delivered to my yacht.

you can tell its too early because buying 8 1tb drives would be half the price, 2tb units are finally starting to make sense, consoles haven't done much to push 2tb+ demand and with the leading game -warzone- reportedly not happy about taking 250gb, progress might take another decade games should be half a terabyte by now, all the 4k and pcie4 hype and we still stuck with 2011 textures I'm starting to worry that ps5 drive will spend its lifetime underused like the ps3's bluray

Impressive, but a bit "who is this for?" at the moment; 8TB is too large for a games drive but too small for bulk storage in 2022 (especially at that price.) It will be neat though once we reach big external levels of storage in these M.2 drives, with M.2 SSDs for OS, games, and bulk storage, all directly on the motherboard. *feelsgoodman.jpg* If I had better self-control, I could get by with just a 2TB SSD for my games. 4TB would be comfortably ideal though. Eventually I'll pull the trigger on one. Right now I have them straddled across a 1TB M.2 and a 2TB SSHD and it kind of drives me bonkers.

That's some very expensive game-storage upgrade. I have two of these Sabrent NVMe 2TB already on CROSSHAIR VIII HERO motherboard. No issues at all - one for OS and the other for game and other "fast read" requiring apps. Also they actually 1.8TB in Windows value size.

...should be like the marketing law says: "only" 1499.99...and no gold powder, no swarovski style led's - they really restrained themselves...

lol, I just bought an 18TB ultrastar for under £300. Unless you absolutely need ultrafast storage, dont waste your money.

geogan:

That's some very expensive game-storage upgrade. I have two of these Sabrent NVMe 2TB already on CROSSHAIR VIII HERO motherboard. No issues at all - one for OS and the other for game and other "fast read" requiring apps. Also they actually 1.8TB in Windows value size.

All drive sizes measure in base 10 numbers, not base 2. This has ALWAYS been the case. 1KB = 1000 Bytes not 1024 1MB = 1,000,000 Bytes not 1,048,576 1GB = 1,000,000,000 Bytes not 1,073,741,824 1TB = 1,000,000,000,000 Bytes not 1,099,511,627,776 Notice the approx 10% difference per TerraByte.

geogan:

That's some very expensive game-storage upgrade. I have two of these Sabrent NVMe 2TB already on CROSSHAIR VIII HERO motherboard. No issues at all - one for OS and the other for game and other "fast read" requiring apps. Also they actually 1.8TB in Windows value size.

Also got two of these but 1TB ver. and got rid of the sata ssds, its enough for me. I dont have that huge game library and some games are on my laptop.

geogan:

That's some very expensive game-storage upgrade. I have two of these Sabrent NVMe 2TB already on CROSSHAIR VIII HERO motherboard. No issues at all - one for OS and the other for game and other "fast read" requiring apps. Also they actually 1.8TB in Windows value size.

i like a clean build. but i'm also very value conscious, last summer Crucial released their P5+ (6,600 seq/700k iops). i have Sabrent Rockets as boot drives on two pc's (work and htpc) and have always liked them (not least for the cloning software). but i also have a DAW (Crosshair VIII Dark Hero) that i use for gaming (way better chair 😉) so i bought two P5+ 2Tb ($240 ea for Prime Day) - i'm the target audience for an 8Tb M.2 - but not @ $1.5K i ended up buying an OWC Express 4M2 - a 4 slot M.2 (pcie 3.0) TB3 for $350 large drives may have the greatest need for speed (largest files etc...) but i don't need that for a DAW so i loaded up on three 4Tb PCIe 3.0 (XPG SX8100) @ $399 ea - so now i have 12Tb AND a TB3 RAID enclosure for about the same as the 8TB @ $1,500 Sabrent

Benny V:

8TB is too large for a games drive

Say what?

Oh you sweet little beast, where were you in December when I was building my gaming rig :P

Undying:

Also got two of these but 1TB ver. and got rid of the sata ssds, its enough for me. I dont have that huge game library and some games are on my laptop.

Why get rid of the sata ssd's? Sata ssd's are still more than fine, and the more storage the better 😀

Dragam1337:

Why get rid of the sata ssd's? Sata ssd's are still more than fine, and the more storage the better 😀

As i said dont need that much storage on my desktop and build looks more clean without it. Upgraded my laptop with one 512gb and sold the other two of the same size.

Undying:

As i said dont need that much storage on my desktop and build looks more clean without it. Upgraded my laptop with one 512gb and sold the other two of the same size.

Each to their own - i dont care how my pc looks, the cosmos 2 is just a big black box anyways 😛

EspHack:

you can tell its too early because buying 8 1tb drives would be half the price, 2tb units are finally starting to make sense, consoles haven't done much to push 2tb+ demand and with the leading game -warzone- reportedly not happy about taking 250gb, progress might take another decade games should be half a terabyte by now, all the 4k and pcie4 hype and we still stuck with 2011 textures I'm starting to worry that ps5 drive will spend its lifetime underused like the ps3's bluray

I can not disagree more , 4k textures are plenty say you have an asset a table at best you can walk so close to fit it on half your screen ... Maybe there is literally no need for 8k texture there you will just consume more vram an storage for nothing , then a vase asset 4k will be a waste so 2k texture max makes sense if not 1k texture. My examples are rough at best since a texture does not apply flat the uv map dictates how it wraps around the asset. If they do what you want every single 8gb and lower card will not be enough at all. Using higher resolution textures will increase drastically the installation since there are a lot more things under the hud is texture +materials . So let's see Diffuse (what all think when they say texture) Normal (makes your lower poly look like higher poly it is literally almost free detail !) Specular (light reflection information ) height ( guess ! ;P) and depending on the Dx version or opengl or Vulcan they can be more materials in general they are almost free visual fidelity remove em from any game and you will think we are back in 2000. Ok so now let's return to the table texture +3 materials for simplicity 1k textures =1mb so it will occupy in ram 4mb just to dress that table , on 2k literally you increased the pixel count 4x so now the table texture occupies 16mb in vram ... 4k quadruples again the pixel count 64 mb just for a table ..8k textures quadruples again 256 mb a scene have a lot more assets the building you are in vases hangars doorways, doors, and an asset can have multiple faces where they accept different texture etc etc . And yeah I know I simplified a lot of things and I did not take into account compression techniques or that the materials do not need to always match the diffuse pixel density a specular often is fine to be lower res ... Depends on the asset but I am already dropping a wall of text here . Also I you might find it funny but if direct storage work exactly like ps5 ssd asset streaming we are looking at significantly redused install sizes ! The way it works now devs will package assets in blocks of data to be loaded when you enter an area , when you change an area you load a different block that has packaged all the assets needed as well this means storing and occupying AGAIN space on your ssd ... Devs reuse assets a lot of times in the same game is not unusual a block containing 50% or even more reused assets . Ps5 and direct storage have the potential to alleviate that block optimization since it will allow to stream in assets 1 at the time .

Happy its not that cheap Qlc but that price is crazy, my sabrent 4tb (tlc version) was £499 when i bought it new, hope the price drops a lot

Benny V:

Impressive, but a bit "who is this for?" at the moment; 8TB is too large for a games drive but too small for bulk storage in 2022 (especially at that price.) It will be neat though once we reach big external levels of storage in these M.2 drives, with M.2 SSDs for OS, games, and bulk storage, all directly on the motherboard. *feelsgoodman.jpg* If I had better self-control, I could get by with just a 2TB SSD for my games. 4TB would be comfortably ideal though. Eventually I'll pull the trigger on one. Right now I have them straddled across a 1TB M.2 and a 2TB SSHD and it kind of drives me bonkers.

I have a 4TB SSD, 2x1TB SSD, 6TB for games, not enough.

Venix:

I can not disagree more , 4k textures are plenty say you have an asset a table at best you can walk so close to fit it on half your screen ... Maybe there is literally no need for 8k texture there you will just consume more vram an storage for nothing , then a vase asset 4k will be a waste so 2k texture max makes sense if not 1k texture. My examples are rough at best since a texture does not apply flat the uv map dictates how it wraps around the asset. If they do what you want every single 8gb and lower card will not be enough at all. Using higher resolution textures will increase drastically the installation since there are a lot more things under the hud is texture +materials . So let's see Diffuse (what all think when they say texture) Normal (makes your lower poly look like higher poly it is literally almost free detail !) Specular (light reflection information ) height ( guess ! ;P) and depending on the Dx version or opengl or Vulcan they can be more materials in general they are almost free visual fidelity remove em from any game and you will think we are back in 2000. Ok so now let's return to the table texture +3 materials for simplicity 1k textures =1mb so it will occupy in ram 4mb just to dress that table , on 2k literally you increased the pixel count 4x so now the table texture occupies 16mb in vram ... 4k quadruples again the pixel count 64 mb just for a table ..8k textures quadruples again 256 mb a scene have a lot more assets the building you are in vases hangars doorways, doors, and an asset can have multiple faces where they accept different texture etc etc . And yeah I know I simplified a lot of things and I did not take into account compression techniques or that the materials do not need to always match the diffuse pixel density a specular often is fine to be lower res ... Depends on the asset but I am already dropping a wall of text here . Also I you might find it funny but if direct storage work exactly like ps5 ssd asset streaming we are looking at significantly redused install sizes ! The way it works now devs will package assets in blocks of data to be loaded when you enter an area , when you change an area you load a different block that has packaged all the assets needed as well this means storing and occupying AGAIN space on your ssd ... Devs reuse assets a lot of times in the same game is not unusual a block containing 50% or even more reused assets . Ps5 and direct storage have the potential to alleviate that block optimization since it will allow to stream in assets 1 at the time .

Tbh 8gb shouldn't have been enough for a long time already. You can use pleb 1k textures if you like, im going 8k baby !