I have an x370 sli killer from as rock and has a list of supported nvme drives in the manual and I really want to get the intel 600p 512gb but it's not listed. I'm sure it will work just fine just wanted assurance.
The 600p isn't a good NVMe SSD. In many workloads, it actually performs worse than a high level AHCI SSD. Money would be better spent on the Crucial MX300.
The 600p isn't a good NVMe SSD. In many workloads, it actually performs worse than a high level AHCI SSD. Money would be better spent on the Crucial MX300.
The nvme version or regular sata?
Plus don't see how the mx300 performs better, the intel has a higher max sequential read and write, better 4K iops..over the crucial
Plus looked at benchmarks the crucial performs way lesss
The 600p isn't a good NVMe SSD. In many workloads, it actually performs worse than a high level AHCI SSD. Money would be better spent on the Crucial MX300.
The nvme version or regular sata?
Plus don't see how the mx300 performs better, the intel has a higher max sequential read and write, better 4K iops..over the crucial
Plus looked at benchmarks the crucial performs way lesss
Both. It being TLC basically bottlenecks it, what you said is ball theoretical. Read here for a proffesional review comparing the two: http://www.anandtech.com/show/10850/the-intel-ssd-600p-512gb-review/4
As seen the 600p hardly beats the mx300 and in a lot of the workload the mx300 measures superior.
The 600p isn't a good NVMe SSD. In many workloads, it actually performs worse than a high level AHCI SSD. Money would be better spent on the Crucial MX300.
The nvme version or regular sata?
Plus don't see how the mx300 performs better, the intel has a higher max sequential read and write, better 4K iops..over the crucial
Plus looked at benchmarks the crucial performs way lesss
Both. It being TLC basically bottlenecks it, what you said is ball theoretical. Read here for a proffesional review comparing the two: http://www.anandtech.com/show/10850/the-intel-ssd-600p-512gb-review/4
As seen the 600p hardly beats the mx300 and in a lot of the workload the mx300 measures superior.
why on that link is the only 2 graphs that beat the intel 600p? in real world applications which are the graphs on that website that weren't linked had better-performance in some cases 2900 points higher than the mx300
The 600p isn't a good NVMe SSD. In many workloads, it actually performs worse than a high level AHCI SSD. Money would be better spent on the Crucial MX300.
The nvme version or regular sata?
Plus don't see how the mx300 performs better, the intel has a higher max sequential read and write, better 4K iops..over the crucial
Plus looked at benchmarks the crucial performs way lesss
Both. It being TLC basically bottlenecks it, what you said is ball theoretical. Read here for a proffesional review comparing the two: http://www.anandtech.com/show/10850/the-intel-ssd-600p-512gb-review/4
As seen the 600p hardly beats the mx300 and in a lot of the workload the mx300 measures superior.
why on that link is the only 2 graphs that beat the intel 600p? in real world applications which are the graphs on that website that weren't linked had better-performance in some cases 2900 points higher than the mx300