Sabrent has revealed the company's new Rocket 2230 SSD, which will fight for a spot on the list of best SSDs. The Sabrent Rocket 2230, like its name implies, conforms to the M.2 2230 form factor and caters to compact devices, such as the Steam Deck, Microsoft Surface, ultrabooks, and Intel NUCs.
Due to the Steam Deck's design, the portable gaming console only accepts M.2 2230 SSDs, and there aren't many options on the market. One particular Steam Deck owner discovered a mod to slip longer SSDs, like the M.2 2242 ones, into the device. However, Steam Deck's designer warned against such hacks since they can provoke overheating issues on the Steam Deck and considerably shorten the consoler's life span. Sabrent's latest Rocket 2230 SSD makes upgrading the SSD inside your Steam Deck easier and safer.
The Rocket 2230 features a single-sided design to squeeze into the tightest places without hiccups. Sabrent's recipe for the Rocket 2230 includes Phison's spanking-new E21T SSD controller and Micron's 176-layer TLC NAND. Combined with a PCIe 4.0 interface, the Rocket 2230 can hit impressive speeds of up to 5 GBps. However, the performance varies on the capacity. Speaking of capacity, Sabrent sells the Rocket 2230 in flavors of 256GB, 512GB, and 1TB, so there's abundant space to store your data or games in the case of the Steam Deck.
Sabrent Rocket 2230 Specifications
|Interface||PCle Gen4 X 4||PCle Gen4 4||PCle Gen4 X 4|
|Certifications||CE, FCCVCCI, BSMI, RoHS, UKCA||CE, FCCVCCI, BSMI, RoHS, UKCA||CE, FCCVCCI, BSMI, RoHS, UKCA|
|Max Sequential Read||4,650 (MB/s)||5,000 (MB/s)||4,750 (MB/s)|
|Max Sequential Write||1,900 (MB/s)||3,700 (MB/s)||4,300 (MB/s)|
|Random 4K QD32 (IOPS) Read||220K||440K||450K|
|Random 4K QD32 (IOPS) Write||470K||920K||545K|
|Power Consumption R/W||R3550 / W2800 (mW)||R4000 / W4000 (mW)||R4150 / W4300 (mW)|
|Form Factor||M.2 2230||M.2 2230||M.2 2230|
|MTBF||1,500,000 hours||1,500,000 hours||1,500,000 hours|
|Warranty||5 years with registration||5 years with registration||5 years with registration|
The 256GB model has sequential read and write speeds up to 4,650 MBps and 1,900 MBps, respectively. The 512GB model allows 5,000 MBps sequential reads and 3,700 MBps sequential writes. The 1TB version is the highest-performing variant with sequential read and write speeds that hit 4,750 MBps and 4,300 MBps, respectively.
Regarding random performance, the 256GB SSD comes with 220,000 IOPS reads and 470,000 IOPS writes, whereas the 512GB SSD flaunts 440,000 IOPS reads and 920,000 IOPS writes. As for the 1TB version, it delivers random read and write performance of up to 450,000 IOPS and 545,000 IOPS, respectively.
Sabrent compared the brand's Rocket 2230 1TB SSD to the Kingston OM3PDP3512B-A01, which came inside one of the Steam Deck, with KDiskMark, an alternative to CrystalDiskMark. The Kingston drive had sequential read and write speeds of 2,427.26 MBps and 1,077.39 MBps, respectively. On the other hand, the Sabrent SSD delivered 3,530.6 MBps sequential read and 2,713.23 MBps sequential write. Therefore, the Rocket 2230 offered 45% higher sequential reads and 152% higher sequential writes.
The Rocket 2230's endurance isn't spectacular, but it's sufficient for daily usage. Sabrent rates the 256GB and 512GB models with an endurance of 200 TBW and 300 TBW, respectively. The 1TB unit carries a 600TBW rating.
Sabrent backs the Rocket 2230 with a limited five-year warranty but requires the consumer to register the drive. The company also includes a free copy of Acronis True Image software so users can clone their old drives to the new SSD.
Unfortunately, Sabrent didn't reveal the pricing for the Rocket 2230. However, the brand stated that the SSDs would arrive at the company's warehouse shortly, so it shouldn't be long before we see the drives on Amazon.
These 2230s are hard to keep cool when you are trying to do a rapid drive fill. Best out there I think is the SN740 for that purpose. Micron drives can't compete at min sustain write. I'll look for reviews (Toms Sustained Write Performance and Cache Recovery is really good, so is serve the home, nobody else seems to document this part of the drive performance).
Nice to have a speedy gen4 drive, doubt it makes any difference in steamdeck performance.
Also, curious to see how such a drive would impact battery life which is, by far, the weakest point of the Deck.
Write speed is great but its rarely relevant in a consumer workload, especially a steamdeck. Honestly id prefer a drive half as fast but cheaper. Id seriously consider 100$ for a 1TB SSD swap in my deck since im a digital packrat. But you and I both know it won't be 100$.
As for SLC cache, etc. Its a minor issue. My first NVME drive was a 2TB intel 660p with QLC nand. I make sure I leave 200GB or so of free space at all times. When I bought it it was nearly 50% cheaper then a comparable TLC drive so $ per GB was still much better than the alternatives even if i considered it a 1.5-1.7TB drive instead of a 2TB drive. A year and a half later that wasn't the case and TLC had gotten so cheap QLC just couldn't compete (they were price parity at best and often I saw them for more money per GB then a good TLC drive).
I'm currently waiting for someone to get a 4TB NVMe drive down to 250$ or less and then ill grab one of those and give the wife my other 2TB NVMe (since i only have two slots, though i have a 4x PCIe slot open so i could always toss a adapter card in I guess).
EDIT: Well I couldn't help myself and went and checked just now. Best Buy has a crucial P3 PCIe 3.0 NVMe for 249.99$. LOL 😆
I don't need the space badly enough at the moment so ill wait until we see the PCIe 4.0 or 5.0 sticks hit the 250$ price range in a couple years.
I dug through my email and found an invoice from newegg for a 4TB 7200rpm HGST deskstar NAS hard drive for 160$ in 2016. Now in 2022 you can get a budget QLC NVMe 3000mb/s drive for 250$. The hard drive was 4 cents per GB and the NVMe is 6.25 cents per GB. Crazy.
Of course I bought 4 18TB drives for a new NAS last year for 320$ each, or 1.8 cents per GB, so onward and upward I guess. Even in a raid 10 its still 3.6 cents per GB so still cheaper then the old 4TB drive. But how many of us really need a 72TB array (36TB usable) anyway? If it wasn't for my wifes business (wedding photography) I would probably just use a pair of 8TB external drives to store a backup of my photos and personal data, etc. Im too lazy to do the plex thing and I stopped with piracy almost 2 decades ago thanks to endless game bundles and steam sales.
Mine has the 256gb SSD and a 1TB mSD card and honestly i can hardly tell the difference. 90% of games load so fast its not really a relevant issue. Some gamer like RDR2 are a bit pokey and slow to start but its honestly stretching things a bit to play rdr2 on it anyway (that said, it plays great IMO. My desktop has a 3080 and about the only thing i miss on the deck is Gsync and 90hz+ frame rates. my monitor is a 32" 160hz 1440p with Gsync and it was honestly the best PC upgrade ive bought in years. About the only way Id consider swapping it put would be for an OLED for HDR compatability and maybe ultrawide. The problem thats kept me from an ultrawide is the significant framerate impact. 3440x1600 is about 55% more pixels, 5120x1440 (basically two 1440p panels without a seam) is over twice the pixel density. So if i get 100fps with 1440p it will do 60-70 fps on a 3440x1600 and with a 5120x1440 it will sit around 40-50fps (so your cutting down settings, turning off RTX, etc) or your spending another 1400$+ on a overpriced 4090.
For gamings its just tough to beat 2560x1440.
Ugg, its late and am writing novel length comments that are barely on topic. I think its time for sleep. :)