Micron 4600 2TB SSD Review: The New Baseline in SSDs

Micron hits a home run with a glimpse at things to come

Micron 4600 2TB SSD
Editor's Choice
(Image credit: © Tom's Hardware)

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Comparison Products

The Micron 4600 will aim for the top of the SSD benchmarks hierarchy, and as such we want to test it against the very best — and the very fastest. On the PCIe 5.0 front, we've included the Crucial T705 as our resident Phison E26 champion. Lower-end 5.0 drives like the Corsair MP700 Elite with Phison's E31T are also potentially competitive. The best 4.0 drives include the Samsung 990 Pro, WD Black SN850X, Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus-G, and SK hynix Platinum P41. We also include the Crucial T500 and newer WD Black SN7100 in that category, as they're particularly good for laptops. Another drive arguably made for laptops is the Samsung 990 EVO Plus. Lastly, the budget drives on deck include the Corsair MP600 Elite and the Silicon Power US75, though note that word on the street is the newer US75 drives have started shipping with QLC NAND and thus don't perform nearly as well.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Shane Downing
Freelance Reviewer

Shane Downing is a Freelance Reviewer for Tom’s Hardware US, covering consumer storage hardware.

With contributions from
  • bit_user
    The article said:
    We also have results showing that, if you want to run it in a PCIe 4.0 slot (or in PCIe 4.0 mode at least), it can do even better. The 4600, via SMART, only pulls about 13% less power at full load than the T705, but in some power states it’s rated as much as 50% lower. This equates to real power efficiency improvements under load.
    Where are these results? I'm asking because the PCIe 5.0 results, shown in the table, have it using quite a lot of power.

    Do we expect a Crucial-branded retail version of essentially the same drive to be released, as well?
    Reply
  • Albert.Thomas
    >No 8TB option

    Aren't most 8tb units obscenely overpriced? It's usually better to get 2x 4tb units.
    Reply
  • AngelusF
    The 4TB endurance doesn't scale up proportionally from the 1TB and 2TB, is it using higher-capacity Flash chips with a smaller cell size in order to fit everything on a single side?
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    bit_user said:
    Where are these results? I'm asking because the PCIe 5.0 results, shown in the table, have it using quite a lot of power.

    Do we expect a Crucial-branded retail version of essentially the same drive to be released, as well?
    I'm not sure how they got missed, but I've updated the Quarch power charts with the PCIe 4.0 results. Do keep in mind that this is on a desktop without all the extra ASPM stuff enabled, so most SSDs can go into a "near zero" power mode when not actively in use. Under load, though, running a PCIe 5.0 drive in 4.0 mode cuts power draw a lot.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    Albert.Thomas said:
    >No 8TB option

    Aren't most 8tb units obscenely overpriced? It's usually better to get 2x 4tb units.
    It's the classic chicken and egg scenario, plus if you want more than 8TB, like multiple 8TB drives, you eventually run out of M.2 slots (and PCIe x16 slots for expansion cards). We want to see 8TB become more mainstream, and the only way that happens is if more companies start taking the plunge. 2TB is now ubiquitous where it was considered very high-end several years back. 4TB is becoming increasingly common, and now we want to see the shift toward 8TB (or even 6TB) start ramping up. :)
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    AngelusF said:
    The 4TB endurance doesn't scale up proportionally from the 1TB and 2TB, is it using higher-capacity Flash chips with a smaller cell size in order to fit everything on a single side?
    I think it may have 16 dies per package (2TB NAND) where the 2TB can do 8 dies per package (1TB NAND). Should that reduce endurance? Maybe not, but they're specifying lower endurance probably just because they can. 🤷‍♂️
    Reply
  • bit_user
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    4TB is becoming increasingly common, and now we want to see the shift toward 8TB (or even 6TB) start ramping up. :)
    Power consumption is an issue holding back drives from using the backside. This is really limiting, since the NAND on a one-sided drive needs to share that side of the PCB with the controller.

    However, once you start talking about low-power/high-density drives, then we end up in the QLC territory, which is regarded as low-end. This makes it sort of a no-win situation.

    Again, I have to wonder if M.2 didn't put the connector on the wrong edge. A connector on the long edge wouldn't have to span the entire PCB, like it does with DIMMs, but putting it there would've made it easier for M.2 drives to sit perpendicular to the motheboard and thereby alleviate the backside penalty.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    bit_user said:
    Power consumption is an issue holding back drives from using the backside. This is really limiting, since the NAND on a one-sided drive needs to share that side of the PCB with the controller.

    However, once you start talking about low-power/high-density drives, then we end up in the QLC territory, which is regarded as low-end. This makes it sort of a no-win situation.

    Again, I have to wonder if M.2 didn't put the connector on the wrong edge. A connector on the long edge wouldn't have to span the entire PCB, like it does with DIMMs, but putting it there would've made it easier for M.2 drives to sit perpendicular to the motheboard and thereby alleviate the backside penalty.
    We're seeing drives that peak at 8W or so for 4TB, so 12W for 8TB should be very doable. Because a big chunk of the power goes to the controller, and you could limit clocks and such to stay within the 12W envelope. The reality for me is that 4TB is good for what I do right now, but I'm quickly approaching the place where having 8TB would be welcome.
    Reply
  • purposelycryptic
    Albert.Thomas said:
    >No 8TB option

    Aren't most 8tb units obscenely overpriced? It's usually better to get 2x 4tb units.
    That is assuming your machine has two slots, and, even if it does, that you don't need 16TB.

    More expensive or not, if you need the extra storage density, the option not being available can force you to go with an alternative drive, even if it is the lesser choice in all other aspects.
    Reply
  • Notton
    There are so many laptops without a second m.2 slot these days. And far too many that don't even come with a 2280 slot.
    And then the ones that work with 2280 don't always work with a dual-sided SSD.

    8TB single sided please.
    Reply