Is there a 4TB TLC PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSD?

lachdanan

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
240
Hi,

I looked everywhere but I can't find any. I only see 2TB options. Do they exist? They are not that special no?


Thanks a lot.
 
Not yet, no. The Rocket 4 Plus has been announced that it is coming out in a 4TB capacity, but it hasn't been released yet. I would imagine the SN850 might follow suit.

Currently, have three variables:
PCIe 4.0
TLC
4TB

And you can pick any two you want, but not all 3. 4TB TLC PCIe Gen3 drives exist. 4TB PCIe 4.0 drives exist, but they aren't TLC. And of course PCIe 4.0 TLC drives exist, but they aren't 4TB.
 
Thanks guys, then I will wait. I don't want to spend all this money and then not take advantage of pci-e 4.0 speeds. Not sure why they can't just release them the same time as 2TB versions, because 4TB is not a first time tech now.
 
I'm with you, I'm waiting for the 4TB version. it's a shame that WD doesn't look they are making a 4TB version of the SN850.
 
In my semi-professional opinion, the Rocket Q4 is a nice drive. I've got one of the 4TB models, and while it's not as fast as the Rocket 4 Plus it's still pretty dang speedy and outpaces most any PCIe 3.0 SSD. And it's available in the capacity you want. For me, right now at least, capacity is king as far as SSDs are concerned.
 
In my semi-professional opinion, the Rocket Q4 is a nice drive. I've got one of the 4TB models, and while it's not as fast as the Rocket 4 Plus it's still pretty dang speedy and outpaces most any PCIe 3.0 SSD. And it's available in the capacity you want. For me, right now at least, capacity is king as far as SSDs are concerned.
I can only say that when I went from a SATA-based SDD to a PCI4-based Sabrent, I saw noticeable improvements in Windows boot and program load times, plus large data files.
 
I can only say that when I went from a SATA-based SDD to a PCI4-based Sabrent, I saw noticeable improvements in Windows boot and program load times, plus large data files.
Sata to NVME is going to be a somewhat improved difference but between 3.0 and 4.0 pcie NVME are negligible at best for 99% of use cases out there.
 
Sata to NVME is going to be a somewhat improved difference but between 3.0 and 4.0 pcie NVME are negligible at best for 99% of use cases out there.
i think this is true for the sabrent drives but not WD850SN, which is very optane like.
 
Sata to NVME is going to be a somewhat improved difference but between 3.0 and 4.0 pcie NVME are negligible at best for 99% of use cases out there.
You might be right, because it's not like I got a PCIE 3 M.2 drive to compare with my PCIE 4 M.2 Sabrent. But no matter. When I did the upgrade to the M.2 I was very pleasantly surprised.
 
I can only say that when I went from a SATA-based SDD to a PCI4-based Sabrent, I saw noticeable improvements in Windows boot and program load times, plus large data files.
I'm in the opposite camp. When I swapped from a SATA 850 EVO to my sk Hynix P31 I see really no difference in overall system performance nor game load times.
 
i think this is true for the sabrent drives but not WD850SN, which is very optane like.

Maybe once nearly full and some life, but in benchmark setting not sure you can see much difference between (for the games/OS boot time of work load).

9664_34_wd-black-sn850-1tb-nvme-2-ssd-review.png



windows-10-startup.png


There is a reason some reviews put virtually no "real life common scenario" in them.
 
Last edited:
I'm in the opposite camp. When I swapped from a SATA 850 EVO to my sk Hynix P31 I see really no difference in overall system performance nor game load times.
Because the OS uses fairly small files as do most games. The only time a faster NVMe drive will show noticeable differences is when working with larger files in the 10's to 100's of gigs in size.
 
Because the OS uses fairly small files as do most games. The only time a faster NVMe drive will show noticeable differences is when working with larger files in the 10's to 100's of gigs in size.
Oh I'm aware of *why* - I literally review SSDs as a side gig. For games, it's actually less that the files aren't big enough and more that those files are all compressed and require processing to load them into memory, or to compile shaders, or any number of other things aside from simply reading the files. Consoles can bypass this to a large degree; since their hardware and software is a fixed environment then precompiled and pre-processed data can exist on a SSD and essentially be dumped straight to memory; that's a big feature of both the new Xbox Series and PS5 consoles. Windows is getting something similar, DirectStorage, at least with regards to GPUs being able to directly access storage devices. The problem on PCs is two-fold; one, it'll be near to a decade before developers can safely *assume* that PC players will have a DirectStorage compatible system enough to make having such a system a requirement to run a game. PC games have to cater to some lowest common denominator, and even very modern 2021 PC games don't even require a *SSD* yet, let alone one that is NVMe or a DirectStorage compatible system to access it. And when you're loading into the latest multiplayer Call of Duty match, everyone is waiting on the one guy in the lobby with the 5400 RPM hard drive anyways.

I hope, in the future, that fast SSD storage can start to be designed into PC games, and that DirectStorage (or something similar) achieves widespread adoption, and that the age of loading times essentially ends. In PC land, personally I doubt that day is any closer than say a decade, but one can hope I'm wrong.
 
Back
Top