Steam installeren
inloggen
|
taal
简体中文 (Chinees, vereenvoudigd)
繁體中文 (Chinees, traditioneel)
日本語 (Japans)
한국어 (Koreaans)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgaars)
Čeština (Tsjechisch)
Dansk (Deens)
Deutsch (Duits)
English (Engels)
Español-España (Spaans - Spanje)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spaans - Latijns-Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Grieks)
Français (Frans)
Italiano (Italiaans)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesisch)
Magyar (Hongaars)
Norsk (Noors)
Polski (Pools)
Português (Portugees - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Braziliaans-Portugees)
Română (Roemeens)
Русский (Russisch)
Suomi (Fins)
Svenska (Zweeds)
Türkçe (Turks)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamees)
Українська (Oekraïens)
Een vertaalprobleem melden
What Ssd should I go for:
Teamgroup T force Vulkan Z 1tb (53 dollars)
Or
Crucial Mx500 1tb (71 dollars)
Crucial MX500 is tried and true, also better warranty and software.
I've used an entry level SATA SSD (BX500) for an OS before but it was a lightly used laptop. It's not the end of the world, but if you use your PC a lot, I would avoid entry level SATA for OS drives.
But before you get the MX500, and I say this liking that drive, compare it to prices for some of these others...
Western Digital Blue 3D (or Sandisk Ultra 3D)
Seagate Barracuda 120
Samsung 860/870 Evo (not QVO, it's low end)
SK hynix Gold S31
Kingston KC600
Intel 545s
Lexar NS200 (not NS100, also low end)
PNY CS2311
Everyone just points to Samsung, or something you get a mention of Crucial or Western Digital, but these are all performance SATA drives. If any of them are cheaper, they definitely deserve a look.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybIXsrLCgdM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X20PBGHAKjs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKszIIXt-6E
They were suggesting using a DRAM-less M.2 NVMe SSD which will still be faster than "cheap" SATA SSD, regardless if the SATA SSD has a DRAM cache or not.
For SATA, I'd avoid DRAM-less drives if you were going to use it for an OS drive though (though I've used a BX500 in a lightly used PC and it's still fine).
All drives will eventually drop sustained speeds. As far as I am aware, that's not because of the DRAM but because of the cache. Lower end drives without DRAM are just also more likely to have smaller and slower caches, as well as slower (often QLC) NAND. Once it's writing directly to NAND, it slows down. If you're doing massive sustained writes, and performance is a factor, you'll probably not be looking at these drives anyway? Storage? Games? Won't matter as much there (especially for games drives, you're mostly just reading from them).