Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Solidigm P41 Plus NVMe SSD

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Solidigm P41 Plus NVMe SSD

    Phoronix: Solidigm P41 Plus NVMe SSD

    Up on the review block today is the Solidigm P41 Plus as a value-focused solid-state drive. Solidigm is the US company formed when SK Hynix acquired Intel's NAND/SSD business. Since forming Solidigm at the end of last year they have continued to sell products from Intel's existing SSD product line-up while last month they announced the P41 Plus as their first consumer solid-state drive of their own design. Recently I've been testing out the Solidigm P41 Plus 1TB and 2TB drives under Linux for seeing how these affordable QLC drives perform.

    https://www.phoronix.com/review/solidigm-p41-plus

  • #2
    Plasma TVs were better than LCD TVs, but people wanted bigger TVs and plasma couldn't deliver. Same with Optane vs Flash, $89 is a down right steal but it will never match the latency or write endurance of optane, tiss a darn shame that Intel shelfed both its Optane and NAND Flash business. Hopefully it doesn't shelf its ARC graphics lineup too. Anyways these Solidigm drives are a real steal! Looking forward to seeing their RAID performance Michael good to see some hardware reviews still even if you have to buy the stuff yourself mostly nowadays.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by kylew77 View Post
      Plasma TVs were better than LCD TVs, but people wanted bigger TVs and plasma couldn't deliver.
      Sure? I think we had 65" Plasma TVs long before we had LCDs at that size and they got up to 150", I can't remeber any LCD with 150". Plasma was just much more expensive than LCD and when OLED came around that did everything much better than plasma for less money the big players dropped plasma.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Anux View Post
        Sure? I think we had 65" Plasma TVs long before we had LCDs at that size and they got up to 150", I can't remeber any LCD with 150". Plasma was just much more expensive than LCD and when OLED came around that did everything much better than plasma for less money the big players dropped plasma.
        As well as they weighted a lot more, used a lot of electricity, and ran hot enough to warm a room.

        For their price these would make great OS drives or even drives for high-speed mirrors and pools.

        Comment


        • #5
          Comparing a benchmark for a M.2 drive that has a DRAM cache against some models that lack a DRAM cache... Sorry, but that makes your review entirely worthless and misleading.

          You really should point out the cache differences.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
            As well as they weighted a lot more, used a lot of electricity, and ran hot enough to warm a room.
            Don't forget some had image burn-in too.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by OmniNegro View Post
              Comparing a benchmark for a M.2 drive that has a DRAM cache against some models that lack a DRAM cache... Sorry, but that makes your review entirely worthless and misleading.

              You really should point out the cache differences.
              He should point it out yes. But is it misleading? In the end price and performance is what counts and the internal cache structure is just an implementation detail.

              Comment


              • #8
                Michael

                Typo on page 2 "On a performance-per-dollar basis,, the" (remove extra comma)

                Comment


                • #9
                  For me temperature and power usage would be interesting too

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    It would be interesting to see these compared to other QLC drives--like the previous Intel models. Thank you for the review, Michael.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X