The load times in the games may have been so different because there might have been a lot of smaller files. A lot of drives do slow down a lot when there are a lot of small files and they generally work better on one larger file that is the same size as what all the small ones take up. Maybe it is partly because when writing them the computer has to make an entry for where each file is stored rather than just make one.
@@syarifairlangga4608 i have a 2tb SSD rated for 1600 TBW with no dram. I don't imagine the DRAM equivalent will be that much higher, and even so i will never get to that amount
@@malvinchau2056 I believe @syarifairlangga4608 meant that English is not his first language. He's actually saying that DRAM doesn't directly increase a drive's TBW. What he likely meant is that using a DRAM-less NVMe SSD as external storage can halve its advertised TBW lifespan. In this case, the Pinnacle SD-1 would only have a TBW of 1000
Good stuff, in your benchmark suite for SSDs you should consider adding 2 things, performance when writing to a full drive, and performance when you fill the '"cache" on the drives. QLC should be the obvious choice for the mast majority of users, it's cheaper and just as fast as drives with TLC and DRAM for general use, which is, reading data.
Hello i have nvme gen 3 970 evo plus 1tb as main for system which i think has dram 3600/2500mbs but as secondary nvme 1tb gen 4 with no dram 7450/6500mbs wich i use just for gaming , should i migrate windoes to dram less gen 4 nvme or its ok to 970 evo plus 1tb or maybe should i get 1 tb gen 4 with dram like 990 pro for system
So it basically doesnt matter and if you have to ask if and why you need ssd with ram you most likely dont need it and can take whatever, people who work with huge files, like video editing for example, already know what drives are better cause this is one of the first things you learn, what speeds up your work. So just take biggest one you can from a respectable brand.
I have a question that I can't find: does DRAM produce more heat onboard? There maybe converse logic in this, a larger cache buffer will reach advertised bandwidth, therefore less prolonged heat since you get the job done fast. Alternatively, dram is yet another higher voltage rentention than slc host memory buffer, therefore more heat. I'm curious about it. I feel dram-less is fine for laptops, but you never know with extended use. I just read that dram can pose a problem if the chip is higher than the storage, heat spreaders and sinks may not reach all of the chips evenly. techpowerup is pretty good in their reviews, pics, thermal images, but it is a burning question. No pun intended.
@@Matlockization Well, after reading Samsung findings, it's obvious that dram keeps heat down at same spec comparison. Increasing bandwidth, however, increases speed and heat, regardless. I did find that it is difficult to get dimensions on dram chips, which by certain mfrs, prevent a heat sink solution from full contact on the nand chips. The truth is, many, if not most laptops come with dram-less. Not that I care, but if a customer wanted it to come with Win11, there's that problem. So, but the nvme 5, and soon, nvme 6 is what people are talking about now. It's not easy digging for particular non-advertised details. I have a Corsair mp600 dramless on my laptop. It's fine. It's hot, but I don't play games or render 3d on it. If it were QLC it would be horrible. I don't know why QLC is even produced, it uses so much power.
I should say bottlenecks are real though. If you put a nvme 4 on pcie 1.3, bandwidth bottleneck, so more reads/writes to achieve the same thing. I'm sure people have done this on older boards, realizing the heat. I could guess at that. That's why I'm curious about the newer than new published nvme 6 specs.
@@零云-u7e You might be right about the QLC, but same read/write speeds is something I've always gone for regardless and that inc's dram and more of it on an M.2.
@@Matlockization The theory goes: QLC is an extra voltage node, more power req thus more heat buildup over runtime. Enterprise uses SLC for a reason. More importantly, because of this, QLC significantly drops the life of the drive. I had to dig for longevity. A non-gamer, non-graphics/person will see good lifespan, but if you were to run a linux server, say a database using lvm containers, continuous access to that container will shorten life. A lot of fuzzy logic on estimates, say -25% on QLC compared to TLC. Under 1TB or virtual containers shorten lifespan as well, simply because you are statistically increasing access in a smaller space. I thought purchasing ram would be difficult for a consumer. I think gamers would be disappointed in QLC if they never did a backup. Gen5 QLC, I would sue the mfr for biligerance.
Those dramless drives are not operating dramless. They can use host pcs ram. If you want to really compare them you should put them on usb 3.2 usb enclosures and test that way.
Heh, now even grandpas when bored are playing with pc hardware, not just kids. Btw the purpose of graphene is not to absorb heat, but to conduct it away from chips.
i love your videos , direct to the point thanks
Thank you 😊
Thanks so much for this breakdown! Going through multiple use cases is something that some reviewers might talk about but don't really show.
Glad I could help
The load times in the games may have been so different because there might have been a lot of smaller files. A lot of drives do slow down a lot when there are a lot of small files and they generally work better on one larger file that is the same size as what all the small ones take up. Maybe it is partly because when writing them the computer has to make an entry for where each file is stored rather than just make one.
So basically, don't spend the extra money on DRAM cache unless you are doing very large file writes
If you use the ssd for external.
The one with Dram will increase the TBW
@@syarifairlangga4608 i have a 2tb SSD rated for 1600 TBW with no dram. I don't imagine the DRAM equivalent will be that much higher, and even so i will never get to that amount
@@malvinchau2056 I believe @syarifairlangga4608 meant that English is not his first language. He's actually saying that DRAM doesn't directly increase a drive's TBW. What he likely meant is that using a DRAM-less NVMe SSD as external storage can halve its advertised TBW lifespan. In this case, the Pinnacle SD-1 would only have a TBW of 1000
@@bassgoul no dram cache is essential for windows working properly
Incorrect @@timothyjannsen9275
DRAM cache is good stuff for extended lifespan SSD as long as you using heatsinks for prevent overheating
I really loved this informative video, can you make something like this for RAM?
Noted
Extremely useful video, thank you !
Glad it was helpful!
Very informative video
You should not have reversed the drives after 1:33.
Good stuff, in your benchmark suite for SSDs you should consider adding 2 things, performance when writing to a full drive, and performance when you fill the '"cache" on the drives.
QLC should be the obvious choice for the mast majority of users, it's cheaper and just as fast as drives with TLC and DRAM for general use, which is, reading data.
That's a great idea!
For a person that want to install a lot of games, it's important to have dram or dram is only for copying files?
Dram helps with burst access so if your game loads lots of data when it starts, Dram will help it start faster
Drame less effect ps5 gaming??
Hello i have nvme gen 3 970 evo plus 1tb as main for system which i think has dram 3600/2500mbs but as secondary nvme 1tb gen 4 with no dram 7450/6500mbs wich i use just for gaming , should i migrate windoes to dram less gen 4 nvme or its ok to 970 evo plus 1tb or maybe should i get 1 tb gen 4 with dram like 990 pro for system
Leave them as they are
wallahi thank you for this video brother.
My pleasure
Do you know if DRAM less NVMe SSD is compatible to be used externally using Enclosure Case?
Yes, it will work
@@KnowledgeSharingTech Thank you :)
So it basically doesnt matter and if you have to ask if and why you need ssd with ram you most likely dont need it and can take whatever, people who work with huge files, like video editing for example, already know what drives are better cause this is one of the first things you learn, what speeds up your work. So just take biggest one you can from a respectable brand.
Did you have a heatsink on the drives?
No
I have a question that I can't find: does DRAM produce more heat onboard? There maybe converse logic in this, a larger cache buffer will reach advertised bandwidth, therefore less prolonged heat since you get the job done fast. Alternatively, dram is yet another higher voltage rentention than slc host memory buffer, therefore more heat. I'm curious about it. I feel dram-less is fine for laptops, but you never know with extended use. I just read that dram can pose a problem if the chip is higher than the storage, heat spreaders and sinks may not reach all of the chips evenly. techpowerup is pretty good in their reviews, pics, thermal images, but it is a burning question. No pun intended.
Dram-less would not be good for laptops as it runs a lot hotter.
@@Matlockization Well, after reading Samsung findings, it's obvious that dram keeps heat down at same spec comparison. Increasing bandwidth, however, increases speed and heat, regardless. I did find that it is difficult to get dimensions on dram chips, which by certain mfrs, prevent a heat sink solution from full contact on the nand chips. The truth is, many, if not most laptops come with dram-less. Not that I care, but if a customer wanted it to come with Win11, there's that problem. So, but the nvme 5, and soon, nvme 6 is what people are talking about now. It's not easy digging for particular non-advertised details. I have a Corsair mp600 dramless on my laptop. It's fine. It's hot, but I don't play games or render 3d on it. If it were QLC it would be horrible. I don't know why QLC is even produced, it uses so much power.
I should say bottlenecks are real though. If you put a nvme 4 on pcie 1.3, bandwidth bottleneck, so more reads/writes to achieve the same thing. I'm sure people have done this on older boards, realizing the heat. I could guess at that. That's why I'm curious about the newer than new published nvme 6 specs.
@@零云-u7e You might be right about the QLC, but same read/write speeds is something I've always gone for regardless and that inc's dram and more of it on an M.2.
@@Matlockization The theory goes: QLC is an extra voltage node, more power req thus more heat buildup over runtime. Enterprise uses SLC for a reason. More importantly, because of this, QLC significantly drops the life of the drive. I had to dig for longevity. A non-gamer, non-graphics/person will see good lifespan, but if you were to run a linux server, say a database using lvm containers, continuous access to that container will shorten life. A lot of fuzzy logic on estimates, say -25% on QLC compared to TLC. Under 1TB or virtual containers shorten lifespan as well, simply because you are statistically increasing access in a smaller space. I thought purchasing ram would be difficult for a consumer. I think gamers would be disappointed in QLC if they never did a backup. Gen5 QLC, I would sue the mfr for biligerance.
For enclosure, dram or dramless?
Dramless
No significant improvements when using NVME with DRAM in games?
No but DRAM makes your OS faster.
Do you think a nvme gen4 drive without dram is ok for playing games?
Yes
Those dramless drives are not operating dramless. They can use host pcs ram. If you want to really compare them you should put them on usb 3.2 usb enclosures and test that way.
يا شيخ شكرا على الفيديو
Ahlan!
Heh, now even grandpas when bored are playing with pc hardware, not just kids.
Btw the purpose of graphene is not to absorb heat, but to conduct it away from chips.
butiful
Dram less ssd it's fine with ps5
Don't go for the timetec ssd It is definitively disappointing.
I’ve been using Timetec SSDs since 3 years without any problems