1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

Corsair releases its fastest SSDs to date, and they're surprisingly cheap

By midian182 · 11 replies
Oct 17, 2018
Post New Reply
  1. The company’s flagship M.2 NVMe SSD lineup follows last years MP500 SSDs. We gave 2017's 480GB model a 75 in our review. Despite offering all-round great performance, its price made it bad value next to Samsung’s 960 Pro/Evo.

    While the MP500 series is powered by the PS5007-E7 Phison controller, the successors use the new E12 controller. There’s also a move from planar MLC NAND to Toshiba's 64-layer 3D TLC NAND. Corsair says the new drives can reach up to 3,480MB/s of sequential read speeds and up to 3000MB/s of sequential write performance. This makes it the company’s fastest SSD yet, beating the MP500’s 3,000MB/s sequential reads and 2300MB/s sequential writes.

    The MP510 drives’ performance figures match Samsung’s 970 EVO SSDs but offer better value through Corsair’s lower prices. The new line is available in 240GB ($65/27c per GB), 480GB ($124/26c per GB), 960GB ($235/25c per GB), and 1.92TB capacities. Samsung’s 1TB 970 Pro, for comparison, sells at around $278.

    “Utilizing the ultra high-speed NVMe PCIe Gen3 x4 M.2 interface for maximum bandwidth, the MP510 leaves traditional SATA 6Gbps and even previous generation M.2 SSDs in the dust. Loading everything from large video and image files to games, applications or the operating system faster than ever before, the MP510 supercharges your system’s performance, whatever you’re doing,” writes Corsair.

    The Force Series MP510 line is available now and all drives come with a five-year warranty. Check out the full specs in the table below, courtesy of Anandtech.

    Permalink to story.

  2. stewi0001

    stewi0001 TS Evangelist Posts: 2,112   +1,532

    FYI: the 1.9TB price tag is $474.99 ($0.247 per GB)
    MonsterZero likes this.
  3. Theinsanegamer

    Theinsanegamer TS Evangelist Posts: 1,481   +1,679

    Strange, why is their 2TB drive slower then the 1TB drive? Samsung's drives dont do that.
  4. ShagnWagn

    ShagnWagn TS Guru Posts: 591   +415

    These SSD drives have been plenty fast for quite a while now. We don't need Windows to load in 25 seconds instead of 30... Focus your attention on drive capacity!!! Get rid of hard drive platters! Does this not seem like common sense?
  5. Theinsanegamer

    Theinsanegamer TS Evangelist Posts: 1,481   +1,679

    dude, SSD systems usually boot in under 10 seconds. I had hard drives that would boot faster then 30 seconds.

    Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the challenges of making larger SSDs? Because then you wouldnt be saying "well just get rid of hard drive platters! It is common sense!". No it isnt, hard drives are immeasurably cheaper per TB then SSDs are, dont have TBW ratings, dont wear out in RAID arrays, and fail gracefully as opposed to near instantly.
    Mamoon69 likes this.
  6. ShagnWagn

    ShagnWagn TS Guru Posts: 591   +415

    I guess it depends on how modern of a computer you have and which operating system. They were arbitrary numbers, but thanks for hammering me. I could have said 10 seconds instead of 11 and you still would have attacked me.

    Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with hard drive failure rates. Do I need to share a 2 second google search for you?

    You (don't?) know, if they had invested the money into storage instead of speed speed speed, they would be cheaper? If they had put the money into SSD's instead of more into HDDs, they would have more R&D. Maybe you forgot all about trying to put SSD's into 3.5" drive standards (apparently the companies have also)? That would drive costs down significantly. Perhaps you should think openly instead of narrow minded. Maybe use your head for scenarios someone else is suggesting instead of attacking.
  7. Dosahka

    Dosahka TS Enthusiast Posts: 99   +40

    I assume they mixed up the 960GB and 1.92TB data.
    It would be odd that 960GB faster than a 1.92TB while write/read speed along with IOPS scaling with size/amount of the memory.
    ShagnWagn likes this.
  8. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 11,208   +4,876

    They would need to prove to me it was actually booting and not waking up from sleep or hibernation. To me booting is from a completely shutdown system. I don't believe Windows is capable of booting in less than 15 seconds. Waking up in less than 15 seconds is another topic.
    ShagnWagn likes this.
  9. kmo911

    kmo911 TS Enthusiast Posts: 66

    We must soon begin to get pb ssd disks PETAbyte. 8k cams make it easy to fill 1 pb pr 5 min. so if we get 999 pb ssd hdd we can record many ours. !!??
  10. toooooot

    toooooot TS Evangelist Posts: 692   +331

    I am holding myself to not spend money on another 500gb or 1tb ssd. I almost bought intel's 660p for 95 with tax, and now the price on it went up to 100 :(
    But maybe it is for the best.
    I have forza 4 on HDD and I already hate this return to old disk type. Every loading thing takes 1-5 seconds more than ssd. This is not supposed to be this way.
  11. LinkedKube

    LinkedKube TechSpot Project Baby Posts: 3,380   +53

    MM, mine does on my custom laptop but I'm also running in R0 on boot drives
  12. kmo911

    kmo911 TS Enthusiast Posts: 66

    RE update. 500gb would fast be used up on a 10 gb line. so rops would be like changing dipers on a child. I would be uses wery fast up. so we gonna need that petabyte soon.

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...