Corsair's new MP600 Pro LPX M.2 is a PS5-compatible SSD with up to 4TB of storage

jsilva

Posts: 325   +2
In context: The default storage unit of the PlayStation is somewhat limited. Although the drive has 825GB, only about 670GB is available. Considering some games can occupy over 100GB of storage, that's not much. New PS5-compatible M.2 SSDs have been hitting the market left and right. There are several affordable options, and Corsair just jumped into the fray with the MP600 Pro LPX SSD.

Like many other SSD vendors, Corsair launched a PS5-ready SSD to increase the console's storage capacity. Available with 500GB, 1TB, 2TB, and even a whopping 4TB, Corsair's new PCIe 4.0 M.2 SSD features a compact built-in heatsink designed to fit inside the PS5 that should offer enough cooling capacity to prevent thermal throttling.

To be compatible with the PlayStation 5, an SSD must meet specific requirements. These include having a PCIe 4.0 M.2 NVMe interface (key M), a minimum sequential read speed of 5,500MB/s, and between 250GB and 4TB of storage capacity. Moreover, companies also must consider that only 2230, 2242, 2260, 2280, 22110 SSD form factors are compatible, and the SSD's thickness must not exceed 11.25mm.

These requirements are all met by the new Corsair 3D TLC NAND-based SSD, which offers sequential read speeds of 7,100MB/s and sequential write speeds of 6,800MB/s. In addition, it also uses Dynamic SLC NAND cache to improve sustained performance and enhance the drive's durability.

Although the SSD it's targeted at PS5 use, it doesn't mean you can't install it on a PC. All you need is a free M.2 slot on the motherboard, and you're all set. It doesn't even matter if it's PCIe 4.0 or PCIe 3.0, as backward compatibility ensures the SSD works in both. However, performance will vary depending on the PCIe interface you use.

The Corsair MP600 Pro LPX SSD is now available with 500GB for $99.99, while the 1TB model puts you back $169.99. The 2TB model goes for $339.99, and the 4TB variant is by far the most expensive, costing $784.99. All models have a five-year warranty.

Permalink to story.

 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,454   +2,419
Current gen consoles are just bad.

For years people claimed they were getting closer and closer to rivaling PCs, when in reality they are closer to above average laptops. The whole move from HDD to NVMe just blows my mind. Also the fact people had to wait months for a firmware update to use that NVMe expansion bay, and the fact you can't connect any SATA SSD via USB out of the box without having to move games you want to play around all the time. Etc etc etc...

How do you have computer parts but can't even get basic storage functionality right?

Current gen consoles - Scam or incompetence? It's one of the two.
 

AMDGeForceRX3090

Posts: 93   +101
Current gen consoles are just bad.

For years people claimed they were getting closer and closer to rivaling PCs, when in reality they are closer to above average laptops. The whole move from HDD to NVMe just blows my mind. Also the fact people had to wait months for a firmware update to use that NVMe expansion bay, and the fact you can't connect any SATA SSD via USB out of the box without having to move games you want to play around all the time. Etc etc etc...

How do you have computer parts but can't even get basic storage functionality right?

Current gen consoles - Scam or incompetence? It's one of the two.

The games storage is fine. The reason for not running PS5 games off a USB drive makes sense, so games can be designed to rely on a minimum speed of a 5.5GBps nvme. Otherwise we have crap like long winding corridors to hide loading. PC games will always have that unless companies make games that say nvme only, or at least ssd only, which I would be fine with. Also the most used GPU on steam is still an old as hell GTX1060. PS5 is probably about RTX2070 equivalent. And Xbox Series X is about RTX2080 Super level. That's well beyond the majority used PC GPU and well beyond most laptops.

People having to wait for the nvme update made sense too as there were practically no drives on market that would do the job. And I plugged a USB SSD into mine to store all the old PS4 games on no problem, freed up space on the internal for more PS5 games.

The only real bad thing with storage this gen is the BS XBOX does with those crazy overpriced expansions. Hopefully someone will make an nvme adaptor to use an off the shelf drive.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,454   +2,419
The games storage is fine. The reason for not running PS5 games off a USB drive makes sense, so games can be designed to rely on a minimum speed of a 5.5GBps nvme. Otherwise we have crap like long winding corridors to hide loading. PC games will always have that unless companies make games that say nvme only, or at least ssd only, which I would be fine with. Also the most used GPU on steam is still an old as hell GTX1060. PS5 is probably about RTX2070 equivalent. And Xbox Series X is about RTX2080 Super level. That's well beyond the majority used PC GPU and well beyond most laptops.

People having to wait for the nvme update made sense too as there were practically no drives on market that would do the job. And I plugged a USB SSD into mine to store all the old PS4 games on no problem, freed up space on the internal for more PS5 games.

The only real bad thing with storage this gen is the BS XBOX does with those crazy overpriced expansions. Hopefully someone will make an nvme adaptor to use an off the shelf drive.
Enjoy your mediocre laptop.
You just don't get it. Consoles don't need NVMe. You fell for the marketing. You even said it made sense to wait for firmware and compatible drives on a device you claim is comparable to a PC with a 2070?! What?! No!

I've been a PC gamer since 2006. My first SSD was like $250 for 64GB. Crucial C300. Today, most of my games are on my SATA drive and only a couple on my NVMe. Why? Because I did the research. Same reason I bought gen 3 over gen 4 - pointless. Even gen 3 is, but I like the idea of no cables. That's it. The only reason I have an NVMe drive in my gaming PC. Consoles aren't beating me or my 2070S at even 1440p. Consoles still struggle with 1080p/60fps! In 2022!

Scam or incompetence. Pick one.

Y'all need to wake up.
 
Last edited:

AMDGeForceRX3090

Posts: 93   +101
Enjoy your mediocre laptop.
You just don't get it. Consoles don't need NVMe. You fell for the marketing. You even said it made sense to wait for firmware and compatible drives on a device you claim is comparable to a PC with a 2070?! What?! No!

I've been a PC gamer since 2006. My first SSD was like $250 for 64GB. Crucial C300. Today, most of my games are on my SATA drive and only a couple on my NVMe. Why? Because I did the research. Same reason I bought gen 3 over gen 4 - pointless. Even gen 3 is, but I like the idea of no cables. That's it. The only reason I have an NVMe drive in my gaming PC. Consoles aren't beating me or my 2070S at even 1440p. Consoles still struggle with 1080p/60fps! In 2022!

Scam or incompetence. Pick one.

Y'all need to wake up.
For most PC games nvme or sata ssd isn't that different as decompression takes longer than the read speed. Some PC games do take advantage of nvme speeds but not that many, though more and more do every day. But with the PS5 and Xbox Series games designed for them can rely on that speed always being there. And with hardware decompression helping too it can be drastic. FF7 on a sata ssd on my PS4 pro took about 30 secs to load from the menu into the world, on PS5 it's about 3 seconds.

Sure there will be plenty of games that don't need the huge speed, but for those that do it works great. I'd imaging it will only be exclusives that really show it off on PS5. If the speeds didn't matter they wouldn't have a speed requirement for adding an nvme. I bet games like Ratchet and Clank would suffer given how fast that jumps between worlds. Also Halo Infinite runs at 4k60 on my 3080 mostly fine, but a jitter here and there. But an Xbox Series X costing significantly less than my GPU alone runs it at 4k60 with decent settings very well. Even does 1440p120. That performance for the price is a great deal.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,454   +2,419
For most PC games nvme or sata ssd isn't that different as decompression takes longer than the read speed. Some PC games do take advantage of nvme speeds but not that many, though more and more do every day. But with the PS5 and Xbox Series games designed for them can rely on that speed always being there. And with hardware decompression helping too it can be drastic. FF7 on a sata ssd on my PS4 pro took about 30 secs to load from the menu into the world, on PS5 it's about 3 seconds.

Sure there will be plenty of games that don't need the huge speed, but for those that do it works great. I'd imaging it will only be exclusives that really show it off on PS5. If the speeds didn't matter they wouldn't have a speed requirement for adding an nvme. I bet games like Ratchet and Clank would suffer given how fast that jumps between worlds. Also Halo Infinite runs at 4k60 on my 3080 mostly fine, but a jitter here and there. But an Xbox Series X costing significantly less than my GPU alone runs it at 4k60 with decent settings very well. Even does 1440p120. That performance for the price is a great deal.
You're reaching with T-Rex arms. Decompression relies on CPU. Yours is quite slow compared to desktop chips, and not even a high end gaming PC needs NVMe.

Enjoy your above average laptop with sub 60fps, poor storage implementation and that "2070 class" GPU....
 
Last edited:

SilverCider

Posts: 78   +4
You're reaching with T-Rex arms. Decompression relies on CPU. Yours is quite slow compared to desktop chips, and not even a high end gaming PC needs NVMe.

Enjoy your above average laptop with sub 60fps, poor storage implementation and that "2070 class" GPU....

You might want to reel in your own T-Rex arms as I don't think you get it. Go read up on MS DirectStorage.
 

Burty117

Posts: 4,488   +2,694
You're reaching with T-Rex arms. Decompression relies on CPU. Yours is quite slow compared to desktop chips, and not even a high end gaming PC needs NVMe.

Enjoy your above average laptop with sub 60fps, poor storage implementation and that "2070 class" GPU....
You really haven't done any research at all have you? This was a painful thread to read...

The compression engine built into the PS5 is incredible, I only just got a PS5 but Ratchet and Clank is a great example, when it's installing, it claims the game is 91GB to install. Once it's installed though, the actual space used on the drive is 33GB, the compression and decompression engine (that had you done your research, you would have known has dedicated silicon space and the specs for it's throughput have been published by Sony) is so fast, it just decompresses on the fly as you play the game. In order to feed it though, the drive must be able to read quick enough, hence the strict specs on NVMe drives for the PS5.

Also, all your testing on your PC are purely based on games that never take SSD's into account, yes a few games do but 99% don't. For someone who's been gaming since 2006, I would have thought you'd have noticed the trend of Developers following the consoles as the base platform to develop around and PC's are always an after-thought.

Once devs and game engines get used to the idea of such massive speeds to the storage, they'll take advantage and your run-of-the-mill Sata SSD will just get left behind.

I'll admit it has been slow going though, Microsoft are taking their sweet time with DirectStorage so PC has an equivalent API to use as consoles do and devs have concentrated on cross-gen games rather than dedicated current gen games.
 

hahahanoobs

Posts: 4,454   +2,419
You might want to reel in your own T-Rex arms as I don't think you get it. Go read up on MS DirectStorage.
Already did months ago like everyone else.
What are we looking for that we don't already know? Do you have a release date? Anything? Or are you gonna try and sell me on the marketing instead?
 

Nintenboy01

Posts: 217   +174
Other than lacking DLSS the PS5 has demonstrated it really is around 2070-2070 Super level and XSX around 2080 Super to 2080 Ti/3070 level. Many games have a 120FPS 1080p performance mode, 60FPS mode, or quality mode at native 4K, dynamic res or 1440p
 

Burty117

Posts: 4,488   +2,694
Other than lacking DLSS the PS5 has demonstrated it really is around 2070-2070 Super level and XSX around 2080 Super to 2080 Ti/3070 level. Many games have a 120FPS 1080p performance mode, 60FPS mode, or quality mode at native 4K, dynamic res or 1440p
Xbox also lacks DLSS like features as well as far as I'm aware? I'm unsure on the PS5 but I know the PS4 and PS4 Pro had hardware accelerated checkerboard rendering which seems to help a lot.

I wonder if AMD's FSR can be used on these or if Checkerboard Rendering is better?

Also, is it me or does the GPU difference between them feel like a completely moot point this generation? I have a friend who got hold of a Series X just before Christmas and him and me were comparing and honestly, you wouldn't be able to spot the difference. Digital Foundry I noticed when they compare PS5 to Series X also struggle to find any tangible difference most of the time.

Ever since Xbox was a thing, there were clear strengths in the hardware, Xbox easily beat PS2 in every way, 360 clearly had the easier to exploit hardware and most games ran better on it, Xbox One clearly had the weaker hardware and ran everything at a lower resolution. This gen though, maybe my eyes are weak now but I just cannot tell a difference.
 

AMDGeForceRX3090

Posts: 93   +101
Xbox also lacks DLSS like features as well as far as I'm aware? I'm unsure on the PS5 but I know the PS4 and PS4 Pro had hardware accelerated checkerboard rendering which seems to help a lot.

I wonder if AMD's FSR can be used on these or if Checkerboard Rendering is better?

Also, is it me or does the GPU difference between them feel like a completely moot point this generation? I have a friend who got hold of a Series X just before Christmas and him and me were comparing and honestly, you wouldn't be able to spot the difference. Digital Foundry I noticed when they compare PS5 to Series X also struggle to find any tangible difference most of the time.

Ever since Xbox was a thing, there were clear strengths in the hardware, Xbox easily beat PS2 in every way, 360 clearly had the easier to exploit hardware and most games ran better on it, Xbox One clearly had the weaker hardware and ran everything at a lower resolution. This gen though, maybe my eyes are weak now but I just cannot tell a difference.
Probably cause the difference will be full 3840x2160 on the Xbox and 3200x1800 or something on the PS5, and most people are sat way too far away from their 4k screens to see the full resolution anyway. FSR was shown to work even on an old RX580 so a couple RDNA2 derived chips should be able to use it fine.
 

Burty117

Posts: 4,488   +2,694
Probably cause the difference will be full 3840x2160 on the Xbox and 3200x1800 or something on the PS5
But it's not even that big of a difference between them. Dying Light 2 being the example here. The consoles run the game identically except in the highest resolution mode, of which, the PS5 is 1800p and the Xbox is 1944p, equalling 16% more pixels. As Digital Foundry notes, you can't really tell the difference until you freeze frame and zoom in 400% and pixel peep.

Maybe when more current gen only games come out, we'll start seeing more divergence of performance? Kinda feels like we won't though, this gen being an example that raw TFLOP numbers don't always add up to massively better performance.
 

AMDGeForceRX3090

Posts: 93   +101
But it's not even that big of a difference between them. Dying Light 2 being the example here. The consoles run the game identically except in the highest resolution mode, of which, the PS5 is 1800p and the Xbox is 1944p, equalling 16% more pixels. As Digital Foundry notes, you can't really tell the difference until you freeze frame and zoom in 400% and pixel peep.

Maybe when more current gen only games come out, we'll start seeing more divergence of performance? Kinda feels like we won't though, this gen being an example that raw TFLOP numbers don't always add up to massively better performance.
If anything the difference is much smaller than last gen. OG Xbox One is 1.2TF and PS4 is 1.8TF. That's huge. And for quite a while 10% of GPU power was reserved for Kinect whether it was being used or not... How bad is that?
 

Burty117

Posts: 4,488   +2,694
If anything the difference is much smaller than last gen. OG Xbox One is 1.2TF and PS4 is 1.8TF. That's huge. And for quite a while 10% of GPU power was reserved for Kinect whether it was being used or not... How bad is that?
Yeah Microsoft really messed up there, shame really considering how well they were doing before hand.
 

SilverCider

Posts: 78   +4
Already did months ago like everyone else.
What are we looking for that we don't already know? Do you have a release date? Anything? Or are you gonna try and sell me on the marketing instead?
Ah, one of those types.

Go read your own argument and then the following responses which detail exactly what you're questioning.
 

Burty117

Posts: 4,488   +2,694
He didn't even respond to me, he knows he's just being a little special so he'll now do a bit of trolling, the mature way to engage in conversation šŸ˜Ž