Furthermore, in order to deliver such high write speeds, Kingston has implemented a decently sized dynamic SLC write cache to absorb inbound requests. That equates to a 500 MBps bump in read/write performance at the 500GB capacity and 300/700 MBps read/write improvement at the 1TB and 2TB capacities. With a PCIe 3.0 x4 link, the company rates them to deliver sequential performance of up to 3.5/2.9 GBps read/write and hit upwards of 375,000/300,000 random read/write IOPS, a significant boost over the previous model. At the time of writing, Amazon has them listed around $0.22-$0.30 per GB, almost double the cost of some SSDs, even exceeding Samsung’s 970 EVO Plus. And when purchased as single units, their prices can be quite high.
Kingston’s KC2500 M.2 NVMe SSDs are available in capacities of 250GB up to 2TB. Both Adata’s XPG SX8200 Pro and the HP SSD EX950 gave the KC2000 a spanking with their faster operating 4-plane Micron 64L TLC NAND flash. Kingston, the big OEM supplier that it is, had no issue with making the tradeoff of slower NAND speeds for better long-term reliability with early production BiCS4 96L TLC, but while the company optimized the KC2000 from a reliability standpoint, it failed to keep up with some of the more responsive competitors in testing. Mainly, the NAND’s operation speeds were set to slower frequencies than what competitors were operating at, and the fact that the Kioxia NAND was of a 2-plane design, rather than 4-plane like Micron’s and Samsung’s, potentially losing out on some performance under mixed workloads. The reasoning? While Kingston was using a pretty potent component combo, there were some limitations to its design. Kingston’s KC2000 was a rather good performer when it went through our benchmarks the last go-round, although, it wasn’t one of the best SSDs.
0 kommentar(er)
