Conclusion: Entry Level QLC

The Corsair MP400 has proved to be a competent budget NVMe SSD in its 1TB version. The recent crop of drives like the Corsair MP400 and Sabrent Rocket has raised the bar for consumer QLC SSDs. That being said, the a 1TB QLC drive is relatively low capacity for the controller, and there are performance compromises that go along with that (compared to the 8TB relatives we looked at last week). At mainstream capacities they can compete against many budget TLC SSDs, and at the higher capacities where there are few or no budget TLC options, many of the benefits of QLC NAND come into play.

The MP400 sits on the boundary between a good TLC drive and an entry level QLC drive. It performs as expected, and the key arbiter in going for this drive is going to be in the cost.

When Does QLC Make Sense? An Overview

Based on our testing, QLC drive capacities below 1TB (such as 500 GB), we recommend avoiding QLC SSDs. These smaller capacities are where DRAMless TLC SSDs are clearly the better value, and more mainstream TLC drives with DRAM are often on sale for entry-level prices as well. Above 1TB, the DRAMless TLC options are few and far between, and we don't expect any of them to handle heavier workloads as easily as 2+TB QLC drives with DRAM do.

At the 1TB capacity point we're focused on today, the conclusion is not as clear. The Corsair MP400 generally outperformed the low-end TLC drives we have to compare against, though our collection is missing a few of the best-performing budget TLC options on the market today. It is pretty clear that DRAMless TLC SSDs have the edge in power efficiency.

For general purpose consumer desktop usage, both QLC and TLC entry-level NVMe drives offer better performance than SATA SSDs, and with little or no price premium. Which kind of entry-level NVMe drive is the better really comes down to day to day pricing.

Budget NVMe Consumer SSD Price Comparison
December 11, 2020
  PCIe
DRAM
NAND 500GB 1TB 2TB 4TB 8TB
NVMe PCIe 3.0
ADATA XPG SX8100 3.0 x4
Yes
TLC
8ch
$59.99 (12¢/GB) $94.99
(9¢/GB)
$229.99 (11¢/GB) $499.99 (12¢/GB) -
ADATA Swordfish 3.0 x4
No
TLC
4ch
$54.99 (11¢/GB) $94.99
(9¢/GB)
$189.99 (9¢/GB) - -
Corsair MP400 3.0 x4
Yes
QLC
8ch
- $114.99 (11¢/GB) $244.99 (12¢/GB) $662.00 (17¢/GB) $1498.00 (19¢/GB)
Inland Platinum 3.0 x4
Yes
QLC
8ch
- $94.99
(9¢/GB)
$193.99 (10¢/GB) $499.99 (12¢/GB) -
Intel 660p 3.0 x4
Yes
QLC
4ch
$59.99 (12¢/GB) $109.99 (11¢/GB) $209.99 (10¢/GB) - -
Intel 665p 3.0 x4
Yes
QLC
4ch
- $109.99 (11¢/GB) $239.99 (12¢/GB) - -
Kingston A2000 3.0 x4
Yes
TLC
4ch
$53.99 (11¢/GB) $102.99 (10¢/GB) - - -
Mushkin ALPHA 3.0 x4
Yes
QLC
8ch
- - - $599.99 (15¢/GB) $1299.99 (16¢/GB)
Mushkin Helix-L 3.0 x4
No
TLC
4ch
$54.99 (11¢/GB) $89.99
(9¢/GB)
- - -
Sabrent Rocket Q 3.0 x4
Yes
QLC
8ch
$64.99 (13¢/GB) $109.98 (11¢/GB) $219.98 (11¢/GB) $599.98 (15¢/GB) $1299.99 (16¢/GB)
WD Blue SN550 3.0 x4
No
TLC
8ch
$53.99 (11¢/GB) $104.99 (10¢/GB) $247.99 (12¢/GB) - -
NVMe PCIe 4.0
Sabrent Rocket Q 4.0 4.0 x4
Yes
QLC
8ch
- $149.98 (15¢/GB) $319.99 (16¢/GB) $689.98 (17¢/GB) -
Addlink S92 4.0 x4
Yes
QLC
8ch
- $145.88 (15¢/GB) $277.88 (14¢/GB) $649.99 (16¢/GB) -
SATA
Samsung 870 QVO SATA
Yes
QLC - $89.99
(9¢/GB)
$199.99 (10¢/GB) $419.99 (10¢/GB) $861.27 (11¢/GB)

The handful of multi-TB QLC drives using the Phison E12S controller are competing not just on price, but on the vendor's ability to keep the drive in stock. From day to day, we're seeing the best-priced models quickly end up backordered, so there's clearly demand for these massive SSDs but the prices should drift downward a bit as these drives become more widely available from multiple brands. The Corsair MP400 hasn't been on the market for as long as the Sabrent Rocket Q, so the latter currently has it beat on pricing and availability. Microcenter's Inland Platinum QLC drive seems to still be the cheapest Phison E12S+QLC drive on the market, with especially attractive pricing for the 4TB model.

Even though the proliferation of new QLC alternatives has broadened the scope of the entry-level NVMe market segment, these drives are still almost always overshadowed by the best deals in the more mainstream NVMe market segment that is dominated by drives with TLC and DRAM and 8-channel controllers. Right now with holiday pricing, it is very easy to score a drive that doesn't have any of the acute weaknesses of DRAMless or QLC models, without paying a premium. The best example is ADATA's XPG SX8100, a TLC drive with Realtek's 8-channel controller with DRAM. The SX8100 is one of the few TLC models with a 4TB option so it competes against high-capacity QLC models, and beats many of them on price at all capacity points.

Our next look into consumer QLC SSDs will be Sabrent's Rocket Q4, the successor to the Rocket Q that adopts the Phison E16 PCIe 4.0 controller. Even though the newer Phison E18 Gen4 controller is starting to ship in high-end SSDs, The E18 is probably overkill for QLC models, and it's certainly more expensive. The E16 controller may stick around for a while to offer a more affordable path toward better QLC performance.

Next Review: SSD Benchmark Suite Update for PCIe Gen 4

This review marks the end of our current generation of SSD testing equipment and procedures. Our new overhauled test suite designed for PCIe Gen4 SSDs will be launching soon, along with a new section in Bench for the new test results. The existing SSD18 results will remain available with no further updates. Many recent drives we have already reviewed will be re-tested on our new SSD test suite and their results will be added to the new SSD21 section as they are completed.

 
Mixed Read/Write Performance And Power Management
Comments Locked

75 Comments

View All Comments

  • Oxford Guy - Monday, December 14, 2020 - link

    850 EVO is 3D TLC built with a fairly large node.
  • rrinker - Tuesday, December 15, 2020 - link

    Yes but the point it how much data people write to their SSD, not the technology used. For the intended audience of these slower drives with lower endurance, the point being made here is that the endurance isn't really an issue. For people with use cases where these drives don't really make sense due to plenty of factors other than endurance, it might be an issue, but the people writing that much to the drive aren;t the people this drive is targeted at.
    Same goes with nearly every review ever posted here. It might be a basic budget product which is more than adequate for Mom and Pop to send emails and view pics of the grandkids, but ALWAYS some extreme user will pipe up with how useless the product is. Well - it's not for you, why should you care? Ma and Pa web browser and emailers don't need 64 core Threadrippers and 128GB RAM and the highest end video card on the market. If you do - then fine, get what suits your needs and ignore the products targeted at users who don't need it. All I'm saying. The key factor here is that this is an older drive and over its lifetime, it hasn't seen anywhere close to even this new drive's rated endurance, and I'm not a casual user. If this drive was around back then, I wouldn't have come close to hitting the limits of it, even though it's rated for far less writes than my 850 due to the technology used.
  • SodaAnt - Sunday, December 13, 2020 - link

    Folding@Home was not the cause, it uses next to no disk.
  • Mobile-Dom - Monday, December 14, 2020 - link

    "normal people"

    "Folding@home"

    hmm
  • TheinsanegamerN - Tuesday, December 15, 2020 - link

    "normal people"

    I have a PC with a NVMe SSD. This hosts both several frequently played games and my operating system. Anything that gets downloaded goes to that drive first.

    It's a samsung 950 pro. 5 years old, and its just hit 10TBW after hosting god knows how many OS installations. Somehow I find it HIGHLY unlikely you know "normal people" who go through 150TB in 2 months.
  • Beaver M. - Saturday, December 12, 2020 - link

    Been using the same 512 GB SSD for 5+ years now. 12 to 16 hours a day.
    I have 62TBW now. Thats using it as a system/download/games/recording(not that often) drive.
    Given that I didnt install that many different games (since Im a more casual gamer now), 200 TBW seems low. Needs at least 400 TBW, which even my low 512 GB SSD offers, because its MLC.
    Its true that if youre a content creator you need much more than that.
  • Spunjji - Monday, December 14, 2020 - link

    Those numbers suggest this drive would last a user like you at least 15 years, and maybe 18. I have doubts that it would even be worth putting into whatever system you're running by then - and that's before we get into the nitty-gritty of what a drive is rated for vs. what it will actually do.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Tuesday, December 15, 2020 - link

    So this drive would last you nearly two decades then. And just because you hit the TBW limit doesnt mean the drive stops working. Techreport proved that years ago, and controllers have gotten a lot better since then.

    https://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endura...
  • Beaver M. - Friday, December 18, 2020 - link

    It gets a lot slower and there will be NAND fatigue.
  • mukiex - Monday, December 14, 2020 - link

    The important thing to note as drives get larger is how important they can be for storing stuff like a Steam library. Game downloads are a read-heavy operation, and cheaper SSD storage with less endurance makes for a perfect storage medium.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now