My current system drive is a 250GB Samsung 960 EVO (claimed: 3.2GB/s read 1.9GB/s write), which is running out of space. Realistically my Samsung is plenty fast enough and I don't give much of a crap about it being any faster, but I'd rather avoid any replacement being any slower
In my system already I have a 1TB Crucial P3 Plus (claimed 5GB/s read, 4.2GB/s write) that I use for game storage. I also have a new 1TB WD Blue SN570 (claimed 3.5GB/s read, 3GB/s write) sitting on the desk
I'm toying with the question of which of those two drives to use for the system drive. The Crucial is faster on paper but it would be more effort to swap them over, whereas he WD Blue is technically a slower drive, but I can just swap it in without having to move any data around.
Considering that I'm running a PCIe 3.0 motherboard and both of the 1TB drives are rated as being faster than my current Samsung drive, am I going to see any real world difference between the Crucial and WD drives that would be worth messing around, or should I just install the WD Blue and not worry about it?
In my system already I have a 1TB Crucial P3 Plus (claimed 5GB/s read, 4.2GB/s write) that I use for game storage. I also have a new 1TB WD Blue SN570 (claimed 3.5GB/s read, 3GB/s write) sitting on the desk
I'm toying with the question of which of those two drives to use for the system drive. The Crucial is faster on paper but it would be more effort to swap them over, whereas he WD Blue is technically a slower drive, but I can just swap it in without having to move any data around.
Considering that I'm running a PCIe 3.0 motherboard and both of the 1TB drives are rated as being faster than my current Samsung drive, am I going to see any real world difference between the Crucial and WD drives that would be worth messing around, or should I just install the WD Blue and not worry about it?
Last edited: