• goldcakes@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s a QLC drive. It literally isn’t fast enough to consume 3.1 Gen 1. Sustained writes are like 60MB/s.

  • Vivid_Yielding@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Everyone in this thread complaining about slow speeds and the wrong USB version, without realising that the damn SSD is using a fucking SATA III interface… in 2023. I mean, it’s one way to cut costs but god damn…

  • DevAnalyzeOperate@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I genuinely have zero idea what the market is for giant portable drives which can’t read/write quickly but are more expensive than spinning rust. The nature of these portable drives is either you’re writing just a little data to them so you don’t need much storage, or you are writing a ton of data to them and want to probably run at TB3 speeds or better.

    • arahman81@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The writes only drop off in larger transfers, in small/moderate transfers its still faster than a HDD. Plus, the standard immunity to sudden movement.

    • Ferrum-56@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Main thing I can think of is game drive for consoles. Games load a lot faster from SSDs but you don’t need high sustained speed. Mostly read-only so QLC is fine.