NVMe with Intel 3D Nand TLC - 120GB for 33 USD from China Reeinno Mace-2000 test

[adamiakadam00]

I found very interesting drive with good memory chips and excellent price! 120GB = 33USD (free shipping)

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Ree...-240GB-2280-3D-NAND-HD-1-8GB/32912303241.html

 

[newtekie1]

Performance wise it seems rather...meh...

I've seen SATA drives getting better write numbers in pretty much everything except the sequential(which is the least important number), and pretty much matching the read numbers(again except sequential).

Edit: I just watched the video. It is DRAM-Less, no wonder it performs so poorly. Not worth going with a DRAM-less drive, IMO.

 

[adamiakadam00]

Yep. The controller is slowing down the drive. Anyway it should work faster than any SSD on SATA3.

 

[newtekie1]

Yep. The controller is slowing down the drive. Anyway it should work faster than any SSD on SATA3.

In my experience, not really. The removal of the DRAM cache slows these drives down so much in real world use that they really aren't any faster than a SATA drive in practice, and in fact can be even a little slower than a good SATA drive. They can post big sequential read and write numbers, but those numbers really mean nothing in real world use. The 4k numbers are what affect real world use for a system drive, and this drive isn't really any better than a SATA drive on the 4k read numbers, but the 4k write numbers are actually less than half of what you get on a good SATA drive. Doing things like installing programs/games/updates is going to be really slow on this drive, even compared to a SATA drive.

 

[adamiakadam00]

Yes but its true when you do operations on small files. In different situation (large files) PCI-E x4 bandwith will lead to win against standard sata3 drives (600mb/s vs 3936mb/s).

 

[cucker tarlson]

my 128gb adata 3d mlc sata ssd does beter at 4k random write. and that's what matters.

 

[adamiakadam00]

But it is not a $33 drive ^^

 

[cucker tarlson]

But it is not a $33 drive ^^

it's not a $33 drive cause it's good. I guarantee you that my su900 with dram and slc buffer will outperform that nvme drive in almost any task once they're 90% full. and it cost me just over 40 bucks.
most of typical pc usage is small files, in games 4K-32K is like +95%

 

[newtekie1]

Yes but its true when you do operations on small files. In different situation (large files) PCI-E x4 bandwith will lead to win against standard sata3 drives (600mb/s vs 3936mb/s).

Sure, but a system drive, which is all a 120GB drive is really good for, won't really be experiencing large sequential file transfers.

But it is not a $33 drive ^^

But the Adata SX6000 is a $35 drive, and way better. We'll worth the few extra dollars.

 

[adamiakadam00]

SX6000 128GB vs Reeinno 128GB (maybe some of you compared the 256GB version of the SX6000?)

 

[cucker tarlson]

4k write is absolutely abysmal on this cheap drive. and sx6000 isn't that great either, sx8200 is the best budget nvme.

 

[adamiakadam00]

SX6000 256gb vs reeinno 256gb - so it is not so bad as someone said

 

[Octopuss]

So SATA drives have cache as well?

 

[cucker tarlson]

So SATA drives have cache as well?

yes, any good drive will have dram and slc cache, nvme or sata. All my three 850 Pro's, my 128gb su900 as well as the 860 evo that I just bought have slc and ddr3/ddr4 onboard. I'd stay away from drives that don't provide slc/dram caching.

 

[Octopuss]

So in other words, it doen't even matter what the rest of the drive consists of as long as it has tons of fast cache?

 

[cucker tarlson]

So in other words, it doen't even matter what the rest of the drive consists of as long as it has tons of fast cache?

no it does.

 

[Octopuss]

Well, if NVMe drive is absolutely useless without cache and behaves worse than a SATA drive, I presume none of the modern aspects (like NVMe and better flash) about such drive matters.

 

[cucker tarlson]

why useless ? it's ot useless, it won't be able to deliver consistent performance in anything but light workload, but it's not useless in any way. All depends on the price, IMO it's not worth getting the absolutely cheapest ssd, not only due to performance, but lifespan as well. But useless, no, they're still fast enoguh, even if performance dips uner havier workload or when the drive is full.

 

[Octopuss]

why useless ?

Because it performs worse than something it's supposed to replace? (NVMe vs SATA)

 

[cucker tarlson]

Because it performs worse than something it's supposed to replace? (NVMe vs SATA)

it's still gonna be fast, but if you cheap out on a nvme drive, buy a 2d tlc one, with no dram buffer, not only do you sacrifice the longevity, you also pretty much nullify the performance increase that nvme protocol can provide. what I said about a good sata drive outperforming a cheap nvme referred to the smallest 120gb versions. The higher the capacity of a cheap nvme drive, the better it will do. a 250/500gb cheap nvme will still outperform or at least match a good sata ssd. The reason to avoid them is quality. They usually have pretty low TBW limit and short warranty. If you go with nvme, you should get a decent 3d tlc one with a dram buffer at the very least, there's plenty of good ones, like sx8200. I still prefer a larger sata based ssd over a nvme one that'll cost a premium. I just got an 860 evo 500gb for 330pln. For comparison, sx8200 480gb costs 460pln. No doubt 8200 is gonna be faster, but in real world use it's not that noticeable.

My point is,in order to actually feel the difference between a sata ssd and a nvme one, you can't cheap out. It's only the good nvme drives that provide a noticeably better performance at low size random read/write, where it really matters. Look at this for example. Only the good nvme drives like samsung 960/950 line provide a performance increase big enough you can actually feel it in tasks like installing new software or copying files. Notice how entry level nvme drives like sx6000 or mp300 are not that much faster than sata based 850 pro.

https://www.purepc.pl/pamieci_masow...xpg_sx8200_najszybszy_z_najtanszych?page=0,14
https://www.purepc.pl/pamieci_masow..._xpg_sx8200_najszybszy_z_najtanszych?page=0,7

 

[adamiakadam00]

Its silly to compare M.2 drives to SATA SSDs. Why? Because its better to use M.2 than SATA3 drives. Why? There are no any wires! If M.2 SATA drives costs the same like M.2 NVMe - its better to get NVMe. Even without cache. Thats my opinion.

i'm not saying that Reeinno w/out cache is much faster than other drives. Its a drive with enough read/write speeds.

That kind of drives are at entry or ultra low end levels. The point is the price. It does not matter if the game loads 2s faster. Noone considers to use it in any kind of servers for professional use where the real I/O performance and read/write speeds are matter. The test proved that chinese ultra low price NVMe is a very good option and its not worse than other SSDs produced by big companies.

 

[dj-electric]

I said it before and im gonna say it again.
Dear people,

Don't trust your data with off-brand SSDs. Branded ones are fairly cheap anyways.

 

[adamiakadam00]

Is it surprising for you that they used intel memory chips?

 

[Durvelle27]

I don’t find this very appealing. You can always find better deals on small SSDs if you just look and especially from more reputable brands.

 

[adamiakadam00]

Yep. That kind of thinking moves us to use only 1 serious brand...............

Why review of unknown Reeinno is interesting? Because its not 326th review of Curcial or other SSDs with"reputable brand". Not known, does not mean bad.