Do you need a PCIe Gen 4 SSD for Gaming?
|So you’ve lucked out and scored a brand new Ryzen 5000 series CPU, RTX 3000 series GPU, and are considering throwing in one of the new ‘full fat’ PCIe Gen 4 SSDs like this Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus, but you aren’t sure if it’s worth double the price of the normal Gen 3 Rocket – well fret no more! This is the video for you! Also if you aren’t quite that lucky or rich and are rocking a Ryzen 3000 series CPU and B550 or X570 motherboard, this still applies to you. Lets test if using one of these super-mega-ultra-fast drives makes literally any difference to the average gamer like you!
First off, let me show you the drives we’ll be using. The ‘full fat’ gen 4 drive will be played by the Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus, the ‘baby gen 4 drive’ will be played by the Sabrent Rocket 4, we’ve also got a good gen 3 drive, a Samsung 960 PRO, and I’ll even throw in a SATA SSD in the form of a Samsung 870 QVO for good measure. So how do they stack up in ‘synthetic’ tests?
Well, the difference is pretty massive when shown like this. The Rocket 4 Plus reads at 7GB/s and writes at just shy of 7GB/s, whereas our SATA SSD barely scrapes 500MB/s on both. The Rocket 4 isn’t too far behind the Plus on reads, suffering more on writes, and the 960 PRO sits nicely in the middle of the Gen 4 and SATA drives at around 3.5GB/s and around 2GB/s on writes. Overall a pretty nice step up from each drive. So, with the Rocket 4 Plus offering 14 times more read and write performance than our SATA SSD, it should load games 14 times faster right? Lets see…
Lets start with Watchdogs Legion, where the Rocket 4 Plus matches the slower Rocket 4. Then, the gen 3 drive, the 960 Pro, is only .2 of a second behind. Only the SATA SSD holds a significant margin on the others running at 18.4 seconds instead of 16.2, but at just 12% slower it’s hardly the difference between being able to go stick the kettle on while the game loads and not.
In Cyberpunk 2077 the Gen 3 drive is the fastest, although not by much. Under half a second separates the top 3, with only a second and a half extra for the slower SATA drive. Overall the SATA drive is only around 20% slower, which at these speeds is just shy of 2 seconds.
GTA V is a game known for being a ‘loading simulator’, and by comparison it really is. Just loading the story mode, it took 32 seconds to get to the tutorial mission, but interestingly besides the SATA drive being 1 second slower, the rest were all basically identical.
Finally, Microsoft Flight, loading into the first landing mission. Strangely, the Rocket 4 Plus was actually the slowest, again with the gen 3 960 PRO coming in first.
Interestingly, taking a look at the average loading times, the gen 3 drive wins out here by just 0.2 of a second. The gen 4 plus drive is a touch slower at 1 second, with the SATA SSD under a second slower than that.
So, when it comes to loading up games… no it doesn’t matter if it’s SATA, gen 3, gen 4, or the newer faster gen 4 options. All load within a second or two of each other.