Read more.Quote:
Initially available in 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB capacities.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Initially available in 128GB, 256GB, and 512GB capacities.
128GB really? ISn't it time that the default smallest storage size should be 256GB ?
Those capacities, read and write speeds and IOPS are all pathetic. What are they thinking by releasing these now?
Agreed, Why would any company release an m.2 drive that's worse than a 5-year-old Samsung? m.2 is performance, if somebody wants cheap they get a SATA SSD or some spinning rust.
I think that would depend on Gigabyte's target market. If they are targeting enthusiast upgrades, then I would agree with you 100%, but if they are going for OEMs or embedded devices then 128Gb could well be sensible. It would cut $50 from the price of a cheap ultrabook, which would make all the difference in many markets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfclaw
If you are comparing it with a SATA SSD, then it is worth remembering that M.2 is a lot smaller that a SATA device, so even if it is no faster, it is still better in that respect.
Agreed, these are about 4 years too late.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonigan