Xbox Series X Expandable Storage

Meridius

Well-known Member
I just did a test between two Samsung 1tb SSDdrives using a x570 motherboard not usb, to copy a single 50gb file to a SSD to SSD it takes 2min so if lets say

1TB SDD to 1TB SSD
50gig file to move 2min and another 2 min to move the other to the internal that's 4min in total
100gig file to move 4min and another 4 min to move the other to the internal that's 8min in total

now you might shave of 1 min in total of that with NVME or gen 4 drive to XBOX internal, the thing is a 1tb NVME gen3 is £130 plus the drive case £30 that's £160 in total and a saving of £80 and prob take from 4min to 8 min to swap a single game over.

a gen 4 drive i don't think you would make much difference.

I am not going to buy the xbox drive as its just to much. so if i run out of space i might have to look at a gen 2 usb3.1 case and a nvme gen 3 1tb drive to save £80.

this is a single 50gb file so i am not to sure if lots of files would take longer or not than a single file.
 

lungwun

Well-known Member
I just did a test between two Samsung 1tb SSDdrives using a x570 motherboard not usb, to copy a single 50gb file to a SSD to SSD it takes 2min so if lets say

1TB SDD to 1TB SSD
50gig file to move 2min and another 2 min to move the other to the internal that's 4min in total
100gig file to move 4min and another 4 min to move the other to the internal that's 8min in total

now you might shave of 1 min in total of that with NVME or gen 4 drive to XBOX internal, the thing is a 1tb NVME gen3 is £130 plus the drive case £30 that's £160 in total and a saving of £80 and prob take from 4min to 8 min to swap a single game over.

a gen 4 drive i don't think you would make much difference.

I am not going to buy the xbox drive as its just to much. so if i run out of space i might have to look at a gen 2 usb3.1 case and a nvme gen 3 1tb drive to save £80.

this is a single 50gb file so i am not to sure if lots of files would take longer or not than a single file.
This is quite fascinating!
Unfortunately I don't know anything about NVME.

Looking on Amazon right now, what caddy and NVME Gen 3 drive would you recommend I keep a look out for?
Hoping to grab a deal on prime day or Black Friday.
 

Meridius

Well-known Member
This is quite fascinating!
Unfortunately I don't know anything about NVME.

Looking on Amazon right now, what caddy and NVME Gen 3 drive would you recommend I keep a look out for?
Hoping to grab a deal on prime day or Black Friday.
I am not to sure as i don't know what different brands are like for speeds but i have always bought icy box in the past and seen to be very good, this one has a heatsink built into it, and its gen 2 of usb 3.1.

Amazon product
review



or the sabrent USB 3.2 Tool-Free Enclosure which is usb 3.1 gen 2


the thing is the no one knows what the Series X Xbox will use USB 3.0(5Gbps), 3.2 Gen 2(10Gbps) or 3.2x2(20Gbps). so until test come out i would not buy anything
 
Last edited:

Nukleuz

Well-known Member
I just did a test between two Samsung 1tb SSDdrives using a x570 motherboard not usb, to copy a single 50gb file to a SSD to SSD it takes 2min so if lets say

1TB SDD to 1TB SSD
50gig file to move 2min and another 2 min to move the other to the internal that's 4min in total
100gig file to move 4min and another 4 min to move the other to the internal that's 8min in total

now you might shave of 1 min in total of that with NVME or gen 4 drive to XBOX internal, the thing is a 1tb NVME gen3 is £130 plus the drive case £30 that's £160 in total and a saving of £80 and prob take from 4min to 8 min to swap a single game over.

a gen 4 drive i don't think you would make much difference.

I am not going to buy the xbox drive as its just to much. so if i run out of space i might have to look at a gen 2 usb3.1 case and a nvme gen 3 1tb drive to save £80.

this is a single 50gb file so i am not to sure if lots of files would take longer or not than a single file.
I've just copied RDR2 game folder from NVME->NVME which is 115gb.
Took 1m 56secs at an average rate of about 1.10gb/ps
(samsung 970 evo on Z390 mobo)

Copied same from NVME to Samsung 860QVO SATA SSD and it took 23mins 45secs at around 85mb/s.

Can't test it to my external USB HDD as that has all my xbox games on!
 
Last edited:

Meridius

Well-known Member
it all depends on the spec of the drive and the size and the chips they use. but this will all mean nothing if Microsoft use slow usb versions. I am sure many people will have videos that show this when the console is released in November. but theres no way i am paying £230 for a 1tb
 

lungwun

Well-known Member
I am not to sure as i don't know what different brands are like for speeds but i have always bought icy box in the past and seen to be very good, this one has a heatsink built into it, and its gen 2 of usb 3.1.

Amazon product
review



or the sabrent USB 3.2 Tool-Free Enclosure which is usb 3.1 gen 2


the thing is the no one knows what the Series X Xbox will use USB 3.0(5Gbps), 3.2 Gen 2(10Gbps) or 3.2x2(20Gbps). so until test come out i would not buy anything
Thanks for this. I guess I'll hold fire till more information about the console trickles out
 

ricflairandy

Active Member
Storage is more than id expected after that 100 quid number was being touted, but i guess if you compare it to comparable drives it is what it is. Im happy enough with the 1tb and my existing 4gb usb 3 drive. It will be interesting to see if games that are curent gen but x enhanced will need to be on the internal though.
 

tonyk79

Well-known Member
I cannot see a single sustained performance figure for that drive you linked to, it’s all ‘Up To’ just like broadband speeds, they are under perfect conditions. That does not therefore indicate it’s faster then the Series X drive with its reportedly advertised sustained figures.
For the Sabrent drive I linked, the first review shows the typical speed a user got. The Xbox drive will be up to those speeds as well and the Xbox operates at maximum 2400MB/s uncompressed while a Gen 4 drive is typical double that speed. The Corsair equivalent Is also faster.


How is an internal SSD equivalent to the external plug in plug out hot swappable option Seagate have built? I don’t mind people comparing like for like products but this just isn’t the same thing.

Find a CFExpress card which is probably what the Xbox drive is built on and certainly the same sort of functionality...
The only difference is the case, hot swappable is nothing special either, it’s been around for years. a significantly slower 1TB CF Express Card is £500- £800, why would MS use this or technology built on it? My £99 price is for the wholesale NVMe; add a case, heat sink, Interface and you are talking £129 at most, cut in Seagate and MS markup and Im of the opinion £179 is reasonable.

£229 is too expensive for this 2400MB/s drive.
 

Meridius

Well-known Member
yep i was going to say £150 at most for their drive to be honest.
 

sleepylaser

Well-known Member
Bulk Cost price and then allowing for the MS/Seagate markup.

If you want a single retail unit, £169 will get you This much faster NVMe which will allows for Sabrent and Amazon markup. I think £179.99 is a fair price for the much slower Xbox NVMe based on this much faster example drive and given Seagate exclusivity, no competition. Even a 4950MB/s Corsair is only £175.99.
That linked sabrent apparently requires a separate heat sink to ensure sustained high speeds. It’s also bare tech- no plastic sheeting /casing. It also has to be installed- it doesn’t have a hard wearing plug.

I’ve seen loads of ssd price comparisons on this and other forums and I’m convinced that the price of the Seagate series x ssd is not taking the pee. We are talking high end card in a distinct self reliant form factor, it’s early tech too for what it is. As this is Seagate’s bread and butter you wouldn’t expect it to be a loss leader either.

Of course £220 is a lot of money.
 

Nemesis X2

Distinguished Member
At the end of the day it is what it is. higher than we'd all hoped, but it is a high spec hot swappable card which likely wouldn't be any cheaper anywhere for an equivalent product. We don't have to buy one......

At least with the Xbox we know we have options. In the X there's a 1tb drive by default, which ignoring the COD MW / RDR2's of this world will actually hold a good number of games. Was checking over my installed X enhanced titles yesterday and there are loads in the 25-40gb bracket. We also know we can buy a proprietary drive to offer the same performance should we wish to do so, or we can just store titles on a USB back up. Plenty of options....

Compare that to Sony... The default drive is 825gb, they have nothing compatible at launch in way of expanding, and when the first few get approved don't think for a second they won't have a steep premium on them with all that potential demand. Also although it is expected PS5 games can be stored on an external USB drive and transfer to the internal when needed, it still hasn't been confirmed (to my knowledge) and I see many asking the questions. At least with Xbox everything is known and transparent.
 

tonyk79

Well-known Member
That linked sabrent apparently requires a separate heat sink to ensure sustained high speeds. It’s also bare tech- no plastic sheeting /casing. It also has to be installed- it doesn’t have a hard wearing plug.

I’ve seen loads of ssd price comparisons on this and other forums and I’m convinced that the price of the Seagate series x ssd is not taking the pee. We are talking high end card in a distinct self reliant form factor, it’s early tech too for what it is. As this is Seagate’s bread and butter you wouldn’t expect it to be a loss leader either.

Of course £220 is a lot of money.
What is Specifically high end about it? There are much higher end cards available for less and a heatsink and case is nothing revolutionary, the capacity of the nand chips will dictate form factor/size while Seagate do not make their own Nand chips so what is in the Xbox will be in other NVMe.

MS have sold Series X at a loss and are making the money back with this expansion drive, that’s completely fine and I would much rather have it this way as this optional expansion is overpriced with no requirement to purchase it; otherwise the Series X price could have been a lot higher.

The same is true for Sony and you will see licence deals to make approved NVMe at a marked up price.
 

Saxo Appeal

Distinguished Member
So saying all games which are enhanced for Series X are at the most 50gb, apart from COD and RSN games, then we’ll be able to fit around 15 to 18 give or take the OS allowance.

In my eyes that’s plenty for my 1TB to hold all my major playing games.
 

tonyk79

Well-known Member
At the end of the day it is what it is. higher than we'd all hoped, but it is a high spec hot swappable card which likely wouldn't be any cheaper anywhere for an equivalent product. We don't have to buy one......

At least with the Xbox we know we have options. In the X there's a 1tb drive by default, which ignoring the COD MW / RDR2's of this world will actually hold a good number of games. Was checking over my installed X enhanced titles yesterday and there are loads in the 25-40gb bracket. We also know we can buy a proprietary drive to offer the same performance should we wish to do so, or we can just store titles on a USB back up. Plenty of options....

Compare that to Sony... The default drive is 825gb, they have nothing compatible at launch in way of expanding, and when the first few get approved don't think for a second they won't have a steep premium on them with all that potential demand. Also although it is expected PS5 games can be stored on an external USB drive and transfer to the internal when needed, it still hasn't been confirmed (to my knowledge) and I see many asking the questions. At least with Xbox everything is known and transparent.
I agree on the Sony part, 825GB is too small in a premium console, given you will lose some of that with the OS, Formatting and caching. I reckon around 600-650GB will be available for games and as you say; approved units will carry a markup. I have a feeling 1TB at £249-£299 based on the MS price.
 

tonyk79

Well-known Member
So saying all games which are enhanced for Series X are at the most 50gb, apart from COD and RSN games, then we’ll be able to fit around 15 to 18 give or take the OS allowance.

In my eyes that’s plenty for my 1TB to hold all my major playing games.
From memory on Xbox I think from 1TB you have Typically 750GB available but and this hasn’t been confirmed, Xbox can instantly access 100GB data so that would have to be also cached on the disk; thus reducing available space further, although I suspect its just a page file that will scale up as needed.

It seems 2TB External HDD and the internal 1TB is going to be a good combo. Could effectively buy a Series S for the price of the 1TB expansion!
 

Cloysterpeteuk

Distinguished Member
At the end of the day it is what it is. higher than we'd all hoped, but it is a high spec hot swappable card which likely wouldn't be any cheaper anywhere for an equivalent product. We don't have to buy one......

At least with the Xbox we know we have options. In the X there's a 1tb drive by default, which ignoring the COD MW / RDR2's of this world will actually hold a good number of games. Was checking over my installed X enhanced titles yesterday and there are loads in the 25-40gb bracket. We also know we can buy a proprietary drive to offer the same performance should we wish to do so, or we can just store titles on a USB back up. Plenty of options....

Compare that to Sony... The default drive is 825gb, they have nothing compatible at launch in way of expanding, and when the first few get approved don't think for a second they won't have a steep premium on them with all that potential demand. Also although it is expected PS5 games can be stored on an external USB drive and transfer to the internal when needed, it still hasn't been confirmed (to my knowledge) and I see many asking the questions. At least with Xbox everything is known and transparent.
I’m still glad Sony went for the bleeding edge tech approach, games having access to a SSD of that ridiculous speed is a game changer for me. Of course it causes problems when you want more storage, thankfully I don’t often download crap like cod.
 

reecie

Well-known Member
Whilst it is pricey it is a NVME 4.0 drive in a plug and play format with heat sync issues taken care of. A standard 1TB NVME 4.0 drive looks to be anything from £175-220. So at this point in time the price is probably in the right ball park. The Smart Delivery tech will hopefully drop game sizes down a bit anyway. I'm just going to plug in my existing game drive and rotate the playing set between external and internal rather than buying this new storage up front.
 

sparkie1984

Distinguished Member
It would certainly appear that PS have a considerably faster internal drive! Although the Xbox drive is still very fast and a huge upgrade from the one x internal drive
 

daymouse

Distinguished Member
It would certainly appear that PS have a considerably faster internal drive! Although the Xbox drive is still very fast and a huge upgrade from the one x internal drive
I think it’s more marketing bull from Sony though as that’s not the maximum transfer speed not the sustained speed like MS have quoted. So be interesting to see what real world sustained speed the PS5 achieves
 

Nemesis X2

Distinguished Member
I’m still glad Sony went for the bleeding edge tech approach, games having access to a SSD of that ridiculous speed is a game changer for me. Of course it causes problems when you want more storage, thankfully I don’t often download crap like cod.
It won't be any sort of game changer for 95% of the games on PS5 which won't be designed to take advantage of it a multiplat. Also given Sony have clearly set the seed to bring their games to PC, it really remains to be seen how much their own devs utilise it with one eye on that market.

Equally the benefits in a game design point of view of a slightly faster drive over the Xbox's also lightning fast drive remains to be seen. I'd expect negligible if anything, given MS VA has plenty of clever design to access 100GB of data form the drive instantly and also has much faster memory bandwidth also, which is 100 times faster than PS5's raw SSD speed and more relevant for gameplay you would think.. Ultimately it might boil down to simply loading games 2 seconds faster. Given on Xbox we'll go from anything like 60-90 second loads in many cases to about 6 seconds, would i care if PS could load that game in 4 seconds...obviously not.

If i was a Sony fan i'd rather they went with a similar speed SSD to Xbox and PC and invested more money in the GPU, or simply provided a 1tb drive as a minimum.
 

apolloa

Distinguished Member
It won't be any sort of game changer for 95% of the games on PS5 which won't be designed to take advantage of it a multiplat. Also given Sony have clearly set the seed to bring their games to PC, it really remains to be seen how much their own devs utilise it with one eye on that market.

Equally the benefits in a game design point of view of a slightly faster drive over the Xbox's also lightning fast drive remains to be seen. I'd expect negligible if anything, given MS VA has plenty of clever design to access 100GB of data form the drive instantly and also has much faster memory bandwidth also, which is 100 times faster than PS5's raw SSD speed and more relevant for gameplay you would think.. Ultimately it might boil down to simply loading games 2 seconds faster. Given on Xbox we'll go from anything like 60-90 second loads in many cases to about 6 seconds, would i care if PS could load that game in 4 seconds...obviously not.

If i was a Sony fan i'd rather they went with a similar speed SSD to Xbox and PC and invested more money in the GPU, or simply provided a 1tb drive as a minimum.
It is pretty clear Sony have spent the money on a faster SSD, and just overclocked the cheaper CPU and GPU components, which could lead to issues as a fair few have raised eyebrows at the GPU speeds being targeted. And let’s not forget that’s theoretical maximum frequencies, not what it will be running at. All I’ve heard from Sony regarding PS5’s performance is maximum this and that, Microsoft has gone to great mains to only state sustained performance. But Cerney is a clever guy so I have no doubt it will perform, but they have bet in storage speeds over processing power this time, that may mean pretty games at lower FPS.
 
Last edited:

Meridius

Well-known Member
so i was nearly right about a 50gb file from SSD to internal SSD about 2 min but double form internal to external SSD, so about 7 min in total instead of 4min

the thing is he says he used a USB 3.0(5Gbps) external SSD, so if the Xbox series x supports 3.2 Gen 2(10Gbps) then it will be even faster.

don't think anyone has said what usb ports are used on the Xbox series x
 

Nukleuz

Well-known Member
3x USB 3.1 Gen 1 ports
 

rowedav

Distinguished Member

Happy with my Ext SSD as a backup option now
Which one have you got Tones? I have a 2tb mechanical drive currently but would give some thought to getting a SSD backup as well if there are some good options out there...
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Best Hi-Fi products of 2020, Plus Best of the Month for TV Shows & Movies

Latest News

AVForums Podcast: 25th November 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
Sky agrees movie deal with Entertainment One
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
What's new on Amazon Prime Video UK for December 2020
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Lypertek renames TEVI wireless earphones to PurePlay Z3
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
What's new on Disney+ UK for December 2020
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom