Upgrading SSD on HP OMEN 17-cb00011nv

spapakons · Tuesday at 9:56 AM

Hello!

I am not very familiar with the differences between M.2 SSD types and I want your help to avoid buying something not suitable for my wife's laptop. The current SSD is 256GB and has these specs:

Samsung PM981 256 GB Specs

256 GB, TLC, PCIe 3.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

I found this 480GB SSD which should be compatible with that laptop, but I want to make sure before I order. Thanks.

Crucial E100 480 GB Specs

480 GB, TLC, PCIe 4.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

The laptop also has a SATA port, so I can temporarily connect a SATA disk, make a full disk backup of the original and then restore it on the new disk. This should boot OK, right?

KevTech · Tuesday at 11:57 AM

The One in computer now is PCIe 3.0 and the other is PCIe 4.0

Both are length size 2280 so that is the same.

Find out if the PCIe slot supports PCIe 4 as if not it will work but you will not get the increased transfer speed of PCIe 4.0

The 4.0 would just run at 3.0 speed if the slot does not support 4.0

PCIe 4.0 has double the data transfer rate of PCIe 3.0

No matter what it will work as the length is the same (2280).

spapakons · Tuesday at 12:15 PM

Like putting a SATA III disk on a SATA II slot. It works fine at slower speed. I don't mind because the old disk is almost full and I want a larger one. I realize the speed difference will be small, but the main goal is to increase capacity not performance.

Thanks for your time.

KevTech · Tuesday at 12:29 PM

spapakons said:
Like putting a SATA III disk on a SATA II slot.

Yes, it will just run at the slower spec.

With M2 what you need to check is the slot length your PC supports.

Width are all 22mm but length can differ.

XxXxX · Tuesday at 12:36 PM

spapakons said:
Hello!

I am not very familiar with the differences between M.2 SSD types and I want your help to avoid buying something not suitable for my wife's laptop. The current SSD is 256GB and has these specs:

Samsung PM981 256 GB Specs

256 GB, TLC, PCIe 3.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

I found this 480GB SSD which should be compatible with that laptop, but I want to make sure before I order. Thanks.

Crucial E100 480 GB Specs

480 GB, TLC, PCIe 4.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

The laptop also has a SATA port, so I can temporarily connect a SATA disk, make a full disk backup of the original and then restore it on the new disk. This should boot OK, right?

i replaced my NVMe M2 intel ssd 3x 4 sata
with a 4x 4 WD Blue NVMe M2 sata of a larger size

it was just plug and play but the WD ssd runs at 3x sata speeds
which is under-clocked but works just fine.
best of luck Steve ..

spapakons · Tuesday at 12:37 PM

I was thinking that it might be different slot between NVME 3.0 and 4.0, but it is the same. Only speed changes. As far as I know very old M.2 slots don't accept modern NVME disks because of different protocols. Thankfully my wife's laptop is not that old.

user788 · Tuesday at 4:42 PM

Just fyi, Crucial E100 is one of the slowest performing NVMe ssd one can buy nowadays & it is highly likely that it might even be slower than Samsung PM981 in some aspects. Probably why it has no reviews on any even half decent international review website. Just get teamgroup MP33 or MP44L or crucial's own P310 all of which should be available for similar/bit higher price than E100.

Helmut · Tuesday at 8:03 PM

Should be OK.
You won't get the published speed as it will be on PCIe 3.0, that is of no consequence. It should be backwards compatible to PCIe 3.0 and NVMe 1.2
Thus you will get approx same speed as the old one.
The endurance is rather low 60 TBW, the norm is around ~300 TBW for that size of drive.
Obviously price is a factor. 1 TB would be a better choice.

user788 · Wednesday at 2:55 AM

Helmut said:
Should be OK.
You won't get the published speed as it will be on PCIe 3.0, that is of no consequence. It should be backwards compatible to PCIe 3.0 and NVMe 1.2
Thus you will get approx same speed as the old one.

This is not ok. You are talking about "sequential speeds" which majority of users also believe to be the most important factor but in reality it is the "random 4k speeds" which matters the most for typical daily usage scenario & operating system/programs loading & functioning. Majority of users don't know that even sata ssd are so much faster than HDDs not because of the difference in their sequential speeds (sata ssd ~400-500MB/s vs ~200MB/s of typical 7200rpm HDDs) but because of the difference in their random 4k speeds (~20-30MB/s of sata ssd vs ~1MB/s (yes it is one) for typical 7200rpm HDDs). Sequential speeds only matters if you are transferring a lot of large size files (say dozens of 500MB+ files) in one go or doing something like video editing. That is also why there are differences (both price wise & performance wise) between cheap entry tier dramless NVMe ssd like E100 & a very good budget dramless NVMe ssd like WD SN580/5100 (stellar reviews of which are dime a dozen on practically every reputed international tech review websites).

Helmut said:
The endurance is rather low 60 TBW, the norm is around ~300 TBW for that size of drive.

That is because this ssd is crap, my 7 years old 500GB dramless sata ssd has 120TBW rating with same 3 years warranty as E100. Though TBW rating of a ssd is just an indicator without any solid factual basis it still goes to show that crucial itself has such low confidence in this drive compared to even their 7-8 years entry tier sata ssd which should tell you something.

spapakons · Wednesday at 3:23 AM

You forget something important. The SSD is going to be installed in a PCIe 3.0 slot which means a faster SSD would not reach its higher speed anyway. The performance difference would not be obvious due to the slower slot, so why pay more for that? The goal is to increase capacity as the current SSD is almost full, not to improve performance. A small improvement would be nice, but I am not willing to pay extra 30€ or more for performance I am not going to see.

user788 · Wednesday at 3:56 AM

spapakons said:
You forget something important. The SSD is going to be installed in a PCIe 3.0 slot which means a faster SSD would not reach its higher speed anyway. The performance difference would not be obvious due to the slower slot, so why pay more for that?

user788 said:
Majority of users don't know that even sata ssd are so much faster than HDDs not because of the difference in their sequential speeds (sata ssd ~400-500MB/s vs ~200MB/s of typical 7200rpm HDDs) but because of the difference in their random 4k speeds (~20-30MB/s of sata ssd vs ~1MB/s (yes it is one) for typical 7200rpm HDDs).

We are talking about a crap NVMe ssd with likely 15MB/s random 4k speeds in worst case/moderate to heavy load scenario vs a good NVMe ssd with random 4k speeds still averaging around 40-50MB/s. Interface doesn't even come into picture here because even sata 3 has 600MB/s interface speed. All those 3000/6000/7000MB/s speeds are only for sequential transfer which is where interface matters & which also matters nothing in day to day performance of a typical user.

spapakons · Wednesday at 5:03 AM

Even if you are right, my wife is not going to see the difference in performance, she uses the laptop only for office work. But she will see the difference in capacity. Besides with the disk almost full the performance has dropped a lot on the original disk and any newer disk will seem better. I have already gave her the link to order it so she can use her financial details to issue an invoice. Thanks for your help.

cheaterslick · Wednesday at 5:22 AM

spapakons said:
Hello!

I am not very familiar with the differences between M.2 SSD types and I want your help to avoid buying something not suitable for my wife's laptop. The current SSD is 256GB and has these specs:

Samsung PM981 256 GB Specs

256 GB, TLC, PCIe 3.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

I found this 480GB SSD which should be compatible with that laptop, but I want to make sure before I order. Thanks.

Crucial E100 480 GB Specs

480 GB, TLC, PCIe 4.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

What kind of prices are you running into here? Did you look at the Samsung equivalent (480GB)?

~

PS: Yeah, I know prices are tough in today's market.

user788 · Wednesday at 6:37 AM

spapakons said:
Even if you are right, my wife is not going to see the difference in performance, she uses the laptop only for office work. But she will see the difference in capacity. Besides with the disk almost full the performance has dropped a lot on the original disk and any newer disk will seem better.

Again, it seems you don't know how much worse many entry tier NVMe ssd can get once they are more than 70-80% filled so here is a single result of crucial P3 (P310 is its successor & much better) which I consider a tier above E100. I can assure you that E100 when almost full will perform much worse than your existing PM981 ssd.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crucial-p3-plus-ssd-review-capacity-on-the-cheap/2

The bad news is that the native performance is extremely poor. Speeds drop down from 4.4 GBps to 100 MBps.

Yes, that's 100MB/s sequential speed, slower than your HDD. Now imagine what would be the performance of E100 which is a tier below than even this model. All I am saying is that chances of you regretting your purchase of E100 are much more especially if you can buy any of the models I suggested here for even $10-15 more.

cheaterslick · Wednesday at 6:43 AM

Actually, some good deals on amazon

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BHJJ9Y77?t

In this day & age, I wouldn't buy anything under 1TB.

Helmut · Wednesday at 7:04 AM

user788 said:
We are talking about a crap NVMe ssd with likely 15MB/s random 4k speeds in worst case/moderate to heavy load scenario vs a good NVMe ssd with random 4k speeds still averaging around 40-50MB/s. Interface doesn't even come into picture here because even sata 3 has 600MB/s interface speed. All those 3000/6000/7000MB/s speeds are only for sequential transfer which is where interface matters & which also matters nothing in day to day performance of a typical user.

The performance is good enough for light office work and in line with the budget price.

Detailed technical points and performance Benchmarks of an SSD are minor considerations. For the user in this case it's about increased capacity and compatibility at a reasonable price.

Paying 50% more for a better performance that you are never actually going to see real world is a luxury in today's rather unfortunate market conditions.

badrobot · Wednesday at 7:12 AM

Don't overthink. It should work just fine.

spapakons · Wednesday at 7:42 AM

Similarly priced models are PCIe 3.0 and slower, according to techpowerup.com

I also found Western Digital Green SN3000 SSD 500GB, see specs here:

Western Digital Green SN3000 500 GB Specs

500 GB, QLC, PCIe 4.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

which seems much faster with a price difference about 15-20€. Should I prefer it? Any known issues with Windows 10 or 11?

Bree · Wednesday at 8:36 AM

spapakons said:
I am not very familiar with the differences between M.2 SSD types and I want your help to avoid buying something not suitable for my wife's laptop. The current SSD is 256GB and has these specs:

Samsung PM981 256 GB Specs

256 GB, TLC, PCIe 3.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

I found this 480GB SSD which should be compatible with that laptop, but I want to make sure before I order. Thanks.

Crucial E100 480 GB Specs

480 GB, TLC, PCIe 4.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

spapakons said:
I also found Western Digital Green SN3000 SSD 500GB, see specs here:

Western Digital Green SN3000 500 GB Specs

500 GB, QLC, PCIe 4.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

You need to be aware of the difference between SLC, MLC, TLC, and QLC NAND. This indicates the number of bits held in each cell, and has a direct relation to the SSD's endurance, sometimes expressed as Terabytes Written (TBW). Writing wears out the cells, reading doesn't. Typically TBW endurance is halved with each extra bit per cell.

SLC: one bit per cell - the most expensive and robust NAND, only seen these days in high end Enterprise-class storage.
MLC: two bits per cell.
TLC: three bits per cell, the most common type of Client SSD (aka consumer products) these days.
QLC: four bits per cell, half the TBW endurance of TLC, typically only recommended for longer term storage.

If you have ever wondered why some drives feel faster, last longer, or offer larger capacities at lower prices, the answer often lies in the type of flash they contain. This guide explains the key differences so you can understand what is happening at the memory level and choose the flash technology that best suits your needs.

https://www.kingston.com/unitedkingdom/en/blog/pc-performance/difference-between-slc-mlc-tlc-3d-nand

QLC vs. TLC | IBM

Evaluating the value of TLC vs. QLC drives comes down to a comparison between performance and durability, or storage capacity and cost effectiveness.

www.ibm.com

user788 · Wednesday at 9:42 AM

spapakons said:
Similarly priced models are PCIe 3.0 and slower, according to techpowerup.com

I also found Western Digital Green SN3000 SSD 500GB, see specs here:

Western Digital Green SN3000 500 GB Specs

500 GB, QLC, PCIe 4.0 x4, M.2 2280

www.techpowerup.com

which seems much faster with a price difference about 15-20€. Should I prefer it? Any known issues with Windows 10 or 11?

This is leagues better than E100 you are considering. Definitely get this over E100.

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ssds/wd-green-sn3000-1tb-ssd-review/2

Bree said:
TLC: three bits per cell, the most common type of Client SSD (aka consumer products) these days.
QLC: four bits per cell, half the TBW endurance of TLC, typically only recommended for longer term storage.

TLC is increasingly getting replaced by QLC & expect QLC to become mainstream by this year's end or by mid next year. Also, a good QLC drive can beat an average TLC drive depending on the optimizations in flash & controller.

Upgrading SSD on HP OMEN 17-cb00011nv

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computer My Computer

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computer My Computer

At a glance

Just a Computer User

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

New member

My Computer My Computer

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computer My Computer

At a glance

New member

My Computer My Computer

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

New member

My Computer My Computer

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

New member

My Computer My Computer

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computer My Computer

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

Well-known member

My Computers My Computers

At a glance

At a glance

New member

My Computer My Computer

At a glance

My Computers

My Computer

My Computers

My Computer

My Computers

My Computers

My Computer

My Computer

My Computer

My Computers

My Computer

My Computers

My Computers

My Computer

My Computers

My Computer

My Computers

My Computers

My Computers

My Computer