Seagate Firecuda 530 NVMe SSD - First SSD compatible with PS5 - FINALLY Revealed
By - AidThisFellowUser
Sony’s OS beta notes that drives with read speeds in excess of 5500MB/s will work. Does it come down to driver support to be “officially supported”?
Sabrient’s 1TB card has read speeds of 7,000MB/s, for example.
Sony is listing a heatsink and a total height under 11.25mm as a [requirement](https://www.playstation.com/en-us/support/hardware/ps5-install-m2-ssd/#min). This and the SN850 are the only drives I know of that meet that spec out of the box, everything else either needs an aftermarket heatsink or comes with a heatsink that's too tall to fit.
> Does it come down to driver support to be “officially supported”?
SSDs are generic storage devices. They don't have drivers aside from the generic driver for all storage of a certain class.
The PS5 is probably reading the drive label name and doing a speed test. There's nothing else to do.
One of the things is that peak read speed in QLC SSDs (like most are now) is attained with a drive that's 1/4 full. As the drive fills up and reads need to distinguish between different voltage values in each cell, the read speed goes way down. A drive that reads in excess of 5.5GBps when empty might be well under that when near full.
Drives obviously advertise their max speed rather than their speed when nearly-full, so you can't look at a spec sheet alone and tell if the drive will work. This is why testing will be necessary.
As far as I understand (and only in direct comparison to TLC) the read difference is minimal when filled and mostly only write performance that suffers heavily.
> One of the things is that peak read speed in QLC SSDs (like most are now)
For PCIe4 x4 drives QLC is still very rare.
TLC also has speed degradation as it fills, just less and starting at 1/3 full instead of 1/4.
But would that affect read performance?
I’m pretty sure PCIe 4.0 QLC drives exist (Sabrent Q4 comes to mind, I think Corsair has one as well)
> One of the things is that peak read speed in QLC SSDs (like most are now) is attained with a drive that's 1/4 full. As the drive fills up and reads need to distinguish between different voltage values in each cell, the read speed goes way down
Wrong. Most drives are neither QLC, nor is the small slowdown when full caused by voltage levels, rather fragmentation.
This kind of stuff is exactly why I'm waiting.
1TB external SSD for PS4 games and no need for much more ps5 storage for the next year, there's not that many games out yet for the system.
Should work just fine
How will the thermals work?
There is no airflow in that SSD slot so it could be a heat coffin.
Based on my testing the FireCuda 530 should remain cool under most conditions without throttle, especially if written to from a slower source.
Most PCIe 4.0 SSDs only start throttling at 80 C. [**The Samsung 980 Pro only claims to reach "warning" temperatures at 82 C**](https://www.anandtech.com/show/16087/the-samsung-980-pro-pcie-4-ssd-review/8). But it [**manages its heat**](https://www.techpowerup.com/review/samsung-980-pro-1-tb-ssd/7.html) without any active cooling.
|Samsung 980 Pro|3 TB continuous read|2.4 TB continuous write|
|Peak NAND Temp.|48 C|73 C|
|Peak Controller Temp.|**70 C**|**86 C**|
|Warning Temp.|82 C|82 C|
|Critical Temp.|85 C|85 C|
The 'out of bounds' temperature began only after continuously writing 264 GB, ***but*** the SSD did not throttle (I wonder if that is a NAND warning temp; if so, these SSDs just will not throttle easily).
The PS5's actually got a decent enclosure: it looks like it gets some air, plus insulated from the hottest components.
That's the actual problem in desktops & laptops: NVMe PCIe 4.0 drives have direct access to the heat from 300W GPUs and 150W CPUs. The residual heat is just too much.
Most heat is made when writing data.
Still, how does it cool writing a 200 GB game?
Network or Blu-ray drive must be bottlenecked for installing game. Even with great download speed like 125MB/s, it won't heat up SSD much.
what about, what about... when I play and write games to my ps5 while in my sauna!?
The steam condensates and turns into water and water cools it
It'll make a lot heat and possibly even smoke at the time, but then it'll be cool forever.
Tf you talking about, smoke is always cool
You know what's even cooler? Flames. Add some of that to the mix
You will be sweating so much over this problem that the sauna becomes unneccessary. This way, Seagate facilitates significant money savings for its clients, what a feature!
What about file transfers between the two? That’s probably what I do most with my Series X (external 4 TB SSD).
I swap multi-100+ GB games every times a week.
You probably won't need to swap between the internal and an NVME drive, but if heat is a problem for writes you'll be limited by reads from your external drive - a SATA SSD can only read ~550 MBps.
Even that would be bottlenecked greatly by the external drive and the usb bus speed.
Well, your speeds may drop during that time due to thermal throttling... But that might be a 10-20% hit, not like 70-80%.
And when you're not doing that specific thing it will likely be fine.
Thanks for the actual response.
I’m willing to bet that hardly anyone transfers games between storage devices for consoles or at least it’s not done very often. Also in your scenario I’m assuming that the external SSD is connected to your console through USB which is a massive bottleneck of itself.
He’s talking about taking a game off the external drive and put it on the expansion “bay” drive to play it, if your internal main drive is full.
Yes, that’s exactly what Im talking about, and the question I’m asking.
What would be the benefit of transferring between the internal nvme ssd and this new nvme ssd? Isn’t that the purpose of these newly licensed SSD’s, that they’ll perform the same?
Well, you want the flash to be hot while it writes that 200GB game. The controller will get toasty, but it'll throttle if it gets *too* hot.
It's frankly not that much of an issue even if you manage to max out the drive somehow, the drive will simply throttle and the install will be a bit slower. Maintaining performance while reading is far more important for the user experience, which as already mentionend doesn't draw as much power.
most nvmes don't need cooling. virtually nobody is running constant high bandwidth writes in their home and gaming workloads.
I wouldn't want to run my PCI-E 4.0 drives without a heatsink. They do heat up pretty quick. It also doesn't help that they're both sitting right under the GPU.
I've been running 2 1tb Evo drives and they've never gone over 58c with no heatsink. both are in a pcie card right below my 1080ti. been running them for almost 3 years now.
Neither of those are PCIE-4.0. I think it's really the controller on these that need the cooling. Mine get to 60C easily, both with heatsinks. I'm not doing any workstation or server workloads; almost strictly a gaming PC.
It's definitely the controllers, actually the way NAND works the performance of the memory is better in hot conditions. That's why Samsung doesn't recommend using a heatsink, their little copper strip effectively spreads the heat from the controller over to the NAND. Ideally you would have the memory sucking heat off your GPU through a heatpipe and the controller actively water cooled.
60c isn't even hot. when drives start getting to 90c+ in gaming workloads then, Ill start worrying.
Someone else said 70C is when they start throttling. I'm not sure how true that is. Gaming doesn't stress drives normally, which is my point. If being under a heatsink and they get that warm, then yes, a heatsink is necessary.
it's a ps5. there won't be a huge constant load on the ssd.
Good point. I wonder if there is enough clearance to strap a low-profile heat sink.
Flash can run at really high temps without issue, in fact every one of these units shipped probably gets cycled through high and low temps before it even gets shipped out.
SSDs don’t need active cooling
No airflow at all though means that there is no place for the heat to escape... which would eventually mean that the SSD overheats, it is an actual thing that can happen.
Overheating SSDs definitely **can** be an issue but many laptops have no airflow for their SSDs. The air trapped near the SSD heats up and eventually heat makes it out through the walls of the compartment (rear cover or palmrest in the case of laptops) as quickly as it’s produced, and you reach a steady temperature. It doesn’t just get hotter forever.
You *do* end up with a high temperature which can lead to thermal throttling. But most modern components will avoid damage by throttling. In practice, SSDs crammed into laptops with poor cooling work fine with reads and short bursts of write, but slow down with sustained writes. There generally aren’t fires or excessive failure rates.
So is it a not-great design? Yes. Is it catastrophically bad? No.
Just speculation on my part, but outside of downloading games and updates I don’t see the SSD being in such an active state that it would become an issue. During gameplay I’d imagine it isn’t doing much writing beyond intermittent “auto-saves” but I’d imagine that data is held in ram until it’s fully committed to the SSD. And reading information off the SSD isn’t going to produce as much heat as writing to it does.
PCIe Gen 4 NVMe SSD's do need cooling. PCIe 3 and SATA SSD's might not, but Gen 4 SSD's are different
They'll thermal throttle themselves, so no, they don't \*need\* cooling
They just perform substantially better with it
They'll operate without it
Both 3.0 & 4.0 NVMe drives need cooling for their mem controller with sustained writes.
Some 4.0 drives will straight-up shut down once it hits tj max, which is about 70℃ for most of them.
If they just straight shut down instead of throttling, then how the heck are they supposed to work in laptops? Most laptops don't have any airflow anywhere near the nvme drives
There have been some really, really bad PCIe 4.0 drives thrown into the market, especially during the earlier days.
[Der8auer even did a video on it.](https://youtu.be/47dGG8ZnN2g?t=447)
Still not optimal to run one without any form of cooling, especially if they're thermal throttling
"My CPU reaches 100c while gaming. Sure, it's thermal throttling pretty bad, but at least it's operational."
>Still not optimal to run one without any form of cooling, especially if they're thermal throttling
All of this is nebulous. You say thermal throttling as if it happens at all its immediately disastrous, when in reality it's a scale.
If your SSD throttles by 2-4% because of thermals, is that as optimal as can be? No obviously not, but it's also not the end of the world for a console.
If your SSD throttles by 20-40% now you've got a real problem.
Without proper testing it's impossible to assume how poorly this particular SSD will do in a poorly cooled console.
>"My CPU reaches 100c while gaming. Sure, it's thermal throttling pretty bad, but at least it's operational."
I mean, yeah, that's how a lot of laptop gaming goes.
[NVMe controller throttling can be aggressive.](https://youtu.be/47dGG8ZnN2g?t=447)
*Can* be. Notice the results on the 960 Evo after he added the heatsink cover from the mobo. Point being, it's highly situational, and going to depend on the specific SSD. Even ambient temps in your room will make a significant difference.
Likewise it'll depend on how often you're performing absolutely massive sequential writes at max load, as that's largely the only time these drives are gonna start heating up a ton in a console specifically. Unless you're regularly moving files back and forth from a local USB SSD... It's just not going to be an issue. Downloading games from the internet is going to be slow... A max of ~120MB/s. Random read from gaming isn't gonna heat them up that much either.
At the end of the day we just need to wait for actual results. I just don't see it being that big of a problem.
That's the thing... nvme disks only get hot during sustained writes, generally
It will end up thermally throttling during sustained writes, but then otherwise be fine for reads
This is no different than a laptop
Nah, they might throttle in heavy use without cooling, but longevity wise doesn't matter.
Not to mention components tend to get more power efficient, so perhaps the WD drive generates less heat.
Pee is stored in the balls
No it’s your kidneys. Your balls male semon. That’s y ppl get them cut off to stop having kids
It's not necessarily the "first SSD compatible with PS5", Seagate was just the first one to confirm that it fits with the specs laid out by Sony (which is just laying down the spec, not certifying specific SSDs)
The Corsair MP600 Pro ($199 for 1TB) is [also compatible](https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/how-to-use-the-ps5-s-m2-ssd-expandable-storage/ar-AAMHSi7?ocid=uxbndlbing), and I'd imagine quite a few more on top of that.
But they are under the recommended write and read speeds
Why is there a ekwb logo but no ports?
EKWB makes SSD heatsinks but I do think it’s a little weird that Seagate would have contracted them for this. The only thing that makes sense to me is that it’s a branding deal.
Brand recognition and EKWB likely bid less than its competitors for the contract.
EK likely gave Seagate a great deal on these. If you check out the WD SN750 with heatsink pre-applied it also has EK on it. For the SN850 though WD decided not to go with EK for whatever reason. Now we see EK doing this with Seagate.
Something to think about regarding EK is that they likely need a certain amount of volume to make their own manufacturing profitable so even if they sell these to Seagate at stock that may be enough to pay for running a machine which they then use to produce their own highly profitable parts etc
You'd be surprised what all types of cooling we're involved in and have experience with. This is definitely more than simply a branding deal.
that over twice as expensive compared normal nvme. I know it is PCIE 4 speed, I hope some day in future when technology improves, PCIE 4 ssd drop its premium pricing over normal ones.
There are plenty of pcie 4.0 drives available at normal prices already
Nothing to do with it being PCIe 4.0, as there are plenty of those for <$250 including both the SN850 & 980 Pro.
How can there be PS5 tax on a non-proprietary product.
It's not a PS5-licensed product, so there isn't a PS5 tax. This is expensive because it's the fastest drive on the market right now. This happens every time an SSD makes a new performance tier. The price will fall with time.
someone who actually read the article lol
As far as I can tell this isn't significantly faster than competing PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSDs. The reason this gets the Sony Seal of Approval and others haven't (yet) is it comes with a heatsink thin enough to physically fit in the slot.
>As far as I can tell this isn't significantly faster than competing PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSDs
Those other SSD's are still $200+ per 1TB. They're all in the same bracket of pricing.
I dont know why people are claiming this is 'PS5 tax' when this was the likely pricing regardless.
Yeah, I didn't mean to push the "PS5 tax" argument, just saying it's not really a "new performance tier".
I think the main reason people are being so critical of the price is they're comparing the Firecuda's heatsink-equipped SKU to the heatsink-less SN850/980 Pro/Rocket Plus. Heatsink-less Firecuda 530 seems to be $240, so even closer to the rest of the drives.
The thing is you can't tell that a drive will work by just its max speed, it needs to be higher than 5.5GBps at full capacity. QLC SSDs start slowing from 1/4 capacity and are significantly slower at full. It's possible this is the first drive that is still above 5.5GBps at full.
Yup, just taking advantage of the market it's made for is all. Sony does the exact same thing with proprietary hardware for their stuff as well.
No joke I remember paying $60 for a 4gb memory card for my PSP back in the day, when the same size USB could be bought for 12 bucks.
I remember having an 8mb ps2 memory card. The thing cost $35 and felt like a ripoff even back then.
Dude further back, I had one of those mega memory cards for ps1 that had 8 cards in it or something like that. They were fantastic but coat like 80 bucks at the time. Bad thing is they had a high failure rate and mine did die eventually too which was a bummer.
My area had them for 24.99 and they NEVER EVER went down in price. I remember it was like 2009 or something at Walmart, and the damn things were still 24.99.
No, not this. This isn't a proprietary standard (like Memory Stick on PSP or Vita's memory cards) or even licensed by Sony.
This is simply the first SSD that's been verified to meet the minimum speed requirement for use on a PS5. It's expensive because it's literally faster than other available SSDs.
Sabrent Rocket 4 as well. Love mine.
read the article please
How the fuck does this have 50 upvotes
Vita lives on in spirit, through fucking broken storage pricing.
Why buy this? Do the other high speed drives like the SN 850 or 980 Pro not work?
Do you question videogamejournalism.com??
Reporting this post for misinformation. The title is blatantly, demonstrably false.
All NVMe PCIe gen 4 drives that match one of the standard m.2 form factors with a sustained read speed of 5500MB/s are "compatible with PS5". The only ones that aren't are ones that have a fixed, non-removable heatsink that doesn't fit the cavity in the PS5.
You shouldn't be downvoted for this, although we did not have such information when this specific press release by Seagate was announced.
I'm a little concerned about Sony being fairly lax with these requirements instead of validating specific drives by name. Cerny even talked specifically about how consumer drives would need overhead over the PS5's standard speeds in order to work properly.
If drives start fucking up/slowing down cuz they're overheating or too full or something, users are not going to understand that it's the drive's fault and will complain about the game. Developers will not appreciate this situation.
> Cerny even talked specifically about how consumer drives would need overhead over the PS5's standard speeds in order to work properly.
100% true but perhaps inaccurate given Sony's patents and what we now know about the hardware. AnandTech's [article](https://www.anandtech.com/show/15848/storage-matters-xbox-ps5-new-era-of-gaming) front last year is a good place to start for general information. Concerning the I/O coprocessors, the author astutely states:
> In this respect, it is similar to an SSD controller with a pool of RAM for its mapping tables, but the job of the IO coprocessor is completely different from what an SSD controller does. This is why it will be useful even with aftermarket third-party SSDs.
Given this, why would the expansion drive need to be faster? Ostensibly it was due to higher latency required by having the secondary drive go through these coprocessors. However, as this is separate even from the stock SSD, and other changes were made to what was seen in the original patent, we can assume it needs to more directly hit 5.5 GB/s.
> If drives start fucking up/slowing down cuz they're overheating or too full or something, users are not going to understand that it's the drive's fault and will complain about the game. Developers will not appreciate this situation.
Not disagreeing with this part though, although generally reads should be fine there. At least currently you also won't be finding a controller that meets the requirements that isn't equally or more capable than the stock's.
I generally agree your "lax" conclusion as QVL whitelists are pretty standard (for example) but there's also a lot of variance in SSD hardware as we've seen with the multiple fiascos recently (SX8200 Pro, PNY, Patriot, et cetera). So that puts Sony in a bit of a quandary.
Knew it would cost more money than the Xbox drive.
The price difference doesn't seem to be too big if anything (at least where I am) and the actual transfer speed peak seems to be about 3 times faster than than the Xbox expansion card
Also, If later you want to use it in your pc just plug and play, with the Xbox drive there is no other use.
People cried about price of the xbox drive and said Sony at least "let's you use off the shelf drives"(nope lol).
Rational people pointed out that no off the shelf drive that can be qualified for PS5 even existed yet, and the few that will ever be approved during its life cycle will cost way more than the Xbox solution.
FYI, do PS5 games install or load 3x as fast as Series X games?(nope).
>People cried about price of the xbox drive
Did they? I feel like I had to go out of my way to tell people why the XSX/S expansion drive was a terrible deal and was usually rewarded with mass downvotes.
It's not a good deal, but there is no choice on console. What drives actually *play* PS5 games so far? They'd be the same price or more. I am not talking about just storage.
PCI-E 4.0 drives are relatively new and are only going to become cheaper and more widely available (just like PCI-E 3.0 nVME drives did) over time.
I have a PCI-E 4.0 drive it's not compatible *for playing PS5 games*.
Thanks for sharing!
They're making the point that there's 4.0 SSD's that aren't these super high end ones.
Which is something we already knew. Back in November Sony stated drives would need to meet certain criteria which would be made available at a later date. Today, Sony [revealed that criteria](https://i.imgur.com/Diwgm4F.png).
I don’t know if you realize this will keep getting cheaper just like any other technology, it’s cutting edge right now, a year from now, 2 years from now this will get much cheaper as newer models come.
The difference is that you are paying for a drive that isn't exclusive to the Xbox series and can be used with almost any other device with an nvme slot. Also the PS5 compatibility thing seems to be more like which SSDs meet the standards needed to achieve similar performance that the drive in the PS5 reaches. My guess is it will be similar to how Nvidia handles freeseync. You can use any freeseync monitor with gsync but only some will meet the standards set by Nvidia for gsync and therefore are classed as compatible. And no you're right, games don't load 3 times as fast, they aren't yet optimised to do so. But that doesn't mean that the drive isn't 3x as fast and that games won't eventually be optimised to load much faster or utilise the extra speed in their design.
They aren't looking for a thoughtful response
Not sure what you're trying to say. The PS5 drive solution is more expensive and less available. Just as everyone knew it would be.
Reminder that there was a time when PCIE3 NVMe was much more expensive than SATA...now they are practically the same in cost.
It’s alright, you won’t get it.
does this work with the PS5 *for playing PS5 games*?
Is it confirmed to work? There's a list of approved drives that Sony is going to update with new additions, is it on the list?
From the title of this post that list includes just one drive. Try it on your PS5 please and let us know.
There is no list, this article is just a confirmation the FireCuda 530 works. [Sony's official stance](https://www.playstation.com/en-us/support/hardware/ps5-install-m2-ssd/) is any drive meeting [this criteria](https://i.imgur.com/Diwgm4F.png) will work.
For storage, yes they work. I was asking about playing the next gen PS5 games. So far seems like no drive works for that? Not sure what the probelm is, correct me if I am wrong. My PS5 is getting full anyway, would LOVE the help.
This is literally the criteria for PS5 specific games.
Yes, they work for playing PS5 games. That's why there are requirements.
From the link:
> Once installed in the PS5 console, M.2 SSD storage can be used to download, copy, **and launch PS5 and PS4 games**, as well as media apps.
Proof? Any drive can STORE the games, but sony made a distinction that just any drive cannot *play* PS5 games. They were to publish a list of approved devices, which so far is at 1 as of today.
If you have proff to the contrary, please show me.
This beta update is literally for that and that criteria to be able to play PS5 games from the NVMe slot which hasn’t worked before this update.
> There's a list of approved drives
There's really no list yet.
There's only this seagate confirmed as compatible, but the information that it is compatible is not coming from sony's side but seagate
edit: also I know this is reddit but you know you can read more than the title of an article, right?
Proof of another nvme drive working to play ps5 games? I know any drive can STORE the games. There was a clear distinction by Sony that they would produce a LIST of drives approived to actually *play* PS5 games off of. That list includes one drive, if wrong please correct.
With all this resistance, you'd think one of you would just **post proof** by now of a PS5 *running next gen games off of a third party nvme drive*.
The beta OS update is literally rolling out as we speak so a lot of people don’t have access yet. It is for the use of the internal m.2 slot to play PS5 games directly off it. Currently there is no list of approved drives from Sony, that will come at a later date. All that’s been provided is a spec sheet of what should work.
While games may not load noticeably faster, due to the read speeds and architecture game install size can be much smaller. Developers have to implement this, but we’re already seeing it happen. Here’s just a small list:
Ask that question again in 18 months, when the Xbox One is barely any cheaper and the Sony (compatible) ones are half as much.
These are all going to be scalped.
Too bad it's a Seagate product.
I'm a little suprised by the 4TB limit to be honest.
Are they saying "no drives exist yet which perform correctly"
"Even if it matches spec, we currently won't recognise an 8TB drive"
I'm pretty sure the way nand flash is improving, there will be an 8TB drive, with the right specs, manufactured now or in the next 12 months at most.
(Yes I know it'll be expensive but it'll come down, plus some rich people have no limits)
> I'm pretty sure the way nand flash is improving, there will be an 8TB drive, with the right specs, manufactured now or in the next 12 months at most.
Absolutely. QLC on a modern Gen4 controller can meet the sequential read requirements^1 and hit 8TB. We have controllers coming up that can accommodate 16TB, in fact. 8TB for TLC would in the least require 1Tb TLC dies but we have that also on the horizon, for example with BiCS6. They may have other reasons for the (current) restriction, though.
^1 64-way interleaving would be sufficient on QLC, which with quad-plane dies means 2 dies per 8 channels, which you can reach with 2TB. The 4-channel 670p hits 2200 MB/s at QD1 (3000 MB/s at high QD) with just 4 dies (512GB).
Anyone got a beta invite?