<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus SSD With PS5 Heatsink Review &#8211; They Switched to B47R Memory Without Telling a Soul!	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/</link>
	<description>The Worlds Dedicated SSD Education and Review Resource &#124;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2022 20:15:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Trevor		</title>
		<link>https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61174</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trevor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2022 20:15:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thessdreview.com/?p=105718#comment-61174</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61155&quot;&gt;Trevor&lt;/a&gt;.

I can confirm that phison_nvme_flash_id2 detects B47R properly, so you can make it sure without removing any label.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61155">Trevor</a>.</p>
<p>I can confirm that phison_nvme_flash_id2 detects B47R properly, so you can make it sure without removing any label.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jay		</title>
		<link>https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61157</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jay]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Mar 2022 07:02:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thessdreview.com/?p=105718#comment-61157</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61066&quot;&gt;Dave&lt;/a&gt;.

As far as I know, Sabrent&#039;s 8TB SSDs are all QLC-based.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61066">Dave</a>.</p>
<p>As far as I know, Sabrent&#8217;s 8TB SSDs are all QLC-based.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Trevor		</title>
		<link>https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61155</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trevor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2022 20:27:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thessdreview.com/?p=105718#comment-61155</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Nice stuff, thanks! Can Phison NVMe Flash ID utility report the different NAND type? Have you tried?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice stuff, thanks! Can Phison NVMe Flash ID utility report the different NAND type? Have you tried?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: TheSSDReview		</title>
		<link>https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61103</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[TheSSDReview]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Mar 2022 02:25:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thessdreview.com/?p=105718#comment-61103</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61095&quot;&gt;Murdak&lt;/a&gt;.

Thank you for taking the time to respond and the comps. I hear what you are saying with respect to the type of tests completed but we do seem to get the best return with respect to the way we have our reports put together.  Who knows...maybe we will include something a bit different down the road.  Thanks again.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61095">Murdak</a>.</p>
<p>Thank you for taking the time to respond and the comps. I hear what you are saying with respect to the type of tests completed but we do seem to get the best return with respect to the way we have our reports put together.  Who knows&#8230;maybe we will include something a bit different down the road.  Thanks again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Murdak		</title>
		<link>https://www.thessdreview.com/our-reviews/nvme/sabrent-rocket-4-plus-ssd-with-ps5-heatsink-review-they-switched-to-b47r-memory-without-telling-a-soul/#comment-61095</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Murdak]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Mar 2022 17:25:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.thessdreview.com/?p=105718#comment-61095</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the test, as always those years.

Yes, there is progress being made in the last 2 years of pcie 4.0 ssd, but this ssd is a somewhat dazzler; they catched up switching the nand, but the small file-test shows the ssd is a dazzler in real world applications. Even with large 4 TB, which should made it write/read pseudo-slc-cache only.
TBW is standard. Sequential 64k is only good in benchmarks, the IOPS only reached in benchmarks, real world it is halfed.

Les Tokar, if you finally would start - please! - to switch your ssd tests from 80 % nonsical-the-same-programm-benchmarks, which the developers trim the ssd (to shine in synthetical test), we all could see what the ssds are really about.
You could start to switch one benchmark at a time ;)

I find it a waste, that you have such nice writing skills, humor, test methodology, vitamin B (connections), knowledge, but then waste the test product for 80 % the same becnhmark-runs, just to fill pages.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the test, as always those years.</p>
<p>Yes, there is progress being made in the last 2 years of pcie 4.0 ssd, but this ssd is a somewhat dazzler; they catched up switching the nand, but the small file-test shows the ssd is a dazzler in real world applications. Even with large 4 TB, which should made it write/read pseudo-slc-cache only.<br />
TBW is standard. Sequential 64k is only good in benchmarks, the IOPS only reached in benchmarks, real world it is halfed.</p>
<p>Les Tokar, if you finally would start &#8211; please! &#8211; to switch your ssd tests from 80 % nonsical-the-same-programm-benchmarks, which the developers trim the ssd (to shine in synthetical test), we all could see what the ssds are really about.<br />
You could start to switch one benchmark at a time 😉</p>
<p>I find it a waste, that you have such nice writing skills, humor, test methodology, vitamin B (connections), knowledge, but then waste the test product for 80 % the same becnhmark-runs, just to fill pages.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
