Sabrent Rocket 5 and Crucial T705 were launched at almost the same time at the start of 2024. After that, they have continued gaining a good amount of reputation and sales in the Gen 5.0 category. However, because of the similar specifications like the controller, NAND flash, and the theoretical read/write performance, people are often confused between the two. I am here to clear that confusion by highlighting the key differences.
Both drives are PCIe Gen 5.0 x4 with NVMe 2.0 support. They have the 1TB, 2TB, and 4TB storage variants, but no 8TB variant. Both drives use the same controller, Phison E26, and the same NAND Flash, Micron’s B58R FortisFlash TLC. The TBW numbers, MTBF, and warranty period are the same.
Both drives come under the high-end NVMe category, and you might think that they have the same hardware, so how would I decide? Well, the performance isn’t the same. In fact, a significant difference can be observed in the theoretical read/write speeds in the table below. A good price difference is also there. So, we are going to cover everything in this article, and by the end, you’ll be able to make your decision.

Theoretical Specifications
Specification | Sabrent Rocket 5 | Crucial T705 |
---|---|---|
PCIe Generation/NVMe Version | PCIe Gen 5.0 x4/ NVMe 2.0 | PCIe Gen 5.0 x4/ NVMe 2.0 |
Release Date | Feb 27th 2024 | Feb 20th, 2024 |
Capacities | 1TB, 2TB, 4TB | 1TB, 2TB, 4TB |
Sequential Read Speed | 1TB: 13,000 MB/s 2TB: 14,000 MB/s 4TB: 14,000 MB/s | 1TB: 13,600 MB/s 2TB: 14,500 MB/s 4TB: 14,100 MB/s |
Sequential Write Speed | 1TB: 9,500 MB/s 2TB: 12,000 MB/s 4TB: 12,000 MB/s | 1TB: 10,200 MB/s 2TB: 12,700 MB/s 4TB: 12,600 MB/s |
Random Read Speed | 1TB: 1,300K IOPS 2TB: 1,400K IOPS 4TB: 1,400K IOPS | 1TB: 1,400K IOPS 2TB: 1,550K IOPS 4TB: 1,500K IOPS |
Random Write Speed | 1TB: 1,400K IOPS 2TB: 1,400K IOPS 4TB: 1,400K IOPS | 1TB: 1,750K IOPS 2TB: 1,550K IOPS 4TB: 1,500K IOPS |
NAND Flash | Micron’s B58R FortisFlash TLC | Micron’s B58R FortisFlash TLC |
DRAM | Yes | Yes |
Controller | Phison E26 | Phison E26 |
The advertised sequential and random read/write speeds are better in the Crucial T705. But, the difference is bigger in the random read/write numbers compared to the sequential speeds. This is what matters the most in real-world applications like running programs, loading software, content creation, etc. Now, we are comparing these drives, and Rocket 5 might appear way behind the T705, but keep in mind that it beats many of the other drives like Adata Legend 970, Crucial T500, and Corsair MP600 Elite. But, in this comparison, the competitor is much powerful than the Rocket 5. So, the real difference will be seen properly in the benchmarks.
Benchmark Scores Comparison
These benchmark scores are collected and curated from third-party websites and are for the 2TB variants of both drives. The scores are collected from the same sources for the accuracy of comparisons.
PCMark 10 Full Drive Benchmark Score

The Crucial T705 leads slightly in overall PCMark 10 performance with a 2.66% higher benchmark score, suggesting a comparatively better all-around optimization. The gain is marginal, but still, the T705 has an edge in real-world applications. However, the Sabrent Rocket 5 outperforms the T705 in bandwidth, offering 1.37% more throughput. Also, it delivers better responsiveness with 4% lower latency, making it potentially more efficient for real-time tasks requiring a quick response. In real-world usage, the differences are subtle, but for tasks requiring lower latency and bandwidth-heavy applications, Sabrent Rocket 5 can be a better option. However, the overall performance will be better with the Crucial T705.
3DMark Storage Test for Gamers
3DMark Storage test for gamers is a full-fledged storage benchmark for gaming tasks. This test takes the SSDs through rigorous gaming environments like game loading, installing, playing, recording, saving, and streaming. When comparing two drives under this test, a better 3DMark storage score, higher bandwidth, and lower latency mean the SSD will perform better in gaming applications.

The Crucial T705 has achieved a 5.48% higher benchmark score, a 3.3% improvement in bandwidth, and an impressive 7.14% lower latency compared to the Sabrent Rocket 5. These gains make the Crucial T705 a strong choice for power users, games, and even content creators who want the best storage performance in demanding scenarios like gaming, video editing, 3D, and other professional workloads.
CrystalDiskMark Sequential Read/Write Benchmark

In the CDM sequential performance tests, the Crucial T705 beats the Sabrent Rocket 5 in QD1 read speed by a small margin of 0.36%, showing a slight advantage in low-queue-depth read operations. However, across all write tests and high queue-depth read tests, the Sabrent Rocket 5 is marginally ahead, though by fractions of a percent, under 0.05%. The differences are so small that there will be almost no difference in the performance when we look at them in the real world.
CrystalDiskMark Random Read/Write Benchmark

In CDM 4KB random read/write, we can see mixed and almost the same performance scores. The Rocket 5 wins in the low queue-depth read IOPS (by just 0.04%) and delivers a significant 10.17% advantage in high queue-depth read IOPS, which can matter in heavily threaded workloads. On the other hand, the Crucial T705 takes the lead in low queue-depth write IOPS by 4.28% and beats the Rocket in high queue-depth write IOPS by a fraction of 0.36%.
From these results, we can say that Crucial T705 is slightly better at write-heavy workloads, while the Sabrent Rocket 5 excels in large-scale read performance under load.
Power Consumption

In terms of power efficiency, the Crucial T705 is a little better, offering 4.75% more throughput per watt during a 50GB file copy, which suggests better energy utilization under load. Both drives consumed exactly 7 watts on average. However, in idle power consumption, the Sabrent Rocket 5 is around 0.93% more power efficient than the T705. Overall, while both drives are power-hungry compared to other low-end SSDs, the T705 is slightly more efficient during active use, whereas the Rocket 5 wins in idle states.
Tech Specs
Specification | Sabrent Rocket 5 | Crucial T705 |
---|---|---|
Controller | Phison’s PS5026-E26 | Phison’s PS5026-E26 |
Controller Architecture | ARM 32-bit Cortex-R5 + AndesCore 32-bit N25F RISC-V (5-Core) | ARM 32-bit Cortex-R5 + AndesCore 32-bit N25F RISC-V (5-Core) |
DRAM Specifications | Micron’s LPDDR4 DRAM 1TB: 1×1024 MB 2TB: 1×2048 MB 4TB: 1x 4096 MB | Micron’s LPDDR4 DRAM 1TB: 1×1024 MB 2TB: 1×2048 MB 4TB: 1x 4096 MB |
SLC Write Cache | 1TB: approx. 110 GB (dynamic only) 2TB: approx. 210 GB (dynamic only) 4TB: approx. 440 GB (dynamic only) | 1TB: approx. 110 GB (dynamic only) 2TB: approx. 220 GB (dynamic only) 4TB: approx. 440 GB (dynamic only) |
NAND Flash | Micron’s B58R FortisFlash TLC | Micron’s B58R FortisFlash TLC |
Topology | 232-Layers | 232-Layers |
NAND speed | 2400 MT/s | 2400 MT/s |
Read Time (tR)/Program Time (tProg) | 61 µs/600 µs | 61 µs/600 µs |
Die Read Speed | 1574 MB/s | 1574 MB/s |
Die Write Speed | 160 MB/s | 160 MB/s |
Encryption | No Encryption | AES-256, TCG Opal |
Power Loss Protection | No | No |
SMART/TRIM/PS5 Support | Yes/Yes/Yes | Yes/Yes/Yes |
All the technical specifications, including the NAND Flash, controller, die read/write speed, and DRAM capacity, are the same. I don’t know why they have given 10GB less SLC-Write cache in the Rocket 5’s 2TB variant? Otherwise, everything else is the same. The Sabrent Rocket 5 has one drawback of no encryption. This can be a big disappointment for some people, and they may choose not to buy I,t but for most people, this is generally not an issue.
TBW, DWPD, MTBF, and Warranty
Specificiation | Sabrent Rocket 5 | Crucial T705 |
---|---|---|
TBW (Terabytes Written) | 1TB: 600 TBW 2TB: 1200 TBW 4TB: 2400 TBW | 1TB: 600 TBW 2TB: 1200 TBW 4TB: 2400 TBW |
DWPD (Drive Writes per Day) | 0.3 | 0.3 |
MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure) | 1.5 Million Hours | 1.5 Million Hours |
Warranty | 5 Years Limited | 5 Years Limited |
Again, the TBW ratings, DWPD, MTBF, and Warranty periods are exactly the same in both SSDs.
Pricing


Conclusion
The real-world performance, synthetic benchmark scores are almost similar in both drives. So, you can choose the right one for you based on their pricing and brand preferences. Both brands are quite reputable in the industry and have good customer support.
If I have to choose between the two, I would go for the T705 because of its better power efficiency. Generally, the Sabrent Rocket 5 is available at cheaper prices. So, when I have to save money, I would go for it. I hope you are also able to make your final decision now.