SSD comparison · Updated July 27, 2026 · Prices verified July 27, 2026

Crucial T500 2TB vs Lexar NM790 2TB

Side-by-side: Crucial T500 2TB ($369) vs Lexar NM790 2TB ($310). $/TB winner, specs, real-world picks for July 2026.

Crucial T500 2TB Gen 4

Crucial · Phison E25
$369
↓ was $370 on July 13, 2026
$184.50/TB
View on Amazon →

Lexar NM790 2TB Gen 4

Lexar · MAP1602
$310
↓ was $380 on July 6, 2026
$155.00/TB
View on Amazon →
Generation
Gen 4
Gen 4
Price (USD)
$369
$310
Capacity
2 TB
2 TB
$/TB
$184.50
$155.00
Sequential read
7,400 MB/s
7,400 MB/s
Sequential write
7,000 MB/s
6,500 MB/s
Interface
PCIe 4.0 x4
PCIe 4.0 x4
Controller
Phison E25
MAP1602
DRAM cache
Yes
No (HMB)
TBW endurance
1,200 TBW
1,500 TBW
Warranty
5 years
5 years
PS5 compatible
Yes
Yes

Verdict: Crucial T500 2TB vs Lexar NM790 2TB

Gen 4 at 2 TB is one of the most contested SSD segments in 2026, and Crucial T500 2TB versus Lexar NM790 2TB captures that competition well. The decision rarely comes down to peak speeds — both drives saturate typical workloads.

Hardware-wise, the Crucial T500 2TB runs on an E25 controller that became the workhorse of late Gen 4 designs. The Lexar NM790 2TB pairs the MaxioTech MAP1602 — a DRAM-less Gen 4 controller dominating the value tier across TeamGroup, Lexar, and others.

Prices favor the Lexar NM790 2TB by $29.50/TB ($155.00/TB versus $184.50/TB). Not a huge gap, but enough to be the tiebreaker if performance is similar.

The DRAM-vs-HMB question divides opinion: Crucial T500 2TB's on-board DRAM theoretically helps under sustained workloads, while Lexar NM790 2TB's HMB approach has matured enough that most users won't see the difference. Pick on price if everything else is similar.

Real-world use cases

For PlayStation 5 builds, the console's internal M.2 slot tops out around 5,500 MB/s sustained, so both Crucial T500 2TB and Lexar NM790 2TB hit the same wall — pick whichever is cheaper at the moment you buy. Heads-up — these are full-length 2280 drives. Steam Deck and most current handhelds require shorter 2230 modules, so check capacity-specific 2230 variants if that's your target platform.

Market context: we track 11 Gen 4 2 TB drives, and by price per terabyte the Crucial T500 2TB currently sits #9 while the Lexar NM790 2TB sits #7. Neither cracks the top of the value table, so it's worth glancing at the alternatives below before picking either.

Cheaper 2 TB alternatives to both

As of July 27, 2026, these tracked drives undercut both the Crucial T500 2TB and Lexar NM790 2TB on $/TB:

$62.50/TB · $125

Silicon Power US75 2TB
7,000 MB/s read · 1,200 TBW · HMB

$67.50/TB · $135

Lexar EQ790 2TB
7,000 MB/s read · 1,200 TBW · HMB

$145.00/TB · $290

WD_BLACK SN7100 2TB
7,250 MB/s read · 1,200 TBW · HMB · Compare vs Lexar NM790 2TB →

Pick the Crucial T500 2TB if...

Go with the Crucial T500 2TB for a dedicated DRAM cache chip. Crucial's T-series tends to undercut Samsung and WD on price while using comparable Micron silicon — a value play hiding in a flagship form factor.

Pick the Lexar NM790 2TB if...

Go with the Lexar NM790 2TB for the lower retail price ($310 vs $369), and better $/TB economics ($155.00/TB). The Lexar NM790 2TB wins on $/TB because it pairs DRAM-less MAP1602 silicon with low-margin distribution. Performance is fine for OS and gaming, weaker only on sustained random writes.

Best value for money

Lexar NM790 2TB
At $155.00 per TB, this is the cheaper option by $29.50/TB

Best for gaming

Lexar NM790 2TB
Hits the gaming sweet spot: 7,400 MB/s reads, reasonable price, PS5-ready

Best for content creators

Crucial T500 2TB
7,000 MB/s sustained write, 1,200 TBW, DRAM

Best for PS5

Lexar NM790 2TB
Both work in PS5; this one is cheaper at $155.00/TB

Crucial T500 2TB vs Lexar NM790 2TB — common questions

How much does the Crucial T500 2TB cost compared to the Lexar NM790 2TB?

Current Amazon pricing (verified July 27, 2026): Crucial T500 2TB at $369 or $184.50/TB, Lexar NM790 2TB at $310 or $155.00/TB. The Lexar NM790 2TB is the cheaper of the two. Note: 2026 NAND shortage is causing weekly price changes.

Which is faster, Crucial T500 2TB or Lexar NM790 2TB?

Reads: the Lexar NM790 2TB leads at 7,400 MB/s versus 7,400 MB/s. Writes: the Crucial T500 2TB wins at 7,000 MB/s versus 6,500 MB/s. In real-world gaming and productivity the user-visible difference is typically under one second per operation.

Will the Crucial T500 2TB or Lexar NM790 2TB work in my PlayStation 5?

Yes to both — both meet Sony's expansion specs (PCIe Gen 4 NVMe, M.2 2280, with a heatsink). The PS5 won't differentiate between them in benchmarks because its internal storage controller throttles to PCIe Gen 4 speeds. Lexar NM790 2TB wins this matchup if price is your tiebreaker.

Does the Crucial T500 2TB's DRAM cache make a noticeable difference?

For OS, gaming, and general productivity: no. The Lexar NM790 2TB's HMB (Host Memory Buffer) implementation matches DRAM performance within 5% on these workloads. DRAM matters for sustained random writes — databases, multi-GB file operations, video editing project saves. Heavy daily writers see the difference; casual users do not.

How much does the 300 TBW endurance gap actually matter?

For most buyers, it doesn't. The Lexar NM790 2TB's 1,500 TBW versus the Crucial T500 2TB's 1,200 TBW translates to years of additional theoretical lifetime, but consumer drives almost always die from controller failure or firmware issues long before reaching TBW limits.

If you could only buy one, which would it be?

The Lexar NM790 2TB. At $155.00/TB with 7,400 MB/s read and 4.5/5 reviews, it's the safer default unless your workload specifically benefits from the Crucial T500 2TB's higher sustained write speeds.

Are there cheaper 2 TB SSDs than the Crucial T500 2TB and Lexar NM790 2TB?

Yes. As of July 27, 2026, the Silicon Power US75 2TB ($62.50/TB), Lexar EQ790 2TB ($67.50/TB), WD_BLACK SN7100 2TB ($145.00/TB) all undercut both drives on price per terabyte. Budget drives in this range are typically DRAM-less, which matters only for sustained random-write workloads — for gaming and general use they perform comparably.