Solve 48

By webeagle12
in General Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

briangw

Posted
Posted

I spoke with my step father... he says its 2. he says in any problem with the parenthesis.. you have to do the destributive property first. he said you cant just do 48*1/2*12. so he says its 2.. i say its 2... and the guy who posted above me on the calculator says its 2

Technically, either method is right. The catch is how the problem is presented. Instead of saying just "Solve," the instructions need to say solve by order of operations or distributitive property. Open any pre-algebra or algebra text book on the chapters for practice or test at the end and the instructions will say one of the other. If they don't, then you should be able to use this defense in the class you are taking if you solve it one way compared to what the instructor was thinking.

This worksheet has common equations to the one being discussed here:

http://math.about.com/od/algebraworksheets/ss/Algebra-.htm

Mentor

anarkhy

Posted
Posted

I spoke with my step father... he says its 2. he says in any problem with the parenthesis.. you have to do the destributive property first. he said you cant just do 48*1/2*12. so he says its 2.. i say its 2... and the guy who posted above me on the calculator says its 2

sorry man, i only posted the video to show it can be a dubious problem. actually i am with google who says its 288. Not only google solves the equation it shows the corret writing.

c43d6d8a.jpg

Grand Master

Astra.Xtreme

Posted
Posted

Technically, either method is right. The catch is how the problem is presented. Instead of saying just "Solve," the instructions need to say solve by order of operations or distributitive property. Open any pre-algebra or algebra text book on the chapters for practice or test at the end and the instructions will say one of the other. If they don't, then you should be able to use this defense in the class you are taking if you solve it one way compared to what the instructor was thinking.

This worksheet has common equations to the one being discussed here:

http://math.about.com/od/algebraworksheets/ss/Algebra-.htm

Distributive is multiplication, so you still have to follow order of operations no matter what. That only correct answer is 288.

Grand Master

briangw

Posted
Posted

Distributive is multiplication, so you still have to follow order of operations no matter what. That only correct answer is 288.

If that's the case, then why do those worksheets on my link have a similar format to the problem shown here? the point is, it can be done either way. Consult any math book's chapters on OoO or DP and you will find similar looking problems that can be done either way, but they tell you which way to solve it. The OP failed to say how to solve it and that's why we have a debate right here.

Oh, and Distributive can be division too:

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/69813.html

Neowinian

Adi Dusa

Posted
Posted

Oh, my god...

I don't intend to be rude, but I surely hope that none of the guys here who are not convinced that the only answer is 288 are/will be working in any safety critical areas. Imagine what would happen if one of them was designing or programming a computer used in a plane to calculate altitude or speed....

First, this is not an equation. It is a simple operation. So leave variables and letters alone. They have no use here. Also, for the guy that tried something like 48/y(x) on his calculator, I believe y(x) is a function, which is a totally different thing than 2(9+3) (I'm not really sure how you wrote it on your calculator, so I admit there is a chance I am not right about it being a function, but then your calculator has a bug and does not know to calculate correctly certain expressions). Also, for those saying that a(b+c) is ab+ac, you have to be aware that a is not 2 here, but 48/2. So, the correct way to split the parentheses is 48/2*9+48/2*3=24*9+24*3=216+72=288.

There are several ways to calculate this, but all will lead to 288...

Second, any symbol you use as an operand (:, /, ?), that is a division and obeys the same rules.

I did not learn in school about PEMDAS or BEMDAS, or whatever you call those, but I did learn about order of operations. It is very simple and I would expect anyone who graduated 4th grade (maybe it depends on the country they went to school in), should know that the result of this operation is 288.

By the way, the post title is incorrect. You do not solve 48?2(9+3), you calculate it. :p

Grand Master

briangw

Posted
Posted

Second, any symbol you use as an operand (:, /, ?), that is a division and obeys the same rules.

I did not learn in school about PEMDAS or BEMDAS, or whatever you call those, but I did learn about order of operations. It is very simple and I would expect anyone who graduated 4th grade (maybe it depends on the country they went to school in), should know that the result of this operation is 288.

Personally, I would perform OoO, but I can see how it can be solved both ways. Not mine, but apparently this debate has been on for some time:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110412111826AATGn5S

Okay, the answer is 2, everyone. Look, a math problem can be solved in many different ways, and you?ll get the right answer every single time.

The controversial PEMDAS, BOMDAS way:

48?2(9+3)

48?2(12)

48?24

2

The 2(12) has to be together, not because I?m prioritizing M over D. It is because it is altogether, just as 2x would be. (I will explain this further under substitution.)

DISTRIBUTIVE PROPERTY, which is for those who don?t know, A(B+C)=AB+AC:

48?2(9+3)

48?(2*9+2*3)

48?(18+6)

48?24

2

SUBSTITUTION, which in this case, we will substitute x=(9+3):

48?2x

You don?t do 48?2 first because there?s a variable there and get 24x. First, you find the x:

x=(9+3)

x=12

So, now, you have 2x.

2x=24

48?24

2

If you want to take the SUBSTITUTION further, you can make it that y=48 and x=(9+3).

y?2x

2x is together. The only way y?2 could be a fraction is if it?s (y?2)x.

Another way to use SUBSTITUTION, using PEMDAS/BOMDAS as well: This is why 2(12) is together. Let?s substitute x=12, assuming we have already added what?s in the parenthesis. 9+3=12

48?2x; x=12

You can?t assume that (48?2)x. That?s an entirely different problem. First, you have to find 2x.

2x=24

48?24

2

Using the CALCULATOR, you have to recognize that 2(9+3) is together, so you have to type it like so:

48?(2(9+3))

Otherwise, it naturally assumes you want (48?2)(9+3).

It?s similar to how you use boolean phrases on a computer in terms of computer programming and even a simple Google search. If you want to search for ?new Mexico laws?, as in the Mexico country?s laws, you would type ?new Mexico laws?. But if you want to search US state New Mexico?s laws, you can?t just capitalize the ?n? and assume the computer would recognize the proper noun. (i can just type like this with no capitalization or commas and the computer wouldn?t care.) You have to put parenthesis around ?New Mexico? like so: ??new mexico? laws?. That?s because ?New Mexico? is one whole idea just as 2(9+3) or in substitution, 2x is one whole idea.

WHY 288 IS WRONG:

By COMMUTATIVE PROPERTY, which is AB=BA, those assuming that we have to do the problem LEFT TO RIGHT is also assuming that the problem can be like so:

(48?2)(9+3)

(9+3)(48?2)

12*24

288

If you want to work by THAT, then, you?re assuming that this problem is the same as the original:

9+3(48?2)

9+3(48?2) ? 48?2(9+3)

That?s a completely different problem, and this would get a completely different answer besides 288 and 2. (The answer is 81.)

THE ANSWER IS 2.

Grand Master

Astra.Xtreme

Posted
Posted

Long rant of garbage

For the love of God, how were you ever a teacher? No offense...

By your logic, you are claiming that: 48?2(9+3) = 48?(2(9+3))

It absolutely DOES NOT!

I don't understand why you can't grasp the fact that distributive is multiplication. After executing the numbers inside the parentheses, it wouldn't even make sense to distribute to one number. That goes against the very idea of distribution itself.

It's okay to admit you're wrong...

btw, does this make it any clearer? 48?2*(9+3)

People seem to be very confused when the 2 is right against the (

Enthusiast

Gromit

Posted
Posted

Guys, just thought I should clear this up, it's BIDMAS

Brackets

Indicies

Divide

Multiply

Add

Subtract

It's the order if which way to do equations, so you first do the brackets, followed by the indicies, then divide, then multiple, then add then subtract. It's pretty unlikely you'll find them all in one equation but even if not, you do in the order of what operations are in the equation.

Grand Master

briangw

Posted
Posted

For the love of God, how were you ever a teacher? No offense...

By your logic, you are claiming that: 48?2(9+3) = 48?(2(9+3))

It absolutely DOES NOT!

I don't understand why you can't grasp the fact that distributive is multiplication. After executing the numbers inside the parentheses, it wouldn't even make sense to distribute to one number. That goes against the very idea of distribution itself.

It's okay to admit you're wrong...

btw, does this make it any clearer? 48?2*(9+3)

People seem to be very confused when the 2 is right against the (

*sigh* So if I told you to solve 48?2(9+3) using the distributive property can you do it, yes or no? And if no, why? Then in your argument, all of these textbooks are wrong and we should just burn them.

and you obviously missed my edit above where distributitve can work using division:

http://mathforum.org...view/69813.html

Grand Master

Astra.Xtreme

Posted
Posted

Guys, just thought I should clear this up, it's BIDMAS

Brackets

Indicies

Divide

Multiply

Add

Subtract

It's the order if which way to do equations, so you first do the brackets, followed by the indicies, then divide, then multiple, then add then subtract. It's pretty unlikely you'll find them all in one equation but even if not, you do in the order of what operations are in the equation.

Wrong. It's multiply OR divide, then add OR subtract. Going from left to right, whichever comes first.

*sigh* So if I told you to solve 48?2(9+3) using the distributive property can you do it, yes or no? And if no, why? Then in your argument, all of these textbooks are wrong and we should just burn them.

and you obviously missed my edit above where distributitve can work using division:

http://mathforum.org...view/69813.html

If division can be distributed, then so be it. But it still doesn't take away from the fact that you have to follow order of operations from left to right.

There's nothing to be distributed in that problem anyway. If you do distribute, then you completely failed anyway by doing that before the contents of the parentheses...

You act as if all textbooks are 100% correct.

Explorer

joint

Posted
Posted

lol. all you 288 people are wrong. just think of the size of the number you have to devide by 48 to come up with 288. I also talked to my step brother who is an accountant.. he said if you do 48*1/2*12 thats wrong because if you switch the sign in the beginning you have to do it over on the other side too.. so by doing it your way the correct equation would be 48*1/2*1/12 = 2. So 288 is wrong. 2 is the correct answer. so have a nice day. and like i said just think of the size of the number you have to devide by 48 to come up with 288( doesnt make sense) Have a good day. 2 is the correct answer.

Grand Master

briangw

Posted
Posted

Wrong. It's multiply OR divide, then add OR subtract. Going from left to right, whichever comes first.

If division can be distributed, then so be it. But it still doesn't take away from the fact that you have to follow order of operations from left to right.

There's nothing to be distributed in that problem anyway. If you do distribute, then you completely failed anyway by doing that before the contents of the parentheses...

You act as if all textbooks are 100% correct.

I'm not saying they are correct, but if we go by your logic, then we must not teach students that there can be more than one way to solve a problem based on the directions given. Look, I agree with you that at first glance, I would have used order of operations. I even answered a similar poll on FB choosing the OoO method over the DP one. But at second glance and all the rebuttal going on, I realized that in both scenarios (here and on FB), the only direction given was "Solve." At my first instinct, I chose 288, because that was the logical choice based on what I taught and learned. But then I began to read the other reasonings and started googling this in depth and came up with some pretty interesting stuff. Then, I thought back on the last time I taught (back in November) and considered both chapters and *Bing* it can be done either way.

No one is going to agree to one thing or another, And I won't hold it to you, despite the fact you live in Wisconsin (or maybe just from there). You have some good brats out there, but the Packers can still go to :devil: . It's all good. ;)

Grand Master

Astra.Xtreme

Posted
Posted

lol. all you 288 people are wrong. just think of the size of the number you have to devide by 48 to come up with 288. I also talked to my step brother who is an accountant.. he said if you do 48*1/2*12 thats wrong because if you switch the sign in the beginning you have to do it over on the other side too.. so by doing it your way the correct equation would be 48*1/2*1/12 = 2. So 288 is wrong. 2 is the correct answer. so have a nice day. and like i said just think of the size of the number you have to devide by 48 to come up with 288( doesnt make sense) Have a good day. 2 is the correct answer.

Do you even know what you are talking about? You completely disregarded the ordering notion of the problem, which is the whole point of it in the first place...

I'm an engineer, and I say that the answer is 288 because of the grade school-level laws of mathematics. Not that my profession has anything to do with it anyway...

No one is going to agree to one thing or another, And I won't hold it to you, despite the fact you live in Wisconsin (or maybe just from there). You have some good brats out there, but the Packers can still go to :devil: . It's all good. ;)

We take pride in our beer. :)

At least you didn't mention the world's worst basketball team, the Bucks. :x And the fact that our weather sucks. Can't beat a 35 degree rain all through spring. heh

Explorer

joint

Posted
Posted

Do you even know what you are talking about? You completely disregarded the ordering notion of the problem, which is the whole point of it in the first place...

I'm an engineer, and I say that the answer is 288 because of the grade school-level laws of mathematics. Not that my profession has anything to do with it anyway...

i feel sorry for the things that you enginner

yes i do. 48/?=288 ?=13824 someone explain how you get 13,824 from 2(9+3) Lol

Grand Master

Hardcore Til I Die

Posted
Posted

lol. all you 288 people are wrong. just think of the size of the number you have to devide by 48 to come up with 288. I also talked to my step brother who is an accountant.. he said if you do 48*1/2*12 thats wrong because if you switch the sign in the beginning you have to do it over on the other side too.. so by doing it your way the correct equation would be 48*1/2*1/12 = 2. So 288 is wrong. 2 is the correct answer. so have a nice day. and like i said just think of the size of the number you have to devide by 48 to come up with 288( doesnt make sense) Have a good day. 2 is the correct answer.

The fact that your Stepbrother's an Accountant is irrelevant. He probably doesn't have to solve problems like this one every day. Plus, this sort of thing is taught in Primary School/early Secondary School, so any old school student is just as qualified to comment on the answer to this question as an Accountant is.

The answer is 288.

i feel sorry for the things that you enginner

yes i do. 48/?=288 ?=13824 someone explain how you get 13,824 from 2(9+3) Lol

What on earth are you walking about? How can 48/13824 = 288? :unsure:

I think you've lost the plot mate :p

Explorer

joint

Posted
Posted

The fact that your Stepbrother's an Accountant is irrelevant. He probably doesn't have to solve problems like this one every day. Plus, this sort of thing is taught in Primary School/early Secondary School, so any old school student is just as qualified to comment on the answer to this question as an Accountant is.

The answer is 288.

the correct answer to this problem is 2. its ok that you are all wrong. at least you learned something though

Grand Master

Ambroos

Posted
Posted

Mathematics should be clear to avoid any confusion. This thing is unclear because it could give a different result depending on what 'conventions' you follow. Left-to-right and the juxtapositioning rule are two different conventions that both aren't accepted everywhere. This makes the original equitation ambiguous, and ambiguity in math is just not allowed. When in doubt, add more brackets, it's always been like that.

Grand Master

briangw

Posted
Posted

We take pride in our beer. :)

At least you didn't mention the world's worst basketball team, the Bucks. :x And the fact that our weather sucks. Can't beat a 35 degree rain all through spring. heh

lol. Well, we have a pretty bad team in the Timberwolves too. I do admit, I like your beer and we 've had a couple of 35 degree rain showers in NW MN. I still find it funny that the Twin Cities got more snow than we did up north this season.

Explorer

joint

Posted
Posted

The fact that your Stepbrother's an Accountant is irrelevant. He probably doesn't have to solve problems like this one every day. Plus, this sort of thing is taught in Primary School/early Secondary School, so any old school student is just as qualified to comment on the answer to this question as an Accountant is.

The answer is 288.

What on earth are you walking about? How can 48/13824 = 288? :unsure:

I think you've lost the plot mate :p

whatever i typed it in the wrong order. the point is still the same.... think of the size of the number 48 is deviding by to come up with an answer of 288. that number is huge. 13824/48=288. explain where 13824 comes from 2(9+3). OTHERWISE THIS TOPIC IS OVER. THE SOLUTION IS 2. BY YOUR WAY THE CORRECT PROBLEM WOULD BE 48*1/2*1/12 = 2.

Grand Master

Hardcore Til I Die

Posted
Posted

whatever i typed it in the wrong order. the point is still the same.... think of the size of the number 48 is deviding by to come up with an answer of 288. that number is huge. 13824/48=288. explain where 13824 comes from 2(9+3). OTHERWISE THIS TOPIC IS OVER. THE SOLUTION IS 2. BY YOUR WAY THE CORRECT PROBLEM WOULD BE 48*1/2*1/12 = 2.

Nothing is divided by 48 though?? I don't understand where you're getting that from...

(9+3) = (12)

48 / 2 = 24

24(12) = 24*12 = 288

Nothing is ever divided by 48 so I don't understand what you mean by that.

Grand Master

Astra.Xtreme

Posted
Posted

whatever i typed it in the wrong order. the point is still the same.... think of the size of the number 48 is deviding by to come up with an answer of 288. that number is huge. 13824/48=288. explain where 13824 comes from 2(9+3). OTHERWISE THIS TOPIC IS OVER. THE SOLUTION IS 2. BY YOUR WAY THE CORRECT PROBLEM WOULD BE 48*1/2*1/12 = 2.

You still don't have any idea what you're talking about... Where are you getting this idea of some huge number 48 is dividing? You are comparing a plain division with this problem that has precise ordering. It's completely different.

Anybody that thinks the answer is 2, is saying that 48/2(9+3) = 48/(2(9+3)).

It's not, and you can never say otherwise...

Grand Master

Ambroos

Posted
Posted

Wow, 27 pages for a sum that clearly calculates to 288? :blink:

You disappoint me Callum, I've always liked you, but now you're clearly wrong :p Juxtaposition implies that you execute 2(12) before you do 48/2 :p

Oh well, I'm never gonna get this explained :p

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • Microsoft Edge 150.0.4078.65

      By James W. · Posted

      150.0.4078.65 secret changelog: New feature: Settings > Copilot and AI > Allow Cowork to take actions on your behalf
    • OBS Studio 32.2.0 RC1

      By Copernic · Posted

      OBS Studio 32.2.0 RC1 by Razvan Serea OBS Studio is software designed for capturing, compositing, encoding, recording, and streaming video content, efficiently. It is the re-write of the widely used Open Broadcaster Software, to allow even more features and multi-platform support. OBS Studio supports multiple sources, including media files, games, web pages, application windows, webcams, your desktop, microphone and more. OBS Studio Features: High performance real time video/audio capturing and mixing, with unlimited scenes you can switch between seamlessly via custom transitions. Live streaming to Twitch, YouTube, Periscope, Mixer, GoodGame, DailyMotion, Hitbox, VK and any other RTMP server Filters for video sources such as image masking, color correction, chroma/color keying, and more. x264, H.264 and AAC for your live streams and video recordings Intel Quick Sync Video (QSV) and NVIDIA NVENC support Intuitive audio mixer with per-source filters such as noise gate, noise suppression, and gain. Take full control with VST plugin support. GPU-based game capture for high performance game streaming Unlimited number of scenes and sources Number of different and customizable transitions for when you switch between scenes Hotkeys for almost any action such as start or stop your stream or recording, push-to-talk, fast mute of any audio source, show or hide any video source, switch between scenes,and much more Live preview of any changes on your scenes and sources using Studio Mode before pushing them to your stream where your viewers will see those changes DirectShow capture device support (webcams, capture cards, etc) Powerful and easy to use configuration options. Add new Sources, duplicate existing ones, and adjust their properties effortlessly. Streamlined Settings panel for quickly configuring your broadcasts and recordings. Switch between different profiles with ease. Light and dark themes available to fit your environment. …and many other features. For free. At all. OBS Studio 32.2.0 changelog: Release Candidate 1 Changes Fixed empty name label in volume meter in Beta 1-3 [Warchamp7] Fixed macOS Audio Capture sources capturing cursors unnecessarily [jcm93] Beta 3 Changes Fixed extra padding on some UI elements on Windows in Beta 1-2 [Warchamp7] Fixed NVIDIA Audio Effects not working in Beta 1-2 [pkviet] Fixed issues with long item names in the Audio Mixer in Beta 1-2 [Warchamp7] Removed redundant "Monitor Only" from the Advanced Audio Properties window [Warchamp7] Mute and Monitor are handled independently in the new Audio Mixer Removed Close button from What's New dialog [Warchamp7] Removed margins from What's New dialog [Warchamp7] 32.2 New Features Replaced add source dropdown with new dialog [Warchamp7] Improved FPS selector UX [jcm93] Added missing file support for filters [exeldro] Added ability for plugins to set custom icons for new source types [cg2121] Included .webp files when adding a directory to Image Slide Show source [TarunCore] Added copy paste functions to frontend API [exeldro] Added filter to compose SDR into HDR [jpark37] Added delete as a hotkey to delete sources on macOS [PatTheMav] Added dynamic bitrate support to multitrack video [lexano-ivs] 32.2 Changes Forced Intel-based installations to update to Apple Silicon version on macOS [PatTheMav] This change means that OBS Studio versions built for Intel-based Macs but running on Apple Silicon Macs will automatically update to OBS Studio built for Apple Silicon Macs. If an installation was using third-party plugins, those plugins will no longer load until replaced with Apple Silicon versions. Fixed audio mixer state getting out of sync when changing settings via websockets or plugins [Warchamp7] Added theming for checked QToolButtons [glikely] Improved OpenGL performance slightly on low-end machines [kkartaltepe] Set minimum size for color source to 1 pixel [exeldro] Added minimum width to spinboxes [Warchamp7] Disallowed overwriting the crash handler [sebastian-s-beckmann] Applied process mitigation policies for Windows [notr1ch] Adjusted description of multitrack video [jhnbwrs] Changed new capture devices to use fallback frame rate by default [PatTheMav] Improved DLL loading behavior on Windows [notr1ch] Limited multitrack video config to Custom service [PatTheMav] 32.2 Bug Fixes Fixed OAuth and dock state save corruption [PatTheMav] Fixed group bounds not resizing when removing items [howellrl] Fixed canvas mixes not being restored after video reset [dsaedtler] Fixed some erroneous crashes during shutdown [Warchamp7] Fixed display capture sometimes capturing black after a duplicator failure [ThrowTop] Fixed color of controls dock output buttons in System theme [shiina424] Fixed virtual camera reset failures [stephematician] Fixed potential crash when user discards changes in the settings window [suogesi] Fixed incorrect return value in virtualcam filter [xtfo] Fixed source toolbar buttons not working after dragging a source into a group [Warchamp7] Fixed properties hint icon spacing [Warchamp7] Fixed potential crash when a video device reconnects on macOS [jcm93] Fixed an issue where PipeWire could fail on NVIDIA GPUs [hoshinolina] Fixed obs_canvas_get_video_info returning incorrect framerate [dsaedtler] 32.2 Deprecations Deprecated obs_properties_add_button [sebastian-s-beckmann] Download: OBS Studio 32.2.0 RC1 | Portable | ARM64 | ~200.0 MB (Open Source) View: OBS Studio Homepage | Other Operating Systems | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • Anyone can now use your Instagram photos to generate AI images, here's how to opt out

      By ZipZapRap · Posted

      For real. Forums are about as social media as I’ll ever get.
    • Lexar PLAY X 1TB 2230 review: blazing fast PCIe Gen4x4 gaming SSD for PC and consoles

      By Steven P. · Posted

      Lexar PLAY X 1TB 2230 review: blazing fast PCIe Gen4x4 gaming SSD for PC and consoles by Steven Parker Lexar reached out to us asking if we were interested in taking a look at the Lexar PLAY X SSD. This drive is mostly (but not strictly) intended for handhelds and consoles as a means to expand storage for gaming, but you can use it however you like. In our case we were sent the 2230 1TB variant, so we plopped it into the bracket that's included in the box and installed it in our test PC. Before we get underway, Lexar provided a free sample without any editorial input or review pre-approval. Below are its specifications: Lexar PLAY X Interface PCIe Gen4x4 with NVMe Form Factor M.2 2030, M.2 2230, M.2 2280 Capacity 512GB, 1TB, 2TB Speed 512GB: Sequential read speed up to 7200MB/s, sequential write speed up to 4500MB/s, random read up to 900K IOPs, random write up to 900K IOPs 1TB: Sequential read speed up to 7400MB/s, sequential write speed up to 6400MB/s, random read up to 1000K IOPs, random write up to 1000K IOPs 2TB: Sequential read speed up to 7400MB/s, sequential write speed up to 6500MB/s, random read up to 1000K IOPs, random write up to 1000K IOPs DRAM Cache No TB written 512GB: 300TBW, 1TB: 600TBW, 2TB: 1200TBW Operation temp 0° to 70°C (32°F to 158°F) Storage temp - 40° to 85°C (- 40°F to 185°F) Durability Shock Resistance: 1500G, duration 0.5ms, Half Sine Wave Vibration resistenence: 10~2000Hz, 1.5mm, 20G, 1Oct/min, 30min/axis (X, Y, Z) MTBF 1,500,000 Hours Dimensions 80 x 22 x 2.45 mm / 3.15”x0.87”x0.10” Weight 9.5g / 0.02lbs Part nr LNMPLYX001T-RNNNG Warranty 5 years Price £119.99, €119.99, / £218.99, €249.99 First a few notes about the specs. The Lexar PLAY X SSD does not come with a (graphene) heatsink so you will have to ensure you have a thermal pad or something that can be used with this drive, and secondly it says in the specs that it does not have a DRAM Cache, as it makes use of: Basically what this means is that HMB handles finding files, while the Dynamic pseudo-SLC cache handles writing them. The Lexar PLAY X uses TLC NAND flash memory, which stores three bits of data per cell. Writing three bits requires checking multiple voltage levels, which takes time. It's a trade off for the drive size too, as it would be difficult to place DRAM cache onto the 2230 format. What's in the box Lexar PLAY X (1TB) 2280 Bracket 2230 and 2280 Sticker Quick Installation Guide Our test system consists of the following: Lian Li O11 Dynamic Mini V2 Flow (Amazon|Newegg) ASUS ProArt Z890-CREATOR WiFi (Amazon|Newegg) Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus (Amazon|Newegg) Thermal Grizzly KryoSheet - 44x37 (Amazon|Newegg) 2x 16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB (7200 MT/s in XMP) (Amazon|Newegg) Sabrent Rocket4 Plus 2TB SSD (Amazon) Windows 11 Pro 25H2 (Build 26100.8655) Benchmarks With that out of the way, we ran some benchmarks comparing (historic) data with a couple of other drives on a system that is up to date with the latest June Patch Tuesday updates. Aside from the clear difference between the PCIe 4x4 and PCIe 5x4 results, it is also clear that applying correct thermal conditions, in this case the DARK AirFlow I, makes a difference with the outcome of the score as can be seen on the TeamGroup Z540. (hsf = heatsink & fan, hs = heatsink) WD SN850X Lexar PLAY X Z540 with DARK AirFlow I In our 3DMark Storage benchmark test (images above), which measures access times and bandwidth for gaming scenarios, the Lexar PLAY X was the fastest. Even compared to the actively cooled TeamGroup Z540, this one was 23% faster, despite being on PCIe Gen4; and it was doing so while running cool too, as you will see later in our temperature stress test. The Lexar PLAY X supports DirectStorage like other NVMe drives, and here, the SSD was a lot better with DirectStorage enabled on our 3DMark DirectStorage feature test. With GDeflate especially, the improvement is tremendous. Overall, the test result says that the Lexar PLAY X was nearly three times faster while running with DirectStorage. (hsf = heatsink & fan, hs = heatsink) Z540 with DARK AirFlow I Lexar PLAY X WD SN850X Next we ran the default CrystalDiskMark test (images above) and measured the disk temperature. Even with the motherboard M.2 heatsink applied to the top of it, the drive managed to reach a peak of 70C, which is well within specification. Also, another positive is that it exceeded its advertised sequential write speed of 6,400 MB/s in our testing, which is rare and deserves praise. Z540 with DARK AirFlow I Lexar PLAY X WD SN850X The second test is of six passes at 16GB (images above), meant to stimulate a heavier, longer transfer session, and it reached the same max temp of 70~71C. This indicates that the PLAY X is performing exceptionally well even under heavy loads. It is not as chill as the WD_BLACK SN850X, but 70-71 C is completely safe. Usage Although Lexar generally markets anything stamped with "Play" for handhelds and consoles, on the official product page and Amazon listing, the PLAY X is definitely marketed as an all-rounder with the company claiming that it is: This is exactly what we did, as our sample was placed into the 2280 bracket and installed in the M.2_1 slot on our ASUS ProArt Z890-CREATOR WiFi. CrystalDiskInfo Idle temp as shown above is also pretty decent at 28C. Lexar DiskMaster Lexar also provides a disk utility that can read the disk information and benchmark it. S.M.A.R.T info can be viewed above and it loads automatically in the program, I also ran the "Performance testing" which gave a better result than we saw in CrystalDiskMark v9.0.2. Conclusion I have to say I came out very impressed with the PLAY X, especially seeing how well it did in the 3DMark gaming test. That was surprising for sure, in a good way of course. Hence, as the name suggests, the PLAY X can be a great drive for gaming rigs. The drive ran fairly cool as well, although you will want to make sure it's properly cooled, seeing how it was reaching its maximum recommended operating temperature; but there was no noticeable throttling. The 600 TBW rating of the 1TB variant seems pretty good as well for this gaming-orientated storage where writes will be happening more frequently for game saves and what-not, but even so, you should see years of use without any problems and even if you do run into problems, the five year warranty should have you covered. A bit of a downer for our U.S. readers though, Lexar told me that the PLAY X is not yet available to purchase in the United States, but it can be ordered if you're in the UK. I asked when they plan to release it there and was told: In addition, although the initial review documentation and official website suggests there is also a 2 TB variant, Lexar have stated that "The 2TB version has not been launched yet." As you can see from the links below, the 1 TB variant is also selling a bit above the RRP in the UK, and the 512 GB version aligns with Lexar's RRP. Lexar PLAY X 1 TB for £241.99 on Amazon UK Lexar PLAY X 512 GB for £119.99 on Amazon UK We hope the 2TB variant becomes available soon, considering how well the drive did in our game data tests. We feel the higher capacity will be popular for sure, though at this time, the lack of it is not hard to understand why, given the shortage and the shift in focus for a lot of companies. Sayan Sen contributed to this review. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • The official Funny Pictures thread

      By Slugsie · Posted

      This seemed like a fake news story, or AI generated. Nope, apparently true. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-45414022

  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      pahariyaseo earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      pahariyaseo earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      hadiaali45 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      arone_24 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Reacting Well
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Reacting Well

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      408
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      140
    3. 3
      Nick H.
      89
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      83
    5. 5
      neufuse
      71
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!