Is nvme worth the premium?

is nvme worth the premium?

Other urls found in this thread:

arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/inside-the-ssd-revolution-how-solid-state-disks-really-work/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

>is nvme worth the premium?
Of the two people I know that got an M.2 drive both of them had issues and returned them and just got an SSD.
Did they just both have buggy motherboards?

At this point, no.
The advantage of an SSD over an HDD to begin with is that the random access speeds aren't shit. But going from "100x faster than spinning rust" to "200x faster than spinning rust" is a comparatively small upgrade.

I bought a used 960 evo 250gb for 99, it's 10 more than a new 850 evo 250gb

its my first ever ssd, thinking about getting a 1tb ssd down the line, just want something to store some games and lots of photos for quick Sup Forums posting

unless you're moving huge amounts of files constantly, no.

Probably used non-270/370 boards or the first edition AM4 builds.

>it's 10 more than a new 850 evo 250gb
And i bet you won't notice the difference in daily usage compared to a SATA2 SSD.

i bought a 960 evo 512gb, it wasn't worth it. Jack shit improvement in games and general desktop compared to a sata ssd.

So i put it in my server and now it acts as an L2 and arc for my zfs.

zil and arc rather

Does speed things up a little bit, but in the scheme of things, would be better of with a larger sata ssd. t.512gb 960 pro owner

nvmeme

For most users, nah, you'll never notice it vs a SATA SSD.

If you need to do an absurd amount of 20+ GB transfers and worry about that taking 2 minutes vs 1, sure I guess.

If you have a use case, maybe, but they heat up like crazy if you do get them going. I swapped a 960 Pro for a cheaper slower stick cause I was expecting the damn thing to melt.

They are intended for SFF computers where you don't have the room for SSDs and HDDs nor the space to run all the cables for them.

No. I have one of those new Adata su800 3d nand SSDs and it's barely slower than my RAMDisk. Tested on seveal small games, firefox, and several IDEs.

Like others have said, not worth it.
I have the 960 evo 512gb and I don't notice any real difference when compared to the 840 evo, except when moving large files.
Can't say I see a difference when saving big Photoshop files either.
We might see a real life difference when comparing the new Optane drive to a SATA SSD, but current NVMe isn't big enough of a jump at the moment for us to see any noticeable difference.

>mfw Z97 platform and it doesn't even use the full pcie 3.0 4x
>only 2x

i don't want to switch my 5775C to even some Z170 just because my 960 evo doesn't reach it's full potential

if u are into the botnet things sure

I have nvme on my laptop it is awesome.

This. If you're editing and derushing 4K video on a daily basis and need extra fast storage for large files, yeah go for it. For an average use, the .5s faster boot time and faster game or programm loads that can only be quantified with a swiss stopwatch are not worth the extra buck imo

Premium Meme-ium

It really comes down to what sort of disk activity and level of support your OS drivers have

Do they help with initial load times in games such as GTAV or are there other bottle necks as soon as you have a normal SSD?

Only for filling the otherwise unused slot on your motherboard.

for me, yes

because this >20+ GB
>absurd
I transfer 2+ TB on a daily basis

no, it doesn't improve things like boot time or load time of programs, not even slightly

I see, is it because at that point loading the assets into the RAM and/or VRAM becomes the bottle neck instead?

Its worth it if your work/day work involves moving huge amounts of data FAST!

Otherwise, if your time is mainly computing or other leisure stuff, its worthless over the standard sata variant. Infact its worth-worse because of the cost and the newness of the form factor that limits its backward compatibility with older hardware.

probably not the reason

instead, it's the random access time to sub 4k file blocks in your drive, in which there's absolutely no difference between an nvme and a sata ssd since the microcontroller is the bottleneck

the only advantage of an nvme is the forced sequential read/write speed

Just get a normal hdd, for data storage there's no difference in speed from hdd to ssd.

Aha, but I thought that wen loading big games it would be mostly sequential reads of large assets such as audio and textures. I guess I need to read up on this.

>sequential
files aren't stored in a completely sequential order in your drive. that is the issue. even if a single portion of a file is located in a different block that will drastically reduce the total time to load it.

>there's no difference in speed from hdd to ssd.
even in games load time?

Got it.
> the only advantage of an nvme is the forced sequential read/write speed
So when are they forced and what's the trade off other than non-optimal wear?

>when are they forced
when transferring series of huge (>10 GB) files between not filled up ( more than 50% free space) drives which is what I do constantly

>non-optimal wear
what do you mean by that?

OK WE NEED TO TALK RETARDS, THIS BULLSHIT REALLY TRIGGERS ME

you might really mean it as nvme at a specific question but i doubt it, most people confuse several things in to one

>1. nvme worth it?
not really, not at price difference higher than lets say 5% of the total price

>2. is 960 evo worth it above 850 evo
this is what many fucking morons dont get
you are not going for only nvme, you are getting new ssd generation, with upgrade in many aspects of the ssd
Seriously 960 evo has 50% HIGHER RANDOM READS, the one thing you want from your ssd
so faggots better be very precise when they talk generally about only sequential speeds

>3. is going for m.2 form factor worth it?
yes, no cables, no mess, notebooks will be dropping sata for m.2 like crazy so you ssd will be usable in more devices in the future, and also its safer, I ve seen my share of disks which got burned by fucky sata power cables/extensions/splitters.

IMO
most worthy thing is getting m.2 ssd
after that its worthy thinking about getting a newer generation ssd for all the benefits and in you likely get nvme anyway

and finally price comparission from newegg
$95 - sata 850 evo
$107 - m.2 850 evo
$124 - m.2 960 evo nvme

I thought the SSD controller normally tries to make sure that no storage blocks get used a lot more then other storage blocks.

I thought that doing a sequential write might override that or something. I'll stop bothering you with questions since I clearly need to just read up on how they work.

>read up on
I don't think any manufacturer will disclose how their microcontrollers arrange the allocation of blocks but do tell me if you find anything. from my experience they handle it just the same as a regular magnetic hdd in the sense that splitting files into several blocks becomes unavoidable.

I don't wanna read something too technical on a Saturday morning, so here's an article that seems good from Ars Technica if you like them:

arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/inside-the-ssd-revolution-how-solid-state-disks-really-work/

Not op.
You'll get a boost here and there. But many games have a retarded loading routine that is slow as fuck either way. It can however help with micro stutter.

no

how the fuck have i been on Sup Forums everyday for a year and never seen "nvmeme"

most obvious meme in the world

morons everywhere
read this

For very specific workloads, yes.

For desktop use, gaming, booting faster etc. the difference is not even perceptible.

I wish they sold small size ones, I'd like to use it as a swap disk or page file. Seems like only regular ssd's come in small size.

. is going for m.2 form factor worth it?
>yes, no cables, no mess
$12 extra for aesthetics is stupid.

>notebooks will be dropping sata for m.2 like crazy so you ssd will be usable in more devices in the future
Pretty much no modern notebooks use SATA other than large ones with HDD options. They are dropping both for soldered SSD.

> I ve seen my share of disks which got burned by fucky sata power cables/extensions/splitters.
So don't be a retard and you're fine.

was talking about funny name not technology

>$12 extra for aesthetics is stupid.
except the other factors

>Pretty much no modern notebooks use SATA other than large ones with HDD options. They are dropping both for soldered SSD.
absolute and utter bullshit, notebooks either still have sata drives or have m.2
maybe you are confusing ram with disk, but SSDs are rare to be soldered and will be too
m.2 will be with us for decades to come

>So don't be a retard and you're fine.
how do you solve it by not being retard, for example my first experience with this burning cables were when I ordered OEM seasonic for a friend to have reliable PC
but he had 3 hdds and dvd and oem seasonic while high quality had not many sata power cables to reach where he needed, so we used classsim molex to sata splitter and in 8 months it burned and fucked his dvd rom and psu because the whole bunch of cables run neirgby
there are not exacly branded seasonic molex to sata cables, to buy only quality...
so yeah, getting m.2 format directly in to mobo saves you potential destructive issues of molex>sata extension cables

all in all, if you dont have extra $12 you should just kill yourself and not buy an ssd

Can't wait to see if Optane will bring a noticeable real life upgrade to those who buy it.
Random reads are so much faster that you'd expect it to make a noticeable difference in normal daily use.
If doesn't, then nothing short of RAM will bring a speed increase when coming from a normal SATA SSD.

>m.2
>safer
I have only had a single drive fail on me through all my time with computers.
And that was a m.2 that failed after about 2 years.
Harddrives SSD's have survived 5-7 years for me and I usually switch them out because of the developments in the technology, not because the drives fail.
I don't have the need or the capital to setup a bunch of servers to get more data but I won't get another m.2 drive.

first, someone saying that they had m.2 drive for over a two years now seems bit strange, they were not very common in 2014/2015 and mobos that could use them also were not common.
notebooks had most spread msata at that time

anyway suspicious claims aside, the safety aspect was different regard than a drive failing on you or not.

its the sata connectors not breaking on you as you manipulate, trying to close small awkward cases that count on 90C angled cables, or sata extensions cables not burning cuz somehow chinese managed to fuckup even simple 4 cables wrapped in isolation and no one is exactly selling some reliable brand of molex>sata cables

>Harddrives SSD's have survived 5-7 years for me
at hame and at families/friends I must have used ~20 SSDs, at home currently I have 4 ssds in various PCs and notebooks. my first crucial m4...

I also professionally as a sysadmin deal with many PCs and installed hundreds of ssd

zero failed over the last 6 years, when I started to work there one ocz SSD just returned from RMA and I am not even sure what was that about, and that was it. Since I came we always ordered from crucials, kingstons, samsungs, intels that we used we had zero complains and zero RMA or changing.

thats just to point out that another claim there seems strange

>I won't get another m.2 drive
you will never ever use a notebook again? A thinkpad, dell latitude or xps?
you will always have those ugly cables in your case, using zip ties to deal with psu cables and sata cables?
you will not benefit by nvme sequenctian on some principle because you feel hurt that you got told or you plan to overpay for large pcie ones lol?

dumb nigger you will use m.2 drives, unless you get hit by a buss and never be building PC in the decade 2020-2030

>they were not very common in 2014/2015
Don't know what to tell you, my mobo supported it, so I got one as an additional drive.
>you will never ever use a notebook again? A thinkpad, dell latitude or xps?
Probably, but they change hardware all the time, can't see why I can't wait it out.
And if I can't wait it out, I probably will get one but I won't get one because it is an m.2

u can RAMDISK

...So you're saying NVMes should be defragmented?

Hehe, I'm still using a WD 160GB sata drive as boot/system drive. (Do they even make 160gb anymore?) Would moving up to a ssd improve my boot time, yeah, but I'm to busy living life and dealing with other shit to worry about such boring trivial thing such as "oh look my pc boots in 4 seconds" Most of the time I just leave it on and let it enter sleep mode anyway.

no unless they are old stock or refurbished

what happens to you when this 12 year old hdd dies one day?
got all the backups?

>I'm to busy living life and dealing with other shit
how poor you that you cant afford to move to contemporary technology?

Regular sata drives ain't going anywhere. Sure the bus speed may go up but the drives will always be there and will always work thanks to backwards compatibility. Which is why you can take a modern 10TB drive and plug it into a 2004 era sata 1 board and it'll work fine (long as you set a jumper on the drive limiting it's speed). Just like the whole 4k thing, seagate's built in tech makes the drive just work no matter if its plugged into a pc running Server 2003 sp1 or Windows server 2016. Long as the os supports gpt your golden, 4k sectors or not the drive will still work.

I ain't worried about data, it get's backed up once a day automatically.

still, it will fail tomorow or next month on in 6 months...
theres so much less hassle to buy and move on when everything works than dealing with this when it fails

and i am interested what technology a moron who is on an old hdd uses for daily backups, do describe what you use daily, I assume there must be deduplication or incremental...

Well ok since you asked:
Clients (3 primary) (5 total) all get backed up once a day automatically via Windows Home Server 2011. Can preempt this and run a backup anytime though if I wanted.
Backups are kept for least 1 year, thinks to how WHS does backups this doesn't use as much space as what you'd think it would.
All server data plus client backups are backed up to a nas + usb 3 external drive. This job is handled via Macrium Reflect. How often the job is ran depends on how much new data is dumped to the server each month. Most of the time I can run a server backup job in under 15 min (incremental) Server's data is stored on a 9TB Raid 5 array (1997-2017 data) and on a new 2TB Raid-1 array (2018+ data). The os and client backups are kept on a 1TB drive. Server + all network gear is connected to a ups. I check event logs and smart logs once a week and so far no red flags of any kind for almost a year (last year a 3TB drive kicked, but thinks to raid, it was all good)

What issues?

Well more like 400x but its amazing for caching.

>100x
>200x
>400x
Holy shit! How can you fall for this placebo in 2017? I though Sup Forums was for educated people that know how technology works.
Fucking idiots!

Optane is a special snowflake in the "SSD" market.

It's like a mid HP car with a fuckton of torque while the rest are higher HP cars with turbo lag tied to your alarm clock so the car is ready to make boost once you're awake, taken a shower, eaten breakfast and ready to go to work.

biostar x370 gt5. windows 7 on nvme. zero problems.

>biostar x370 gt5
Good for you, you're lucky.

>lucky
na, just smart.

No for the simple fact that it will only work in an m.2 slot, bubblegum stick drives are limiting their applications where a sat ssd can be used on just about any platform made in the last decade

Literally a fucking meme, not worth the price for 99.99% of users.
t. Samsung 960pro owner.

no, how would a defrag help in loading files faster i.e. how is it going to know in which order should the files be arranged so that they form a sequential array when the program/game needs to access them? plus, defrag can't fully eliminate the fragmentation of standalone files either. the only way to improve load times is to increase the minimum iops your storage can provide i.e. building arrays of drives.

The poor fucks on Sup Forums are constant sources of amusement.

I have picture related, and I gotta say it's fast as balls. I remember when i got my first solid state drive back when they were relatively new... and being blown away by how fast a single drive was... I've used nothing but solid states in my systems ever since (aside from NAS drives).

When I got my first NVMe drive, it was like the same thing all over again.

System boots up incredibly fast, adobe programs load almost instantly...

These twats saying the price isn't worth it and the performance isn't noticeable, are absolute fucking morons. Most likely they have a motherboard that has 'old' m.2 interface and they didn't drop the 15 bucks for a pcie card/adapter.

100% useless unless you're using a dedi to host more than 120 non-idling VPS. That's the only usage case for it over SSD.

absolute morons on /k/ as per usual

So now I paid a premium for the nvme drive, and a pcie to m.2 card. What if the platform can't boot pcie? Or is a laptop?

Fuckin mong.

who said anything about PORTABLES? Let's see you stick a 3.5 inch spinning disk in your fagbook pro.

>placebo: the post
Disk I/O bottlenecks are completely obliterated in a single user scenario with a simple, decent SSD. It's impossible to notice any difference no matter how bloated your Adobe softwares are. NVMe disks are a thing in the hosting industry for specific set ups where hundreds of users race for Disk I/O. The only think we need on a consumer perspective is to slowly get rid of SATA to favor the m.2 form (and speed) factor.

Unfortunately the price difference of the TB model is 100 € in my country
I bought the 960 EVO 500 and also own a TB 850 EVO, there isn't any difference, unless you move files on the 960s partitions
Otherwise the 850 will bottleneck heavily
I think these SSDs don't make much sense even SSD only builds, SATA SSDs are cheaper for mass storage options, NVMes are for professional video editors who move multiple Terabytes a day and have the money to buy multiple NVMe drives
Just another SSD denial retard, I still don't get the reason why you would deny this technology, its not expensive anymore
Still these take PCI lanes, normal users don't have that many lanes
I'm on 28 and thats above average when common consumer CPUs have 16-20 lanes

Its probably 1-2 seconds faster boot time
So 8 instead of the 10 seconds on my 850 PRO
I mainly future proofed my OS drive thats why I bought the 960

Can someone explain to me why we are flocking to a Mobo based PCIe solution when we haven't even reached the throughput limit for a SATA6 cable...

Shouldn't we be fixing SATA controllers onboard instead?

M.2 can use SATA or NVMe.
Notice that most Sata based SSDs tend to get around 550 MB/sec read speeds.
That's a little under the theoritical max of SATA 3 (6GB/sec / 8 = 750MB/sec)
Don't expect to ever get 750MB/sec due to small overhead.
Some NVME drives already exceed 3200MB/sec read speeds.

Wow you're an gaye lole

*6Gb/sec / 8 = 750MB

No.

i hardly notice a difference between that and regular SSDs meanwhile I was always running out of space and ended up getting a regular SSD for storage.

OP here, my 960 evo came today.

Really nice, no more hard drive crunching and waiting for thumbnails to load.

That read seems too high for a 960 evo

>no more waiting for thumbnails to load

Really? Now I'm interested in getting one.

>2500k can't boot from pcie drives without using iffy ghetto hacks
it's not fair lads, we still had time left

I'm using a 960 Pro with a 270 board right now. What do you boys want to know?

I had dual nvme's running RAID0. hella fast man.

ran this with background shit opened

>this dumbass didnt buy the ASRock extreme6

I own two, best z97 board ever made. RIP ur life

Don't know why my 4k read and write are shit

Because 4K reads and writes are the most difficult read and write operations for any solid state storage device except RAM, that's why.

There's no premium. AHCI drives cost way more (for those who need them because their older hardware doesn't support NVMe)

You mean diskram

definitely better than HDDs

I always hear about people having 5 second boot times.
I put an ssd in my z170 computer and the best I can get is damn near 20 seconds with an ssd that has near 500 read/write
I dont even see the bios screen until 12 seconds, so how the fuck are you all getting these times?

They use Fastboot or some other gimmick setting.

Higher-end motherboards take eons to POST. Pretty interesting phenomenon.

that option does nothing for me, I leave it on.

FUG.
whats the trade off, more stability?