So where are all the NVMe SSDs?

[EarthDog]

To each their own...

 

[GreiverBlade]

Im assuming you are responding to me a dozen posts above Greiver? (you should quote who you are talking to, LOL!).

Aye, sorry about that

i was in a hurry

 

[FordGT90Concept]

U.2 is so, so rare. I don't think there's a single X99 motherboard with it. The only way to get M.2 is via U.2 adapter.

Reason why I care is because the client wants another NVMe machine.


I think I'm going to recommend the client waits for Broadwell-EX.

 

[EarthDog]

You mean get u.2 via m.2 adapter...

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Yeah, that.

 

[Ferrum Master]

Ah did a test for the lulz, as new nvidia driver came out...

Comparing my drives... see specs... I didn't expect to see a difference in such a short benchmark actually.

 

[Octopuss]

What exactly does each of the pictures represent?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Judging by System Specs:
Samsung 950Pro 256GB M.2 NVMe SSD
Crucial M550 256GB SATA SSD
Seagate SV35 2TB SATA Surveillance 7200 RPM HDD

NVMe M.2 is 13% faster than SATA.

 

[Ferrum Master]

NVMe M.2 is 13% faster than SATA.

Yeah at least some numbers, and that's the gain we get using daily workloads, do you feel the latency difference, is up to you, we have to consider that the nvme also resides with OS, but it shouldn't change the results much, and M550 is a hell of a good SATA SSD too. But we can definitely assure gaming from HDD really sucks ballz .

 

[FordGT90Concept]

13% is pretty significant especially when you consider the technology of the SSD itself should be similar. Granted, it's not the same and maybe 90% of that difference is from the chips themselves and not the NVMe interface. At the same time, why would Intel bother if it were insignificant?

And remember, it's just loading. Note the FPS--pretty much a flat line (0.16% between high and low). HDD/SDD only matters to people who despise looking at loading screens.

 

[Ferrum Master]

Note the FPS--pretty much a flat line (0.16% between high and low). HDD/SDD only matters to people who despise looking at loading screens.

Yes that's why I like this benchmark, it produces very stable results... I and loading screens are evil it causes beer loss this benchmark killed one weissbeer. But seriously an example like Witcher 2, it has actually loading screens in between regions in the same map... using SSD's they are not present actually. I bet MMO's also greatly benefit from this fact, but I don't play them.

13% yes, it is a lot actually... this only one type of benchmark... I din't expect to differ even for a second... the difference is enough for me to never look back to SSD as main OS drive. For storage, that's another story... I need to get rid of my SV35 soon... just because it is way too noisy.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I've always steered clear of the SV line. Barracuda and Constellation are more my type.

I think 13% still sounds excessive. I wouldn't expect any more than 5% boost from NVMe, everything else being equal.

 

[Ferrum Master]

I've always steered clear of the SV line.

Got it as a RMA replacement... didn't have much choice then... Well keep in mind this is X79 and it's older SATA3. Well those are the real numbers... pretty much straightforward test tbh. If you have any other non synthetic test suggestion, please go on, later in the evening might try them if I wont crash directly into bed...

 

[FordGT90Concept]

That's ridiculous. When I RMA'd a broken 320 GB Constellation, they sent me back a 500 GB Constellation. You'd think they'd only send out SVs to replace SVs.

The problem is that the MLCs are likely not identical between that Crucial and the Samsung and that's a huge variable. One would have to find the same chips that appear on NVMe and AHCI with the same claimed preformance then benchmark them both to compare the two. Preferrably, both would be M.2. There might already be a review out there that does exactly that.

Edit: Here we go: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9396/samsung-sm951-nvme-256gb-pcie-ssd-review

Paging through that, NVMe seems to have a pretty strong lead even when it should technically be at a disadvantage because it has fewer NAND chips.

Edit: Their results mirror yours:

Typically the NVMe version offers about 10-20% improvement in average latency over the AHCI version, which is a healthy boost in performance given that the two utilize identical hardware.

 

[Vayra86]

I think it is really simple. Price, and expected gains.

The actual real world gains are minimal at best. Once you saturate SATA 600 for the vast majority of users there is nothing, like literally nothing, to be gained from NVME or any other storage solution/interface. It doesn't add jack shit. Numbers don't mean anything when they actual performance gain cannot be 'felt' in real world use. Nobody cares about benchmarks, everybody cares about responsive system. Once it is responsive, it is fine. This is also why the super fast mechanical HDD's don't sell in large numbers and have always remained a niche market.

For 95% of all consumers/PC users storage is about capacity, and then about price, and after that, they consider speed. The SSD only got mass adoption when it came down in price signficantly.

If you ask me, these 95% of consumers got it right with regards to storage needs, and that's one of the rare cases where the majority is being smart about it.

 

[Ferrum Master]

be at a disadvantage because it has fewer NAND chips.

Nada... NAND type also matters... my M550 MLC has 16 chips two layers per chip... so 32 layers... The 950pro 3D stacked NAND has two chips with 32 layers so 64 layers... so technically the Samsung MEX can dump much more data in single cycle due to 3D NAND write/read mechanisms... the better algorithm will be the next magic... no wonder the existing ones struggle and are kind of hot... they actually do a lot of job.

PS.

I had end of 3rd year... got it instead of Barracuda 11... pretty much I was also WTF... but oh well... it would cost me more time to quarrel with them.

 

[Octopuss]

Once you saturate SATA 600 for the vast majority of users there is nothing, like literally nothing, to be gained from NVME or any other storage solution/interface. It doesn't add jack shit. Numbers don't mean anything when they actual performance gain cannot be 'felt' in real world use.

You seem like you have a LOT of real world experience with NVMe drives to back those claims up.

 

[Vayra86]

You seem like you have a LOT of real world experience with NVMe drives to back those claims up.

No, but I do know that SSD's are more than fast enough for whatever I want to do, and I do use PC's quite a lot. The thread was about why they don't appear, I think this is part of the cause...

 

[nomdeplume]

The lack of higher end large capacity M.2 PCIe NVMe drives could be due to a security flaw or infrastructure weakness industrial servers have exposed. Realistically almost no consumer level user would see days out of a week saved by having a 10TB M.2 drive anyways. BIOS support in legacy machines is the real story here anyways.

New Z170/Q170 mb's still only have 20 PCIe lanes max to carve up. Is there even any video cards using NVMe SSD's?

 

[R-T-B]

No, but I do know that SSD's are more than fast enough for whatever I want to do, and I do use PC's quite a lot. The thread was about why they don't appear, I think this is part of the cause...

Speaking as someone who actually went from 850 Pro (SATA3) to a NVMe 950 Pro, you do feel a difference. It's just very small, but it's there.

 

[EarthDog]

Speaking as someone who actually went from 850 Pro (SATA3) to a NVMe 950 Pro, you do feel a difference. It's just very small, but it's there.

Oh its absolutely there... agreed. I had a Vector 180 and went to a 950 Pro. Boot times are 15s to active desktop (from around 20s) with the same Windows image. Game level loads are a bit faster as well. If those increases are 'worth it' is up to the person contemplating the purchase.

The lack of higher end large capacity M.2 PCIe NVMe drives could be due to a security flaw or infrastructure weakness industrial servers have exposed. Realistically almost no consumer level user would see days out of a week saved by having a 10TB M.2 drive anyways. BIOS support in legacy machines is the real story here anyways.

New Z170/Q170 mb's still only have 20 PCIe lanes max to carve up. Is there even any video cards using NVMe SSD's?

What are you going on about here? Security flaws? Where was this exposed? Do you have a link to this information? Who is talking about 10TB M.2 drives?

Also, what are you asking here about video cards using NVMe SSDs? For what?

 

[R-T-B]

Also, what are you asking here about video cards using NVMe SSDs? For what?

I think he's trying (incomprehensibly) to say something about the PCIe lanes. But you don't USE the CPU pcie lanes on z170/Q170 for the SSD, you'd use the chipset... so no idea...

 

[EarthDog]

Woooooooooooooow... way to read between the lines on that one RTB!

 

[R-T-B]

Woooooooooooooow... way to read between the lines on that one RTB!

I'm good at it.

(Or it's possibly a spambot... but you can't win them all.)

 

[Octopuss]

I'm good at it.

(Or it's possibly a spambot... but you can't win them all.)

Nope, no viagra or cheap Rolex watches advertisement.