The practical tests don't show much of an improvement. Boot time is a second or two max faster which is, really, nothing. File transfer is a tricky test because you'd need to move files from a nVMe to another nVMe to see the real speed but quite frankly how many would have two nVMe and how often...
Well, we are on a tech site. Bechmarking and showing off is a part of the charm of being here. I am sure you know that.
Having said that though, some are a little too devoted to just benchmarking. Not pointing fingers at'em though. I mean, it's each to their own. I like being practical. That's all.
Honestly, I don't know. But I had been looking at a lot of motherboards for a NAS build. I do recall holding off M.2 as boot drive for it because it was taking away 2 ports for M.2. That was a while ago and it was 1xx chipset era. I needed 6 SATA ports (including the boot drive). M.2 taking away...
If I recall correctly, Intel 1xx chipset used to take 2 SATA ports per M.2. 2xx chipset seems to take only one port per M.2. So, it's an improvement.
But I honestly cannot tell any difference between nVMe and sAtA M.2. Benchmark shows. Reality doesn't.
Read reviews. Don't watch those. When reading you can tell easier whether a reviewer is full of crap or not. It's harder to tell in videos.
Read a fair amount of reviews, and make an informed decision.
2630Lv4, 10c/20t, 55wTDP, 1.8ghz
You can find ES version for dirt cheap.
2630Lv3 is a lot cheaper (on E*ay).
The only exception is X99. X99 will accept most Xeons. X99 mobo is pretty cheap nowadays.
1xx, 2xx won't accept any xeons.
ECC RAM is largely depended on CPU rather than board. If a CPU can take ECC, X99 mobo will take ECC.
Low power computing is a funny business.
@The Data Master , while the T version CPUs are certainly a choice. I've looked at Xeon ES ships, mainly 2630L version. V3 has 8c/16t. V4 has 10c/20t at 1.6ghz and 1.7ghz respectively. Their TDP is 70w and 55w also respectively.
Those chips are also a...