• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

ADATA Launches SP910 2.5-Inch and SP900 M.2 SATA SSDs

Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
4,785 (2.17/day)
Likes
1,187
Location
Still on the East Side
#1
ADATA Technology, a leading manufacturer of high-performance DRAM modules and NAND Flash application products, today launches three new SATA 6 Gb/s SSDs - the Premier Pro SP900 M.2 2242 and 2282 for Ultrabooks and desktop PCs, and Premier Pro SP910, which is suitable for gamers and video editors. No matter the computer, users can find the best solution to upgrade and experience the optimized performance of an SSD.

Show full news post
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
467 (0.11/day)
Likes
122
System Name Elysium
Processor i7-4790k @ 4800MHz (re-lidded)
Motherboard Asus Z97-WS
Cooling Custom 3 radiator loop for CPU and GPUs, D5 pump
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB) GSkill @ 2400MHz
Video Card(s) 2 x R9 290x with full cover blocks
Storage Plextor P6E M.2 (OS/work). Samsung 950 Pro 512GB on NVMe card (Games etc.)
Display(s) BenQ BL3200
Case Xigmatek Elysium
Audio Device(s) On board, SBZ + HDMI to sound processor
Power Supply Corsair AX1500i
Mouse Mad Catz MOUS 9
Keyboard K95 RGB
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores #1 worldwide on 3D Mark 99 or 2000 or one of those, at one point back in the day. :)
#2
Why are they even bothering releasing these SATA SSDs in M.2 format? Surely anyone with M.2 on thir motherboard, even if it's "only" the 10Gbit version will want native PCIe ones and throughput more in the 750-950MB/s range? Otherwise you may as well get a standard 2.5" one.

The only use I see for these is in the mobile space and maybe they are dumping stock of the SATA-based controllers at lower price points before introducing the PCIe ones?

If that's the case they shouldn't be marketing it as "premier", "gaming", "pro", "the best choice" and trying to say it's fast though. ;)

More marketing FUD.
 
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
2,516 (0.85/day)
Likes
757
System Name Nightblade / Dell Latitude / Wife's Rig
Processor Core i5 4690K / i7 2720QM / FX-6100
Motherboard Nightblade ITX z97 / Dell 032T9K QM67 / Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3 Rev3
Cooling tower style cooler, plus one 120mm fan / stock blower / CNPS7000V
Memory Patriot Viper 2x8gb DDR3 2400 / Micron 2x4GB DDR3 / 2x4GB 2x2GB DDR3 1333
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming GTX 970 4GB / NVS 4200M 512MB / nVidia GTX 460 1GB
Storage 120GB ForceGT SSD (OS), 2TB WD Black, 250GB Seagate 2.5in / 320GB WD Blue /240GB SSD M500
Display(s) ASUS ROG SWIFT 1440P / Dell 14in @ 1600x900 / Vizio 1080p TV
Case MSI Nightblade Z97 / Dell Latitude / Corsair Full Tower
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Microsoft Lifechat 3000 / Intel / ALC887
Power Supply Gold rated 600W / Battery with 95w brick / Antec EA-650 Green
Mouse MadCatz RAT5
Keyboard G510
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 on all
#3
Why are they even bothering releasing these SATA SSDs in M.2 format? Surely anyone with M.2 on thir motherboard, even if it's "only" the 10Gbit version will want native PCIe ones and throughput more in the 750-950MB/s range? Otherwise you may as well get a standard 2.5" one.

The only use I see for these is in the mobile space and maybe they are dumping stock of the SATA-based controllers at lower price points before introducing the PCIe ones?

If that's the case they shouldn't be marketing it as "premier", "gaming", "pro", "the best choice" and trying to say it's fast though. ;)

More marketing FUD.
maybe because 750-950MB/s is still faster than 600MB/s?
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
467 (0.11/day)
Likes
122
System Name Elysium
Processor i7-4790k @ 4800MHz (re-lidded)
Motherboard Asus Z97-WS
Cooling Custom 3 radiator loop for CPU and GPUs, D5 pump
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB) GSkill @ 2400MHz
Video Card(s) 2 x R9 290x with full cover blocks
Storage Plextor P6E M.2 (OS/work). Samsung 950 Pro 512GB on NVMe card (Games etc.)
Display(s) BenQ BL3200
Case Xigmatek Elysium
Audio Device(s) On board, SBZ + HDMI to sound processor
Power Supply Corsair AX1500i
Mouse Mad Catz MOUS 9
Keyboard K95 RGB
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores #1 worldwide on 3D Mark 99 or 2000 or one of those, at one point back in the day. :)
#4
maybe because 750-950MB/s is still faster than 600MB/s?
Sorry, I don't get your point? These ones are only 550MB/s.

Which they suggest is "greatly enhanced".

It only is versus platter drives; we've had these speeds on SSDs literally for years and it's not the enhanced speed of even the slower version of the new format ...

Of course as it's a SATA 6GB/s controller it never can be faster. Very dubious marketing IMO.

BTW, I love your avatar.
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
10,404 (4.84/day)
Likes
5,483
Location
Concord, NH
System Name Kratos
Processor Intel Core i7 3930k @ 4.2Ghz
Motherboard ASUS P9X79 Deluxe
Cooling Zalman CPNS9900MAX 130mm
Memory G.Skill DDR3-2133, 16gb (4x4gb) @ 9-11-10-28-108-1T 1.65v
Video Card(s) MSI AMD Radeon R9 390 GAMING 8GB @ PCI-E 3.0
Storage 2x120Gb SATA3 Corsair Force GT Raid-0, 4x1Tb RAID-5, 1x500GB
Display(s) 1x LG 27UD69P (4k), 2x Dell S2340M (1080p)
Case Antec 1200
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek® ALC898 8-Channel High Definition Audio
Power Supply Seasonic 1000-watt 80 PLUS Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Rosewill RK-9100
Software Ubuntu 17.10
Benchmark Scores Benchmarks aren't everything.
#5
You know, with how fast SSDs already are and how I/O has been practically eliminated as a bottleneck with them, do you really think that more bandwidth is going to make machines go that much faster? Even with RAID, you don't notice the difference unless you're copying huge files, which isn't what SSDs are good at in the first place. Neither is it what you're going to typically be doing with an SSD unless you want to kill it.

Either way, I think the difference will really be small except on benchmarks. When it comes to responsiveness, it probably won't matter.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
467 (0.11/day)
Likes
122
System Name Elysium
Processor i7-4790k @ 4800MHz (re-lidded)
Motherboard Asus Z97-WS
Cooling Custom 3 radiator loop for CPU and GPUs, D5 pump
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB) GSkill @ 2400MHz
Video Card(s) 2 x R9 290x with full cover blocks
Storage Plextor P6E M.2 (OS/work). Samsung 950 Pro 512GB on NVMe card (Games etc.)
Display(s) BenQ BL3200
Case Xigmatek Elysium
Audio Device(s) On board, SBZ + HDMI to sound processor
Power Supply Corsair AX1500i
Mouse Mad Catz MOUS 9
Keyboard K95 RGB
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores #1 worldwide on 3D Mark 99 or 2000 or one of those, at one point back in the day. :)
#6
I'd agree regarding response time, but e.g. Game level load times could be improved a lot and better storage bandwidth should be part of that equation.

It still doesn't change the fact that this is being marketed as the fastest thing going, when in fact it's still using the older technology which was my point.
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
10,404 (4.84/day)
Likes
5,483
Location
Concord, NH
System Name Kratos
Processor Intel Core i7 3930k @ 4.2Ghz
Motherboard ASUS P9X79 Deluxe
Cooling Zalman CPNS9900MAX 130mm
Memory G.Skill DDR3-2133, 16gb (4x4gb) @ 9-11-10-28-108-1T 1.65v
Video Card(s) MSI AMD Radeon R9 390 GAMING 8GB @ PCI-E 3.0
Storage 2x120Gb SATA3 Corsair Force GT Raid-0, 4x1Tb RAID-5, 1x500GB
Display(s) 1x LG 27UD69P (4k), 2x Dell S2340M (1080p)
Case Antec 1200
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek® ALC898 8-Channel High Definition Audio
Power Supply Seasonic 1000-watt 80 PLUS Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Rosewill RK-9100
Software Ubuntu 17.10
Benchmark Scores Benchmarks aren't everything.
#7
I'd agree regarding response time, but e.g. Game level load times could be improved a lot and better storage bandwidth should be part of that equation.

It still doesn't change the fact that this is being marketed as the fastest thing going, when in fact it's still using the older technology which was my point.
That depends on how many resources need to be loaded, their sizes, and where they are on the drive in addition to how much of the time the machine is spending on actually doing I/O versus prepping said resources and the state of the application. The faster the storage becomes, the less of a bottleneck it is in the entire processes of getting a game ready to be played or an application ready to be used. So if it takes 8 seconds to load but it's only really spending 2 seconds of that time loading content from a regular SATA 6GB SSD, even if you double the I/O speed, you're only shaving 1 second off your loading time. Granted this is a highly speculative example where you could have the opposite case where the only thing that needs to be done is loading resources, in that case you shave it down from 8 to 4 seconds, but the point is, the faster you make any one process of the application, the more that the others become a bottleneck and gains from doubling any one step of that process become smaller.

Consider for a moment that storage I/O has been improving a lot faster than CPU speeds, so the more bandwidth we squeeze out of storage, the more time (as a percent of the total time spend doing something,) will be spent waiting on the CPU to get stuff done than time it takes to read data out of storage.

So take the 2 seconds of I/O during an 8 second load example, that's I/O taking 25% of the time to load. Once you half it, it's only 1/7th or ~14.3% of the time it takes so any improvement to I/O will be less substantive than prior gains because you're waiting on different things more than you are on I/O.

I think I/O largely became less of a bottleneck since the advent of SSDs in general and the fact that it has been improving faster than CPU speeds (relatively speaking,) which is causing it. That's just my rationale behind why I think that M.2 is kind of a waste of time (at the moment) but that's me. You can only improve memory and storage so much before you naturally make the CPU your bottleneck.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
467 (0.11/day)
Likes
122
System Name Elysium
Processor i7-4790k @ 4800MHz (re-lidded)
Motherboard Asus Z97-WS
Cooling Custom 3 radiator loop for CPU and GPUs, D5 pump
Memory 32GB (4 x 8GB) GSkill @ 2400MHz
Video Card(s) 2 x R9 290x with full cover blocks
Storage Plextor P6E M.2 (OS/work). Samsung 950 Pro 512GB on NVMe card (Games etc.)
Display(s) BenQ BL3200
Case Xigmatek Elysium
Audio Device(s) On board, SBZ + HDMI to sound processor
Power Supply Corsair AX1500i
Mouse Mad Catz MOUS 9
Keyboard K95 RGB
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores #1 worldwide on 3D Mark 99 or 2000 or one of those, at one point back in the day. :)
#8
Everything has the potential to be a bottleneck at some point. ;)

I did notice improved load times on many games when using 2 x SSDs in RAID0, so I still think storage speed is important for that and if the CPU is causing delay loading levels then the load method maybe needs to be revised, I'm pretty sure there is enough bandwidth to get the data over to the graphics cards fairly quickly versus SSD speeds.

Maybe CADAVECA or someone with access to a load of test hardware can do some game load time benchmarks comparing scaling on the storage side, CPU side and PCIe speed to the graphics cards. That might be a fun way to spend a weekend. ;)

Anyone have a Micron P420m kicking about? That should answer the question pretty decisively.
 
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
2,516 (0.85/day)
Likes
757
System Name Nightblade / Dell Latitude / Wife's Rig
Processor Core i5 4690K / i7 2720QM / FX-6100
Motherboard Nightblade ITX z97 / Dell 032T9K QM67 / Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3 Rev3
Cooling tower style cooler, plus one 120mm fan / stock blower / CNPS7000V
Memory Patriot Viper 2x8gb DDR3 2400 / Micron 2x4GB DDR3 / 2x4GB 2x2GB DDR3 1333
Video Card(s) MSI Gaming GTX 970 4GB / NVS 4200M 512MB / nVidia GTX 460 1GB
Storage 120GB ForceGT SSD (OS), 2TB WD Black, 250GB Seagate 2.5in / 320GB WD Blue /240GB SSD M500
Display(s) ASUS ROG SWIFT 1440P / Dell 14in @ 1600x900 / Vizio 1080p TV
Case MSI Nightblade Z97 / Dell Latitude / Corsair Full Tower
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150, Microsoft Lifechat 3000 / Intel / ALC887
Power Supply Gold rated 600W / Battery with 95w brick / Antec EA-650 Green
Mouse MadCatz RAT5
Keyboard G510
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 on all
#10
Sorry, I don't get your point? These ones are only 550MB/s.

Which they suggest is "greatly enhanced".

It only is versus platter drives; we've had these speeds on SSDs literally for years and it's not the enhanced speed of even the slower version of the new format ...

Of course as it's a SATA 6GB/s controller it never can be faster. Very dubious marketing IMO.

BTW, I love your avatar.
sorry my bad i misread the article... or its been edited? i dunno been in the hospital for a while. and thanks about the avatar.

oh wow... this thread is older than i thought... my bad lol (silly alerts)