• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Are SSDs effective when using SATA II ?

Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
1,804 (0.65/day)
Location
Bulgaria
System Name Sandfiller
Processor I3-7100
Motherboard Asus PRIME Z270-P
Cooling TT Gravity i1
Memory 2 x 8GB Cruicial 2400 mhz DDR4 CL17
Video Card(s) RX 580 4GB NITRO+
Storage Cruicial M.2 275GB drive + WD black 500 GB + WD Blue 640 GB
Display(s) 2560x1080 LG 29" + LG 22MP67VQ-P
Case TT URBAN R31
Audio Device(s) Creative Recon 3D
Power Supply Fractal Design IntegraM 650W
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Dell Somethin wireless
Software Windows 10 x 64 bits
I am always for SSD. My parents PC used to be 775 socket material. I put Sandisk SSD years ago and the system skyrocketed. Sata was 2 and still saw huuge improvement.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
3,768 (1.77/day)
Location
Kiev, Ukraine
System Name WS#1337
Processor Ryzen 5 1600X
Motherboard Gigabyte x470 AORUS Ultra Gamin
Cooling Xigmatek Scylla 240 AIO
Memory 2x8GB Team T-Force Vulkan DDR4-3000
Video Card(s) MSI RTX 2060 Super Armor OC
Storage Adata SX8200 256GB, Sandisk X400 512GB
Display(s) Samsung U24E590D (4K/UHD)
Case Chieftec AL-01B-OP
Audio Device(s) ALC1220
Power Supply SeaSonic SSR-550FX (80+ GOLD)
Mouse Logitech G503
Keyboard Zalman K500 modded (Gateron brown)
Software Windows 10, Ubuntu 18.04 LTS
Joined
May 8, 2016
Messages
842 (0.68/day)
System Name BOX
Processor Xeon E5-1680 v2 @ 4,3GHz
Motherboard Sabertooth X79 (BIOS 4801 + NVMe mod + uCode update)
Cooling Thermalright Venomous-X (w/LGA 2011 kit) + 2x Delta PWM Push-Pull
Memory 8x A-Data Xtreme 2000X 2GB (1868MHz CL8.9.8.24 CR2T @ 1,65V)
Video Card(s) ASUS GTX 1080 (FE)
Storage Samsung SM961 256GB NVMe, RAID0 2x WD10EZEX (1TB), HGST HUS726060ALE610 (6TB)
Display(s) Samsung T240
Case NZXT Tempest (Nanoflux/PWM fans only, some w/LEDs)
Audio Device(s) ASUS Essence ST Deluxe 7.1
Power Supply Seasonic X-760 (760W)
Mouse Roccat Savu
Keyboard Logitech UltraXPremium
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores https://www.passmark.com/baselines/V9/display.php?id=108080818886
Was on Sata2 with the same data in my Sandisk SSD that I have now on Sata3, so I know well about this difference. It exists but just noticeable in daily use. Benchmarks show that as 30-40% depending on the file size (the continuous read figures where there is the biggest difference ~80% aren't for casual users). You will be fine, no worries.
1) You are using outdated CrystalDiskMark 2.2
2) You are using 100MB file size, which pretty much fits inside SSDs cache.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2015
Messages
1,323 (0.77/day)
System Name Suffering from random access memory loss.
Processor Intel Core i7 980X @ 4.42 GHz (when becnching op to 4.77 GHz)
Motherboard ASUS P6X58D Premium
Cooling Noctua NH-D14 CPU cooler with 3 x noctua nf-f12 industrialppc-3000 pwm 120 MM fans
Memory 12 GB DDR3 CORSAIR 1600 MHz TIMMINGS 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti SC2 GAMING
Storage 2 x Samsung 950 PRO 256 GB M.2 NVME SSD, Crucial MX300 2 TB SSD, WD RED 4 TB + WD AV-GP 2 TB HDD.
Display(s) 24" SAMSUNG
Case ANTEC TWELVE HUNDRED
Audio Device(s) ONBOARD realtek sound card.
Power Supply THERMALTAKE TOUGHPOWER 1500 WATT
Mouse Logitech G903 Lightspeed Wireless Gaming Mouse
Keyboard LOGITECH G19s
Software WINDOWS 10 PRO 64 BITS
Benchmark Scores https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13514527 https://www.3dmark.com/spy/2333033
SSD can run just fine on sata 2. You just get a speed penalty off cause over sata 3. i have run like 6 sata SSD´s from Samsung and crucial on sata 2 and sata 3 on my old X58 system and none of them have ever failed. I have so far never had a SSD failing on me and i have run SSD since like 2011. I will say its more about that are the given sata SSD backward compatable with sata 2, if not you might get in trouble.

In short your max speed get limited to the half of sata 3 with sata 2. You will go from a max speed on sata 3 of 585 MB/s read/ride to sata 2 that is around 285 MB/s read/ride. But if you are coming from an HDD as OS drive to an SSD as OS drive. You will still get a huge difference in speed and how responsive your pc is.

Here are some test i dit with Samsung EVO 850 250 GB and Crucial MX300 275 GB on sata two. Its the result to the left, that is the SSD test. On the right side is just two WD velociraptor in raid 0 while i had those two.




This is on my newer laptop with an M.2 Sata SSD runs on sata 3 interface. Its a cheap SSD, so deffently not the fastes SSD out there, but it can give an idea of the speed loss from sata 3 to sata 2.


Here is my older Samsung 950 PRO NVMe M.2 SSD running on my X58, for those that might want a fast boot solution on an old pc. Its really nice with an NVMe SSD even throw this one is an older one nowm but still far better than any sata 3 SSD.
 

forman313

New Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2019
Messages
8 (0.03/day)
I did some tests a few years ago... SATA2 = SATA3 for all my workloads. The comparatively non existent access time is responsible for maybe 90% of the increased performance.
I actually lost performance when I tried a budget Marvel Sata3 controller. Intels onboard SATA2 beat it by a fair amount, with the exception of large file copy/seq. read/write ... which we dont need.
 
Joined
Jan 3, 2015
Messages
1,323 (0.77/day)
System Name Suffering from random access memory loss.
Processor Intel Core i7 980X @ 4.42 GHz (when becnching op to 4.77 GHz)
Motherboard ASUS P6X58D Premium
Cooling Noctua NH-D14 CPU cooler with 3 x noctua nf-f12 industrialppc-3000 pwm 120 MM fans
Memory 12 GB DDR3 CORSAIR 1600 MHz TIMMINGS 9-9-9-24
Video Card(s) EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti SC2 GAMING
Storage 2 x Samsung 950 PRO 256 GB M.2 NVME SSD, Crucial MX300 2 TB SSD, WD RED 4 TB + WD AV-GP 2 TB HDD.
Display(s) 24" SAMSUNG
Case ANTEC TWELVE HUNDRED
Audio Device(s) ONBOARD realtek sound card.
Power Supply THERMALTAKE TOUGHPOWER 1500 WATT
Mouse Logitech G903 Lightspeed Wireless Gaming Mouse
Keyboard LOGITECH G19s
Software WINDOWS 10 PRO 64 BITS
Benchmark Scores https://www.3dmark.com/fs/13514527 https://www.3dmark.com/spy/2333033
I did some tests a few years ago... SATA2 = SATA3 for all my workloads. The comparatively non existent access time is responsible for maybe 90% of the increased performance.
I actually lost performance when I tried a budget Marvel Sata3 controller. Intels onboard SATA2 beat it by a fair amount, with the exception of large file copy/seq. read/write ... which we dont need.
Yes i can agreed about the marvell controlled sata 3 as my motherboard have onboard. Those suck balls. Not reccomended for OS drive, pretty unstable for me and max read/ride speed is only around 400/250 MB/s read/ride.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2018
Messages
678 (1.52/day)
Location
Haswell, USA
System Name Matrexx 55 | Clevo P770ZM
Processor i7 8700K 5GHZ 1.35v | 4790K 4.6ghz 1.3V |
Motherboard Z390 Gaming X | Z97 Clevo |
Cooling Macho Rev B | Laptop heatsinks
Memory 64GB | 32GB 2400MHZ SODIMM
Video Card(s) Vega 56 | GTX 980M
Storage 512GB MX100 + 1.5TB Spinpoint HDD | 256GB MX300 + 1TB HDD|
Display(s) 1080P 144HZ/1200 66HZ (2)/ 1440P 60HZ | 1080P 75HZ 15.4 |
Case Matrexx 55 | Laptop shells
Audio Device(s) Various sound cards
Power Supply 750W | 330W |
Mouse too many
Keyboard K552 | Acer and Dell OEM KB's |
Software Windows 8.1/Windows 10/OSX "Mojave"
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
1,387 (0.45/day)
Location
Greece
Processor AMD FX-8350 4GHz@1.3V
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-970A UD3 Rev3.0
Cooling Zalman CNPS5X Performa
Memory 2*4GB Patriot Venom RED DDR3 1600MHz CL9
Video Card(s) XFX RX580 GTS 4GB
Storage Sandisk SSD 120GB, 2 Samsung F1 & F3 (1TB)
Display(s) LG IPS235
Case Zalman Neo Z9 Black
Audio Device(s) Via 7.1 onboard
Power Supply OCZ Z550
Mouse Zalman ZM-M401R
Keyboard Trust GXT280
Software Win 7 sp1 64bit
Benchmark Scores CB R15 64bit: single core 99p, multicore 647p WPrime 1.55 (8 cores): 9.0 secs
1) You are using outdated CrystalDiskMark 2.2
2) You are using 100MB file size, which pretty much fits inside SSDs cache.
Comparison is valid though as those tests are made on the same version of the program, using the same settings, on the same disk having almost identical data in it. And the results show difference depending on the workload. What you are trying to say?
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2014
Messages
208 (0.10/day)
System Name maipc
Processor 4790k @ 4Ghz / 1.05v
Motherboard Asus vii hero
Cooling Noctua NH-D14
Memory 16GB (2x8GB) Hyperx fury 1866 / CL10
Video Card(s) MSI GTX1060 Gaming X 6GB
Storage 1TB 860EVO + 1TB 860EVO + 4TB WD Red + 4TB WD Red
Display(s) Samsung 2243BW 22'' 1680x1050 @ 77Hz + BENQ 17" 1280x1024 @ 72 Hz
Case Cooler Master Centurion 6
Power Supply Seasonic SSP-450 RT (80+ Gold OEM PSU)
Mouse Razer DeathAdder 3.5G
Keyboard CM Storm Quickfire Rapid-i
Software Win 7 64bit
My main system is sata 3 and my backup is a sata 2. I'm using pretty much the same SSDs on both. My main is faster but it is a newer platform with a better CPU so that could be part of it. In my experience, using a SSD with sata 2 is definitely worth it. It's not as fast as a sata 3 but it's pretty close and much much faster than a mechanical drive.

My sata 2 system mainboard actually has sata 3 ports but I don't use them since the sata 2 has better small file write performance on this board. The sata 2 controller is inside the chipset and the sata 3 is on a separate chip. The chipset controller is probably higher quality.

My backup system is a P7P55D-E Deluxe with a X3440 by the way.
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
605 (0.66/day)
Location
Tanagra
Processor Intel i5-9600K
Motherboard ASRock H370M-ITX/ac
Cooling Gammax 300
Memory 16GB DDR4 3000
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse RX 570 4GB
Storage Inland 512GB NVMe
Display(s) LG 27UL500-W
Case Thermaltake Core V1
Audio Device(s) My ears
Power Supply EVGA 500W
Software Windows 10
One of the biggest benefits of SSDs is the near-instantaneous seek time. A spinning disk drive has heads that must move around to access different parts of the drive. An SSD can access the entire drive more quickly and equally. So yes, the faster r/w speeds are one benefit, but even on SATA II you will “feel” the difference thanks to the improved seek time more than anything else. Even an old SSD will breathe new life in a system over a spinning disk.

To give you an idea, my old 4,1 MacPro was SATA II, and I couldn’t tell the difference between that interface and a PCIe to SATA III expansion card with the exact same SSD that had a rated 500 r/w speed. Sure it showed in benches, but load and access times were not noticeably different.
 
Last edited:
Top