Does your computer support PCI-Express 5.0 SSDs?

[Selaya]

yeah well, there are few people indeed who can afford to pay like $2+/gb, that's like almost two orders of magnitude more expensive than nand

 

[An0maly_76]

Real-world tests have shown that even a Samsung 970 decreases load times by maybe 1/2-second over a WD Blue SN570. I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Give me a $2000 budget and the lion's share will go to GPU, CPU and RAM every time.

 

[LabRat 891]

Real-world tests have shown that even a Samsung 970 decreases load times by maybe 1/2-second over a WD Blue SN570. I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Give me a $2000 budget and the lion's share will go to GPU, CPU and RAM every time.

You as well as most gamers and most 'pedestrian' PC users see 0 value in storage advancements like PCIe5.0-NVMe or PCM / Optane, because those advancements (largely) are of 0 value to those demographics.
No offense meant, it's just the truth; one cannot see value in applications they have no concept of. -Speaking from experience

I'm merely an enthusiast w/ some exposure to server, industrial, and scientific/research comput(ers/ing)...
While 'faster storage' is largely being driven by 'Big Tech' currently, it is of immense value in the fields of AI/MI*, science, and even the SOHO user that serves archived media and hosts home automation locally, potenntially for more than one home.

*if interested, I highly recommend trying to find an archived version of "There's Nothing Wrong with Optane" written by an investment researcher.
PCM and 'emergent' memory technologies have companies like Intel and IBM figuratively salivating over AI/MI use of such. Think of it like James Cameron having scripts and ideas 'written up', but having to wait for CGI-effects tech to advance enough to implement (The Abyss, T2, etc.)

 

[Wasteland]

You as well as most gamers and most 'pedestrian' PC users see 0 value in storage advancements like PCIe5.0-NVMe or PCM / Optane, because those advancements (largely) are of 0 value to those demographics.
No offense meant, it's just the truth; one cannot see value in applications they have no concept of. -Speaking from experience

Right, but it isn't just that most users see zero value in these technological advancements. Each successive generation of SSDs trends towards a net negative. To echo Chrispy's post earlier, the only time I see any benefit at all from PCIe 4.0 sequential read/write speeds is when I'm cloning an SSD on my local machine--and when both SSDs are PCIe 4.0. This is not a common occurrence, to put it mildly.

Otherwise, large file transfers typically go from one machine to another, and any modern HDD can saturate my LAN's (Gigabit) bandwidth. HDDs are, in fact, still unbeatable for the sort of mass storage that most often invites large sequential transfers, in a consumer context. Random reads/writes are where SSDs earn their keep, and those specs really aren't improving much. We just get loads more heat, in return for an almost entirely academic benefit.

Oh, and as we see in the case of AM5, adding PCIe 5.0 lanes to motherboards isn't cost-free, either.

If pushing new SSD tech into the consumer space is necessary to spur advancements in enterprise storage, then fine, I guess, but I don't have to be happy about it. Personally I doubt the theory anyway; seems more like we're just on a meaningless marketing treadmill here.

 

[An0maly_76]

Right, but it isn't just that most users see zero value in these technological advancements. Each successive generation of SSDs trends towards a net negative. To echo Chrispy's post earlier, the only time I see any benefit at all from PCIe 4.0 sequential read/write speeds is when I'm cloning an SSD on my local machine--and when both SSDs are PCIe 4.0. This is not a common occurrence, to put it mildly.

Otherwise, large file transfers typically go from one machine to another, and any modern HDD can saturate my LAN's (Gigabit) bandwidth. HDDs are, in fact, still unbeatable for the sort of mass storage that most often invites large sequential transfers, in a consumer context. Random reads/writes are where SSDs earn their keep, and those specs really aren't improving much. We just get loads more heat, in return for an almost entirely academic benefit.

Oh, and as we see in the case of AM5, adding PCIe 5.0 lanes to motherboards isn't cost-free, either.

If pushing new SSD tech into the consumer space is necessary to spur advancements in enterprise storage, then fine, I guess, but I don't have to be happy about it. Personally I doubt the theory anyway; seems more like we're just on a meaningless marketing treadmill here.

Spot-on. I've said for years that Microshaft and the component manufacturers are in cahoots to mandate forced upgrades.

At some point, you have to start looking at the cost / benefit, and the benefits of PCIe4 / 5 and DDR5 really do not justify the cost. Until they are available in capacities comparable to mechanical storage while retaining their speed benefits at a reasonable cost, SSDs are doomed to be a limited market.

People laugh at my "dead platform" 5900X, even though it runs 4.975 on basic PBO settings (and I'm pretty sure I can push 5.2 if I want, I just don't think it's worth it). They're also quick to diss and dismiss when they ask for help with a build and I spec a 1TB M.2 with a 1-2 TB WD Black HDD. Just today, I was told, "We don't put HDDs in $2500 PCs..."

Actually, yes, you do, if you want 4-8TB of decently fast storage for under $200 or don't want to blow half your budget on storage. Probably the same kid that told me RGB was the most important part of a PC build (after I built a blacked-out 5900X / RTX3060ti with 32GB DDR4-3200, 1TB M.2 and 8TB HDD for under $2500 a year ago).

With the various issues, bloatware and spyware related to W11 (not to mention Microshaft's history of p*ssing me off by turning off what I turned on and turning on what I turned off through W10 updates), I plan to learn Ubuntu for the day I can no longer run W10. Microshaft has zero business sense when it comes to the consumer market, and the component manufacturers are equally clueless.

 

[Ruru]

PCIe 3.0 mobo (Crosshair VII Hero, X470)
PCIe 4.0 CPU (AMD R5 3600)
PCIe 4.0 GPU (AMD 6700 XT)
PCIe 4.0 SSD (Kingston NV2)

Because of mobo, everything runs @ 3.0

Got tired of the latency/audio problems of that X470 board so I swapped my old B550 board. So now everything runs @ 4.0.

 

[ADB1979]

I have a 2TB Gen 4 right now as my "Games Drive", which I only bought because it was an excellent deal at the time. Until Direct Storage comes out and has actual games that interest me I won't even consider an SSD upgrade, and even then I will read reviews to see if there is any real point. TBH I expect it will be a couple of years before the games that are being designed and built with DirectStorage from the outset arrive... Until then...

 

[Jeelo]

Mine doesnt even support 4.0..

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Right, but it isn't just that most users see zero value in these technological advancements. Each successive generation of SSDs trends towards a net negative. To echo Chrispy's post earlier, the only time I see any benefit at all from PCIe 4.0 sequential read/write speeds is when I'm cloning an SSD on my local machine--and when both SSDs are PCIe 4.0. This is not a common occurrence, to put it mildly.

Otherwise, large file transfers typically go from one machine to another, and any modern HDD can saturate my LAN's (Gigabit) bandwidth. HDDs are, in fact, still unbeatable for the sort of mass storage that most often invites large sequential transfers, in a consumer context. Random reads/writes are where SSDs earn their keep, and those specs really aren't improving much. We just get loads more heat, in return for an almost entirely academic benefit.

Oh, and as we see in the case of AM5, adding PCIe 5.0 lanes to motherboards isn't cost-free, either.

If pushing new SSD tech into the consumer space is necessary to spur advancements in enterprise storage, then fine, I guess, but I don't have to be happy about it. Personally I doubt the theory anyway; seems more like we're just on a meaningless marketing treadmill here.

I've complained about this before, and honestly I swear not putting thunderbolt or USB 4 ont hese boards is being done on purpose. Short of moving massive media files via a 40 Gbps interface to some giant NAS nobody is benefiting from NVMe speeds right now.

 

[cowcatwithahat]

I am still quite happy with my 970 Evo Plus on Gen 3.

 

[Konceptz]

yes, only because I just built the system.

 

[An0maly_76]

Got tired of the latency/audio problems of that X470 board so I swapped my old B550 board. So now everything runs @ 4.0.

Have you noticed any major performance increase with the AMD card? I've heard they're subject to performance loss at 3.0, at least for some of them. Storage, it doesn't seem to matter so much.

 

[Speedyblupi]

There's no NVMe SSD designed to use more than 4 lanes of PCIe...

there are also none NVME ssds that use the pci-e soket

Actually, they do exist, but they're ridiculously expensive and mostly designed for servers. The PM1735 is a PCIe 4.0 x8 Samsung SSD, for example

Have you noticed any major performance increase with the AMD card? I've heard they're subject to performance loss at 3.0, at least for some of them. Storage, it doesn't seem to matter so much.

It's only the ones with cut-down PCIe buses that have that problem, and it normally only matters when you run out of VRAM.

• The RX 6500 XT only has 4 PCIe lanes and 4GB VRAM, so is crippled by PCIe 3.0 to about the speed of a GTX 1650. In some extreme cases it runs slower than a GTX 1050.
• 8-lane 8GB GPUs like the RX 5500 XT 8GB and RX 6650 XT can lose about 1-5% of their performance on average when limited to PCIe 3.0. It's a measurable difference, but so small it doesn't matter to most people.
• The RX 6700 XT has 16 PCIe lanes, and 12GB VRAM is more than enough for it, so it doesn't run significantly slower when used in a PCIe 3.0 slot.

 

[Ruru]

Have you noticed any major performance increase with the AMD card? I've heard they're subject to performance loss at 3.0, at least for some of them. Storage, it doesn't seem to matter so much.

Nothing outside of margin of error. I guess that my R5 3600 is a bottleneck here.

 

[An0maly_76]

Nothing outside of margin of error. I guess that my R5 3600 is a bottleneck here.

Unfortunately, I suspect I either won the silicon lottery with a flaky IMC, or the first RAM kit I used weakened it. I've heard things about 3600Xs and 5900Xs being bad but functional. As long as I leave it running, it seems okay.

This system has been weird from day one. Mobo / GPU RGB has cycled on shutdown, refused to go dark until two or three reboots...

 

[jesdals]

since most older boards will be able to run the gen 5 drives ill gues even my old z170 board will support them - but not at gen 5 speed

 

[An0maly_76]

since most older boards will be able to run the gen 5 drives ill gues even my old z170 board will support them - but not at gen 5 speed

I wouldn't bet on that. Just because 4.0 and 5.0 are supposed to be backward compatible doesn't mean that the board will support a specific drive.

 

[Chry]

Voted 'Yes' because PCI-e standards are backwards compatible, thus my computer supports it.

 

[An0maly_76]

Voted 'Yes' because PCI-e standards are backwards compatible, thus my computer supports it.

MOST PCIe devices are backward compatible. That doesn't necessarily mean a PCIe4.0 device will run on PCIe2.0. Doesn't mean the board supports it either. I have seen boards that didn't like certain M.2s, as well as prebuilts with boards that only supported certain graphics cards.

 

[AusWolf]

Voted 'Yes' because PCI-e standards are backwards compatible, thus my computer supports it.

That is not the question here, though.

 

[LabRat 891]

since most older boards will be able to run the gen 5 drives ill gues even my old z170 board will support them - but not at gen 5 speed

I wouldn't bet on that. Just because 4.0 and 5.0 are supposed to be backward compatible doesn't mean that the board will support a specific drive.

Voted 'Yes' because PCI-e standards are backwards compatible, thus my computer supports it.

MOST PCIe devices are backward compatible. That doesn't necessarily mean a PCIe4.0 device will run on PCIe2.0. Doesn't mean the board supports it either. I have seen boards that didn't like certain M.2s, as well as prebuilts with boards that only supported certain graphics cards.

That is not the question here, though.

Does your computer support PCI-Express 5.0 SSDs?​

OP really should have added "...at Gen5 speeds".

"Standards" are my bitch*: I've got a Gen3 Optane m.2 in a mid-2000s Dual-Opty K8N-DL's PCIe 1.0 x1 slot, and a Steam Deck with a WD 2230 m.2 gen4 SSD...

Gotta agree with Jesdals and Chry, here. There's extremely good chance that even a modded early Rpi w/ the pcie lane exposed, will 'support' Gen5 SSDs.


Also, I have a suspicion that Gen5 drives will be amongst the first SSDs to *actually* saturate the Gen4 x4 lanes.
Conversely, I could see SSD manufacturers 'encouraged' to 'gimp' backwards-compatible performance. Why? If I'm right, it'd make clear (to 'normal' consumers thru content-creators) that there's no near-term benefit to 'shelling out' for Gen5 support. -which, already seems to be a popular sentiment.
'Platform' manufactures 'working to gimp new products' in order to minimize cannibalization of their new offerings by the (also compatible) old, has happened before. (I'm reminded of pretty much the entire PII-PIII era from Intel.)



*

 

[An0maly_76]

Also, I have a suspicion that Gen5 drives will be amongst the first SSDs to *actually* saturate the Gen4 x4 lanes.
Conversely, I could see SSD manufacturers 'encouraged' to 'gimp' backwards-compatible performance. Why? If I'm right, it'd make clear (to 'normal' consumers thru content-creators) that there's no near-term benefit to 'shelling out' for Gen5 support. -which, already seems to be a popular sentiment.
'Platform' manufactures 'working to gimp new products' in order to minimize cannibalization of their new offerings by the (also compatible) old, has happened before. (I'm reminded of pretty much the entire PII-PIII era from Intel.)

Quite so. It's all about perspective and use case. But I agree, for most people it's a waste of money.

 

[chrcoluk]

MOST PCIe devices are backward compatible. That doesn't necessarily mean a PCIe4.0 device will run on PCIe2.0. Doesn't mean the board supports it either. I have seen boards that didn't like certain M.2s, as well as prebuilts with boards that only supported certain graphics cards.

This could apply to any board then, including ones with matching PCIE spec, the breakage you describe wouldnt be down to a lower speed PCIE, as by design they are backwards compatible. Probably bios related.

I've complained about this before, and honestly I swear not putting thunderbolt or USB 4 ont hese boards is being done on purpose. Short of moving massive media files via a 40 Gbps interface to some giant NAS nobody is benefiting from NVMe speeds right now.

Indeed, the amount of times i move data between drives is very low, usually only when I am swapping drives in/out the system. Backups of course do this but they are usually bottlenecked by the software or cpu rather than the storage device (compression).

Now its always been a thing to dump new tech on people they dont need, so they can advertise new features and have an excuse to make people upgrade, but having been using PCs since 26 years ago, I think thi sis the first time in all of that time I have become so concerned about whats going on, the cost of implementing higher spec PCIE is huge and its effectively now a large motherboard tax. With the entire review industry seeing nothing wrong with it.

I would like to see all chipsets be DDR4/5 compatible, and PCIE5 limited to only a subset of boards.

 

[Mussels]

I just realised all of our PC's are Gen 5.0 PCI-E SSD ready


Just not at PCI-E 5.0 speeds
(The power of backwards compatibility and PCI-E cards/USB enclosures)

Misleading poll! Bring out the pedantic pitchforks!

 

[LabRat 891]

I just realised all of our PC's are Gen 5.0 PCI-E SSD ready


Just not at PCI-E 5.0 speeds
(The power of backwards compatibility and PCI-E cards/USB enclosures)

Misleading poll! Bring out the pedantic pitchforks!

F̫o̖̺r̨̟̻̼͉̞̲g͖͜ḭve ̕m̥̞̠̻͝ͅe ̦̥̩̪͙͍f̛̞̰̭̝̣̠̰o҉͔̥̱r ҉t̻͚̀h̹e͇̬̱̣͚͈ ̺̬̫̭s̜̤͓̩̰ịͅṇ̛̬̮͉̥̪ ̵̳̰o̻̣̜̦̖̤̻f ̹͓̠͔͉͖̱h̫̰̻͓̲̭̖a҉̹̫s̡̰̫h̲͔ţ͍̜a̢̮̪̞͙g̘̭͍͉̱̮

#Brought