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

Should SATA get updated specs? Example SATA 4.0 @ 36Gbps, 48Gbps or 64Gbps.

Should SATA get updated specs?

  • SATA 4.0 @ 36Gbps.

    Votes: 14 14.4%
  • SATA 4.0 @ 48Gbps.

    Votes: 4 4.1%
  • SATA 4.0 @ 64Gbps.

    Votes: 3 3.1%
  • SATA 4.0 @ 72+Gbps.

    Votes: 8 8.2%
  • I like NVMe but also want an updated SATA spec.

    Votes: 37 38.1%
  • No, I'm happy with NVMe.

    Votes: 36 37.1%
  • Other(Please discuss below).

    Votes: 9 9.3%

  • Total voters
    97
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
19,447 (5.93/day)
Location
USA
The discussion came up in another thread and it seemed like it might be interesting to find out what everyone thinks about the subject.
Would you like an updated spec for the standard SATA connector?
Are you happy with the way things are?
Are you inbetween somewhere?

Place your vote and discuss below. Remember, forum rules apply. Let keep things friendly and civil!
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2019
Messages
2,620 (2.08/day)
Location
Midlands, UK
System Name Nebulon-B Mk. 3
Processor Intel Core i7-11700 @ ASUS Optimized (200 W)
Motherboard ASUS TUF B560M-Plus (WiFi)
Cooling be quiet! Silent Loop 2 280 mm
Memory 2x 16 GB Kinston Fury Beast RGB 3200 MHz
Video Card(s) ASUS TUF Radeon RX 6500 XT @ 2975/2400
Storage 1 TB Crucial P5, 1 TB Crucial P5 Plus
Display(s) Samsung C24F390, 7" Waveshare touchscreen
Case Corsair Crystal 280X black
Audio Device(s) Genius SP-HF160, AKG Y50
Power Supply Seasonic Prime GX-750
Mouse Cherry MW 8 Advanced
Keyboard MagicForce 68
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Cinebench R23 multi core: 13,500, single core: 1,500. Superposition 1080p Extreme: 2,920.
I've recently swapped all the drives to nvme in my main PC. Not because of the speed, but for better cable management and easier servicing / less clutter.

As for secondary rigs and HTPCs, the SATA 6 Gbps spec is plenty enough.
 

eidairaman1

The Exiled Airman
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
36,447 (6.66/day)
Location
Republic of Texas (True Patriot)
System Name PCGOD
Processor AMD FX 8350@ 5.0GHz
Motherboard Asus TUF 990FX Sabertooth R2 2901 Bios
Cooling Scythe Ashura, 2×BitFenix 230mm Spectre Pro LED (Blue,Green), 2x BitFenix 140mm Spectre Pro LED
Memory 16 GB Gskill Ripjaws X 2133 (2400 OC, 10-10-12-20-20, 1T, 1.65V)
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon 290 Sapphire Vapor-X
Storage Samsung 840 Pro 256GB, WD Velociraptor 1TB
Display(s) NEC Multisync LCD 1700V (Display Port Adapter)
Case AeroCool Xpredator Evil Blue Edition
Audio Device(s) Creative Labs Sound Blaster ZxR
Power Supply Seasonic 1250 XM2 Series (XP3)
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD
Keyboard Roccat Ryos MK Pro
Software Windows 7 Pro 64
The discussion came up in another thread and it seemed like it might be interesting to find out what everyone thinks about the subject.
Would you like an updated spec for the standard SATA connector?
Are you happy with the way things are?
Are you inbetween somewhere?

Place your vote and discuss below. Remember, forum rules apply. Let keep things friendly and civil!
SATA is a good standard thats been around Circa 2002/2003, it should have its bandwidth increased or the standard merged into SAS.

Temperature and stealing of pcie slots by m.2 is reason enough to keep SATA.

5800 rig is zippy with 11 on a 250GB MX500 SATA.
 

johnspack

Here For Good!
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
5,758 (1.07/day)
Location
Nelson B.C. Canada
System Name Blacknet
Processor Xeon 1680 v2
Motherboard Asus P9X79 Deluxe
Cooling Noctua D14
Memory 32 GBs
Video Card(s) GTX 980Ti
Storage 4x SSDs = 1.750TB 2xStorage Drives=8TB
Display(s) 2x 1080
Case Antec 1200
Audio Device(s) Asus Xonar U7 MKII
Power Supply EVGA 750 Watt
Mouse Logitech G900 Chaos Spectrum
Keyboard Ducky
Software Kubuntu 22.04
Benchmark Scores It's linux baby!
Well, I guess it's how many nvme drives can I plug into a motherboard? I have 4 sata ssds, used to have 5. Would like more. If they would give more pci-e lanes
on modern motherboards and give you 4-6 nvme slots, it would be a no brainer. Otherwise... sata ssds are going to be around for awhile.
 
Joined
Mar 1, 2022
Messages
22 (0.19/day)
Location
Bavaria, Germany
I think a update to SATA 4.0 @ 36 Gbps will be good enough.
I have 4 SATA SSD but no Nvme and it is OK for me.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
6,485 (3.45/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
I see no reason for an updated SATA standard. The current spec is plenty for HDDs, and NVMe handles anything else. m.2 is vastly more practical, and there's u.2 if you need off-board mounting - which is easily adapted from any m.2 slot or PCIe slot. The lack of extra controllers is a boon for efficiency and makes for simpler chipsets and motherboards, and the inherent flexibility and scalability of PCIe is great. Thr only drawback is the increased need for PCIe controllers, but faster SATA would require that as well.
 
Joined
Aug 20, 2007
Messages
17,847 (3.29/day)
System Name Pioneer
Processor Ryzen R9 5950X
Motherboard GIGABYTE X570 Aorus Elite
Cooling Noctua NH-D15 + A whole lotta Sunon and Corsair Maglev blower fans...
Memory Crucial Ballistix 64GB (4 x 16GB) @ DDR4-3600 (Micron E-Die, dual rank sticks)
Video Card(s) EVGA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti FTW3
Storage 2x Crucial P5 Plus 2TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe SSDs
Display(s) 55" LG 55" B9 OLED 4K Display
Case Thermaltake Core X31
Audio Device(s) TOSLINK->Schiit Modi MB->Asgard 2 DAC Amp->AKG Pro K712 Headphones or HDMI->B9 OLED
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova T2 Titanium 850W
Mouse Razer Deathadder v2
Keyboard WASD CODE Mechanical KB w/ Cherry MX Green switches
Software Windows 11 Enterprise (yes, it's legit)
I wouldn't mind a new pcie over sata connector standard ala sata express, but sata simply has overheads and latencies that have no place in the high speed ssd market.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
11,432 (1.78/day)
Location
Formosa
System Name Overlord Mk MXVI
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro
Memory 32GB Viper Steel 3600 DDR4 @ 3800MHz 16-19-16-19-36
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8G
Storage 1TB WD Black NVMe (2018), 2TB Viper VPN100, 1TB WD Blue 3D NAND
Display(s) Asus PG27AQ
Case Corsair Carbide 275Q
Audio Device(s) Corsair Virtuoso SE
Power Supply Corsair RM750
Mouse Logitech G502 Lightspeed
Keyboard Wooting Two
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/33u9si
The discussion came up in another thread and it seemed like it might be interesting to find out what everyone thinks about the subject.
Would you like an updated spec for the standard SATA connector?
Are you happy with the way things are?
Are you inbetween somewhere?

Place your vote and discuss below. Remember, forum rules apply. Let keep things friendly and civil!
You know, it was already done with SATA Express which was the biggest failure in terms of connectivity standards ever. Pretty much every single motherboard had the connectors, cables were provided, but afaik not a single retail drive was ever made.

Then we got U.2, where is that in the consumer space? Seems popular in the server space though.

I don't see why we need yet another standard, when we've already have had two that didn't end up replacing SATA, where at least the first one was 100% backwards compatible.

The idea is to keep the connector the same and backward compatibility intact.
SAS tried that, they ended up topping out at 12 Gbps, with the next version getting a different connector.
That tells you that going beyond 12 Gbps on the same connector isn't possible.
SAS is pretty much PCIe/NVMe based now and shares a lot with U.2.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
19,447 (5.93/day)
Location
USA
You know, it was already done with SATA Express which was the biggest failure in terms of connectivity standards ever.
Right, because it wasn't compatible with the existing standard and connector.
SAS tried that, they ended up topping out at 12 Gbps, with the next version getting a different connector.
That tells you that going beyond 12 Gbps on the same connector isn't possible.
No, it just means the research wasn't done. If 40Gbps can be done over USB through that connector and cabling, 36Gbps can be done over SATA with the same or enhanced connector that is still compatible.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
6,485 (3.45/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
If they could make a PCIe x1 link work over something resembling a regular SATA cable that could be interesting, but anyone who has touched PCIe 4.0 risers knows transmitting those kinds of speeds over a cable is... tricky at best, requiring high quality cabling with very good shielding etc - which is expensive. So either you need expensive, semi-exotic cabling or this tops out at a single lane of PCIe 3.0 (~900MB/s theoretical, ~800 real world?), which isn't much of an improvement over regular SATA. And if you're going PCIe anyhow, why not make it NVMe while you're at it?

This is why m.2 has taken over: motherboard mounting is far simpler, requires no fussy or expensive cables, and SATA is there as a fallback for slower storage if needed. There's no need for controllers, just more CPU/chipset lanes, which faster SATA would need as well. And the vast majority of people don't need that, crucially. m.2 absolutely has its drawbacks, and certainly isn't ideal for those wanting massive capacities (consumer platforms don't have the lanes, after all), but there doesn't seem to be a market for some in-between solution.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
6,485 (3.45/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
Right, because it wasn't compatible with the existing standard and connector.

No, it just means the research wasn't done. If 40Gbps can be done over USB through that connector and cabling, 36Gbps can be done over SATA with the same or enhanced connector that is still compatible.
SATA has 7 pins. USB-C has 24, of which 8 are high speed data pairs, plus more for power, ground, USB 2, etc. Could you double the SATA connector pin count while staying compatible? Probably - USB 3.0 did that. But it would be expensive and complex. And, most importantly, it would require more expensive, thicker cabling, all for a standard that still wouldn't be a match for NVMe. And u.2 already exists for that in 2.5/3.5" form factors.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
11,432 (1.78/day)
Location
Formosa
System Name Overlord Mk MXVI
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro
Memory 32GB Viper Steel 3600 DDR4 @ 3800MHz 16-19-16-19-36
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8G
Storage 1TB WD Black NVMe (2018), 2TB Viper VPN100, 1TB WD Blue 3D NAND
Display(s) Asus PG27AQ
Case Corsair Carbide 275Q
Audio Device(s) Corsair Virtuoso SE
Power Supply Corsair RM750
Mouse Logitech G502 Lightspeed
Keyboard Wooting Two
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/33u9si
Right, because it wasn't compatible with the existing standard and connector.
But that's exactly what it was. You could do two times SATA or one times SATA Express.
No, it just means the research wasn't done. If 40Gbps can be done over USB through that connector and cabling, 36Gbps can be done over SATA with the same or enhanced connector that is still compatible.
Ok, sorry, but now you're just talking smack. SATA and USB 4 uses very different cables and VERY different signalling.
First of all, SATA only has one pair of data pins for either transmitting or receiving data, whereas USB 4 has four pairs.
SATA has nine ground pins, due to much higher EMI inside a chassis than outside, where USB 4 can make do with four.
However, most importantly, USB uses 128b/132b encoding and has done so since USB 3.1 (10 Gbps), where SATA is limited to 8b/10b encoding like USB 3.0.
This encoding should be possible to improve upon, but you're not going to be able to reach speeds above 12 Gbps still, since you simply don't have enough data lines in a SATA cable.
This is why SAS moved on to a different cable/connector.
So I'm pretty certain enough research has been done. Just because you're not happy with the fact that it doesn't work the way you want it to work, doesn't mean people haven't tried.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2020
Messages
474 (0.80/day)
System Name Dusty
Processor 5900x
Motherboard MSI B550 Tomahawk
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory Corsair Vengence LPX 32GB
Video Card(s) MSI RTX 3070 Gaming X
Storage yes
Case Fractal Design Define R6
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA 750w
VR HMD Oculus CV1
Right, because it wasn't compatible with the existing standard and connector.
It was, though.
If they could make a PCIe x1 link work over something resembling a regular SATA cable that could be interesting, but anyone who has touched PCIe 4.0 risers knows transmitting those kinds of speeds over a cable is... tricky at best, requiring high quality cabling with very good shielding etc - which is expensive. So either you need expensive, semi-exotic cabling or this tops out at a single lane of PCIe 3.0 (~900MB/s theoretical, ~800 real world?), which isn't much of an improvement over regular SATA. And if you're going PCIe anyhow, why not make it NVMe while you're at it?
You mean like SATA Express?
"SATA Express interface supports both PCI Express and SATA storage devices by exposing two PCI Express 2.0 or 3.0 lanes and two SATA 3.0 (6 Gbit/s) ports through the same host-side SATA Express connector (but not both at the same time). Exposed PCI Express lanes provide a pure PCI Express connection between the host and storage device, with no additional layers of bus abstraction."

Edit: I was too slow!
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
11,432 (1.78/day)
Location
Formosa
System Name Overlord Mk MXVI
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro
Memory 32GB Viper Steel 3600 DDR4 @ 3800MHz 16-19-16-19-36
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8G
Storage 1TB WD Black NVMe (2018), 2TB Viper VPN100, 1TB WD Blue 3D NAND
Display(s) Asus PG27AQ
Case Corsair Carbide 275Q
Audio Device(s) Corsair Virtuoso SE
Power Supply Corsair RM750
Mouse Logitech G502 Lightspeed
Keyboard Wooting Two
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/33u9si
If they could make a PCIe x1 link work over something resembling a regular SATA cable that could be interesting, but anyone who has touched PCIe 4.0 risers knows transmitting those kinds of speeds over a cable is... tricky at best, requiring high quality cabling with very good shielding etc - which is expensive. So either you need expensive, semi-exotic cabling or this tops out at a single lane of PCIe 3.0 (~900MB/s theoretical, ~800 real world?), which isn't much of an improvement over regular SATA. And if you're going PCIe anyhow, why not make it NVMe while you're at it?

This is why m.2 has taken over: motherboard mounting is far simpler, requires no fussy or expensive cables, and SATA is there as a fallback for slower storage if needed. There's no need for controllers, just more CPU/chipset lanes, which faster SATA would need as well. And the vast majority of people don't need that, crucially. m.2 absolutely has its drawbacks, and certainly isn't ideal for those wanting massive capacities (consumer platforms don't have the lanes, after all), but there doesn't seem to be a market for some in-between solution.
You can already go up to 12 Gbps over the cables, as proven by SAS, but beyond that, it's not possible due to data lane limitations. This is why the SATA cable can't reach higher speeds, but was used by some companies early on for USB 3.1 (10Gbps) signals.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
6,485 (3.45/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
You mean like SATA Express?
Nah, I meant with a single standard SATA connector, not the grafted monstrosity that was the SATAe connector.
You can already go up to 12 Gbps over the cables, as proven by SAS, but beyond that, it's not possible due to data lane limitations. This is why the SATA cable can't reach higher speeds, but was used by some companies early on for USB 3.1 (10Gbps) signals.
That's cool, I didn't know that. Guess that partly also explains why anything faster was abandoned in lieu of PCIe NVMe - why develop a new standard with new controllers and new cabling when NVMe and u.2 already exists?
 
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
1,373 (0.23/day)
You can already go up to 12 Gbps over the cables, as proven by SAS, but beyond that, it's not possible due to data lane limitations. This is why the SATA cable can't reach higher speeds, but was used by some companies early on for USB 3.1 (10Gbps) signals.
That was my first thought when I saw the poll. If 36 - 72 GB/s was that easy to do, without too much added cost to the board, cables, or limiting cable length, it would have been done a long time ago. I'm not saying it's impossible, tho.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
19,447 (5.93/day)
Location
USA
SATA Express is backwards compatible.
Never used it. Never cared either. The connector was not the same. Even if the protocol was compatible, the connector wasn't.

It was, though.
No it isn't. The connectors are very different.


Folks,
I'm really not interested in getting into a debate over the physics of data transmission over copper wiring. Anything that can be transmitted over circuit pathways on a motherboard can also be transmitted over a properly built cable. Example? HDMI and DisplayPort. Each of those types of data transmission can sustain high bandwidth over cabled distance without signal degradation. It's a matter of proper voltage & signal attenuation. The protocol is almost irrelevant. If the proper research had been done, the speeds I'm suggesting in the poll above would be possible or very close in an updated SATA protocol spec.

The Poll question is not worded: "Do you think it's possible?". As a tech nut and scientist, I already know it's possible, and so does everyone else who uses high bandwidth data transmission cabling. We can safely put that question to rest.

So the question of the poll stands as valid: Would you want a newer SATA spec?
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
1,373 (0.23/day)
The connector was not the same.
A SATA Express host port has two SATA ports in it, that's the very reason for its design: backwards compatibility.
I'm really not interested in getting into a debate over the physics of data transmission over copper wiring.
There's nothing to debate here.


1652774283527.png

SATA Express is being drafted by SATA-IO into what could be SATA revision 3.2. It is essentially SATA link-layer over PCIe physical layer, although it manages to retain backwards compatibility with older SATA standards (at reduced performance, of course).
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
11,432 (1.78/day)
Location
Formosa
System Name Overlord Mk MXVI
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard Gigabyte X570 Aorus Master
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro
Memory 32GB Viper Steel 3600 DDR4 @ 3800MHz 16-19-16-19-36
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2080 Gaming OC 8G
Storage 1TB WD Black NVMe (2018), 2TB Viper VPN100, 1TB WD Blue 3D NAND
Display(s) Asus PG27AQ
Case Corsair Carbide 275Q
Audio Device(s) Corsair Virtuoso SE
Power Supply Corsair RM750
Mouse Logitech G502 Lightspeed
Keyboard Wooting Two
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores https://valid.x86.fr/33u9si
Never used it. Never cared either. The connector was not the same. Even if the protocol was compatible, the connector wasn't.


No it isn't. The connectors are very different.


Folks,
I'm really not interested in getting into a debate over the physics of data transmission over copper wiring. Anything that can be transmitted over circuit pathways on a motherboard can also be transmitted over a properly built cable. Example? HDMI and DisplayPort. Each of those types of data transmission can sustain high bandwidth over cabled distance without signal degradation. It's a matter of proper voltage & signal attenuation. The protocol is almost irrelevant. If the proper research had been done, the speeds I'm suggesting in the poll above would be possible or very close in an updated SATA protocol spec.

The Poll question is not worded: "Do you think it's possible?". As a tech nut and scientist, I already know it's possible, and so does everyone else who uses high bandwidth data transmission cabling. We can safely put that question to rest.

So the question of the poll stands as valid: Would you want a newer SATA spec?
How is SATA Express not the same? Just because you don't care, doesn't make you right.
You could plug in two SATA cables per one SATA Express port, it was just the small extension on the side that enabled SATA Express.

The fact that you refuse to be bothered by things like the physical limitations of a standard you want your updated version to be backwards compatible with, clearly shows that you don't understand how these things work. I thought you were more sensible and more of a tech than this.

 
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
1,373 (0.23/day)
This is the one I was looking for.
1652775024233.png


The fact that you refuse to be bothered by things like the physical limitations of a standard you want your updated version to be backwards compatible with, clearly shows that you don't understand how these things work. I thought you were more sensible and more of a tech than this.
IDK what's going on. You posted facts, and the he started debating it. When it didn't go his way he tries to shut it down? :confused: Yeah, no, that's not going to happen here, never worked before lol.
 
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
19,447 (5.93/day)
Location
USA
clearly shows that you don't understand how these things work.
Do not mistake my indifference for ignorance.

There's nothing to debate here.
You're so right about that.

IDK what's going on. You posted facts, and the he started debating it. When it didn't go his way he tries to shut it down? :confused: Yeah, no, that's not going to happen here, never worked before lol.
That's not what happened.

This poll was NOT created to discuss the technical merits of the idea of an advanced SATA spec, only whether or not users would want it in a form-factor of the original connector.

Quit with the condescending comments and the off-topic shitposting. Thank You.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 31, 2022
Messages
20 (0.14/day)
Location
Lian Yu/Starling City/Star City (multi-timelines)
System Name The Foundry
Processor Intel Core i7 8700
Motherboard Asus ROG Maximus X Hero Z370
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro
Memory 64GB (4x8GB) Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro DDR4-3200 (16-20-20-38)
Video Card(s) Nvidia GeForce RTX3080ti 12GB + Intel UHD-630
Storage 2 x Samsung 980 Pro 1TB Gen4 m.2 nVME + Samsung 860 EVO 512GB SATA SSD + 2 x Seagate Barracuda 3TB
Display(s) Samsung Neo G9 49" UltraWide
Case Corsair 570X Crystal
Audio Device(s) Corsair Void pro USB Headset + Realtek Onboard Audio
Power Supply EVGA 1000W 80+ Gold Fully Modular
Mouse Logitech G903 "Lightspeed" Wireless
Keyboard Corsair K70 RGB v2.0
Software MS Windows 11
What I would prefer going forward is m.2 sockets fitted to cases (replacing 2.5" SSD sleds) that connect to nVME channels on the motherboard (as more channels become available on CPU's) via a slim cable similar to SATA. I know that something like this is already available in the server world (u.2? although could be wrong with the terminology as not that up on enterprise gear), but would like to see this become mainstream in consumer systems.

As for new SATA specs, I think that it is coming towards the end & moving forward with nVME would be a better option IMHO. If SATA manufacturing was ceased & put into nVME manufacturing/development, the prices of the lower end nVME (which is still faster than highest end consumer SATA), we would start seeing the cost per Terabyte on nVME come down to similar levels of high end SATA storage with lower power overheads. If going forward with SATA type devices, consumer grade SAS would be a nice replacement.
 
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
6,485 (3.45/day)
Location
Norway, currently in Lund, Sweden
System Name Hotbox
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
Motherboard ASRock Phantom Gaming B550 ITX/ax
Cooling Aquanaut + Laing DDC 1T Plus PWM + Corsair XR5 280mm + 2x Arctic P14
Memory 32GB G.Skill FlareX 3200c14
Video Card(s) PowerColor Radeon 6900XT Liquid Devil Ultimate, UV@950mV/2050MHz/180W
Storage 2TB Adata SX8200 Pro
Display(s) Dell U2711 main, AOC 24P2C secondary
Case SSUPD Meshlicious
Audio Device(s) Optoma Nuforce μDAC 3
Power Supply Corsair SF750 Platinum
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cooler Master MasterKeys Pro M w/DSA profile caps
Software Windows 10 Pro
I still just don't see the need. More product in the market doing the same thing? More controller designs competing for attention? Even more pressure on PCIe lanes from additional high speed I/O controllers, and a return to the Skylake-era bingo chart of "use one port, it deactivates two others"? No thanks. We have SATA for HDDs, mass storage, and lower speed SSDs - which are still fine. We have NVMe in all its various forms for faster storage - and it's extremely flexible.

Have an m.2 SSD but no slot, or want it out from under your GPU? Get one of these

Or one of these for tons of slots

Want it entirely off the motherboard? No problem



If the problem is that you've got X lanes and can't split them into whatever your drives need, it's far easier to add bifurcation support to a platform than to engineer new host-side and device-side controllers and whatever cabling they use to interface. It's just far simpler and more efficient across the board for the storage devices to be native PCIe.

What I would prefer going forward is m.2 sockets fitted to cases (replacing 2.5" SSD sleds) that connect to nVME channels on the motherboard (as more channels become available on CPU's) via a slim cable similar to SATA. I know that something like this is already available in the server world (u.2? although could be wrong with the terminology as not that up on enterprise gear), but would like to see this become mainstream in consumer systems.
That could be kind of neat, but m.2 drives aren't really meant for mounting to a case, are small and fragile, and don't have latching connectors, so you'd need a backplane for them - which gets expensive rather quickly as it's a bespoke PCB design for each case, more or less. Add to that the cost of PCIe 4.0 or higher compatible cabling, and you're looking at a pretty expensive setup - easily a couple hundred dollars for a few drives. This is also pretty easily bypassed with adapters like the ones above. M.2 or plain PCIe are both easily adapterd to u.2, and there are u.2 caddies for m.2 drives that mount to 2.5" mounts in your case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top