Tfw Jow Forums was wrong

These DO shit on current SATA SSD's

By a country mile as well.

Attached: SSD 970 PROlEVO_Family ver.2_678x452.png (678x479, 177K)

Other urls found in this thread:

anandtech.com/show/10754/samsung-960-pro-ssd-review/7
amazon.co.uk/Samsung-970-EVO-V-NAND-Express/dp/B07CGGNX7S/
youtu.be/l7kr1Guf9Fw?t=122
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I'm not doubting you but do you have any numbers to back up your claim? "Shit on" isnt really quantifiable

This gib proof I'd like to see it too

inb4 it was just bait

Attached: 1527735690130.png (540x405, 67K)

not sure if bait or retardation?

Bottom three are SATA

Attached: 84209.png (650x440, 32K)

a start, but please post proper benchmarks of various i/o types

Tbqh don't really notice it in day to day use

anandtech.com/show/10754/samsung-960-pro-ssd-review/7
read the review yourself then

agreed, nvme is only worth it if your workload makes use of storage performance

>doesnt know the difference between a 6GB/s SATA limit and a PCIE speed

you might be retarded

those are 960's

970's are faster

The difference between the 960 and 970 is incremental at best.

The test on the right side is my Samsung 960 PRO NVMe.
The test on the left is my Samsung 860 EVO SATA.

The difference in speed is similar to an average spinning HDD vs a high end SATA SSD.

Attached: DiskMark2.jpg (1619x945, 575K)

Of course NVME shits on SATA. It's like 3 times as fast.

lol

my m.2 970 pro

Attached: 2018-06-03_17-42-45.jpg (633x578, 203K)

Your 970 is also at a lower state of fill than mine is and you are using the 1GiB test which yields higher numbers.

This.
Tom's shillware tested SSDs placed on SATA II and III, and they found out that it's just a one-second difference between those two in opening Photoshop. Likely the same applies to nvme based on benches I've seen.
I'm not paying extra for placebo.

So how much more do they cost?

So nvme SSDs provide a significant speed boost to sequential read/writes (copying large files around) but for general application use / system responsiveness what matters most is random read/writes, which the 4K random r/w tests show are only moderately faster (~2x faster) than average consumer SATA ssds (crucial mx300/ samsung evos). Looks to me like they are better, but for general system responsiveness it's not an order of magnitude faster, and i'm curious to try them to see what that 2x random speed translates to in actual user experience.

Attached: Wc5HE6c.jpg (566x400, 39K)

>measurable difference
>placebo
That's not what placebo means.

So WTF do you need this strange disk configuration for ?
I understand the HDD as a Mirror but why four different SSD. What do you use them for.

Not that much but your mobo needs M.2 slot with NVMe support

this is my SATA SSD

Attached: 2018-06-03_17-48-18.jpg (489x448, 175K)

ok kid

>you can actually get M.2 SSD's for less than fucking nothing, thanks for reminding me OP

amazon.co.uk/Samsung-970-EVO-V-NAND-Express/dp/B07CGGNX7S/

Attached: 1524545208748.png (316x490, 108K)

For most people benchmarks are not
>day to day use

BTFO

For the price of 1 250gb nvme stick, I could get one 1tb sata ssd
You can't meme me

lol if you wanted capacity ud get a normal HDD you fucking retard

nobody cares about capacity these days other than dumb boomers, gaming is where its at, dumb old cunts

They're purely luxury and are prone to heat issues. I've been fucking around with salvaged PM961's and SanDisk A400's from Dells. And, installed Samsung 950, 960, and 970's in rigs I've build as side work.

Adobe fucks system resources a bit faster, GTA V loading screens drop a bit, but nothing that you simply "cant do without" today.

>triggered

Show me your results on the 500mb test.

>get a normal HDD
Found the cuck

Who the fuck cares about fatser read/write??
The most important thing is to have a shit ton of space.

Only libshit millennials want to be dependent on the internet for their services. Such retard inventions like cloud services and shit are totally meaningless.

nice rage meme

Attached: 1512839534630.jpg (600x480, 28K)

Holy shit OP you mean SSDs that go over PCI and aren't limited by SATA bandwidth ARE FASTER?

Attached: 1492480995041.jpg (1024x845, 85K)

Should i replace the drive ? Seems speedy enough for me right now.
I use it in a sleeper build in an semiold SFF Thinkcentre that came with an Ivybridge and now has an R3 2200G with 8GB on an ASrock B350 Gaming ITX.

Attached: OCZAgility3.png (1308x992, 695K)

>Install a big game
>play it and finish it
>uninstall it

WOW I SURE NEEDED 1TB OF SPACE

Unless you are constantly doing storage intensive operations constantly you will likely never notice the difference aside from money disappearing from your wallet.

lmao, found the poorfag

unless they can actually offer a significan amount of reduced time that can be noticeable and not just 30mb more on write and 40 on read then no they do not shit at all
no one will notice the difference what so ever

Poor people are poor because they waste money on items they do not need, cuck.

ITT poorfags making up narratives to suit their excuse for not affording the next level of hardware

Literally if any of you still have an optical drive still in your PC, leave this board and kill yourself

t. welfare NEET

In tests, yes.
In general use, the difference is really small since CPU/network/whatever else already becomes the main limiting factor even with a good SATA SSD.

imagine working and earning less

wrong side of history retard

M.2 NVMe above, normal SATA SSD below

Attached: crystaldiskmark-c-nvme-f-ssd.png (403x736, 96K)

>poorfags literally SEETHING

>autistic NEET screeching

I got more important things to worry about than my pc booting up a few seconds faster. To me it don't mean shit that my pc can boot to my desktop in 2 seconds flat. Keeping my data intact safe from bitrot is. Really, thanks to Sleep mode, I can get back to what I was doing pretty fast anyway and I'm on a regular HDD. Being able to keep my media files intact and 100% playing condition 5-10-40 yrs from now is a much more important thing. Thank god for Refs and ZFS.

>killing your PC with sleep mode

Attached: 1524534791976.png (565x541, 157K)

You will probably some speed increase with a modern SSD, but not nearly as much as when going from a HDD to a SSD. I use an even older Vertex2 to dick around with various OSes, and I rarely see 100% disk usage for any noticeable amount of time.

>poor fags will say Nvme is a meme like 165hz for monitors
nice bench.


Jow Forums it’s ok go get a job so you got the money to buy high refresh rate, Nvme SSDs and a better chair for your lard assess. I make enough just by fixing others computer myself.

>that Q1T1
Can't make that shit up.

The reason I have multiple SSDs instead of one big one is because I add more over time.

The 960 PRO is my main drive for OS and software. The 850 EVO is my game drive, and my 860 EVO is for video editing and Unity model/projects storage.

Do you guys realize the difference here is showing almost no improvement in general system responsiveness, as indicated by the Q1T1 test. On the other end of the spectrum, big file copies (moving videos around) is much faster as demonstrated by seq q32 test, but most people arent doing that very often and thus the benefits, while real, are very modest for booting and normal application i/o.

Attached: 1379169235715.jpg (500x367, 52K)

>I CANT READ A FUCKING GRAPHG

This thread is discussing and shitposting in regards to NVME vs SATA SSDs. Only mongoloids would still be using HDDs for their system & application files.

Attached: 1526743986236.png (600x600, 190K)

t. doesn't understand benchmarks

Attached: 1526839756709.jpg (400x500, 24K)

>SSD and M.2 are basically the same speed

youtu.be/l7kr1Guf9Fw?t=122

LMAO

>t. doesn't understand benchmarks
BIGGER IS BEDDER AND NVME GAS BIGGEST AND IS BEST

SSDpoorfags BTFO

Attached: 1528004152898.jpg (404x270, 32K)

M.2 is just a connector, also those are SSD's too. What you mean is NVME vs SATA. Because there are M.2 slots/SSD's that still use the SATA interface and not NVME.

M.2 SATA SSD's will be the same as a 2.5" drive SATA SSD.

nobody sane would say M.2 SSD without meaning PCI SSD

m.2 SATA SSD's are fucking useless

Protip: people have things other than computers to spend money on, even on Jow Forums

I just cal them NVMe drives to avoid any confusion.

>phison controller

Well no shit

no they don't in wow they load a 50sec load on sata in 45sec on nvme

they only good for files in windows.

They are great, but I won't be updating my ADATA SP* SSDs until we can have 4 m.2 x4 nvme ports on a consumer motherboard just like you can have 4 SATA III nowadays

>45sec on nvme
Are you using several GB of addons, or is the Blizzard to be thanked for this?

Attached: 5e687822dccede3d2b8f6b6f38cf2af5.jpg (302x389, 108K)

they should start by removing these fucking PCI slots that they insist on keeping since the fucking 90s to make room for m.2 and other newer technologies

the amount of people that use shit like sound cards and network cards must be 5%

fucking dumb boomers

This. Also CPUs must have designated data lanes apart from regular PCI lanes for other general purpose hardware, it's retarded that I need to buy a fucking threadripper and a $400 mobo just to use 4 full speed u-m.2 drives

After about 500MB/s it doesn't really make much of a difference for most uses. It's nice if you're dealing with large sets of data often, but if you're just shitposting on Jow Forums you won't notice.

Attached: kys.gif (460x257, 1.95M)

I have the 960 evo and the difference compared to the 850 evo I also have is about non existent.
Large Photoshop files aren't saved any faster, programs aren't opening noticeably faster, it's all more or less the same.
They're a nice to have when transferring files and I can't wait until externals have these kinds of speeds, but that's about it.
Only thing that can potentially shit on the current ssd and may have a noticeable difference is Optane.

Attached: burst-rr.png (650x398, 38K)

>250gb

Don't they also run very hot and even throttle?

>doesn't understand that SATAIII is literally a bottleneck independent of any brands, shilling, etc
>can't google basic info
You've probably never even heard of SAS which previously was the way you'd get around the SSD speed bottleneck prior to nvme

Only under extended use with no heat spreader.

>performs the same outside of snowflake workloads or transferring big files

this
random read/write on nvme is basically the same or slightly better compared to sata ssds, while optane is multiple times faster

botnet

sage

970 evo is about 50% more than an 860 evo. They've generally replaced the high end SSDs leaving only mid range things like Samsung or one million variants of $/GB competitors.

Can you do a test? Open photoshop or premiere on the sata then do it on the m. 2.

Which is faster or are they the same.

Quit wasting your fucking time on this board then and go make some money. I swear Jow Forums is the land of excuse m, virgins and weeebs.

M.2 drives are SSDs as well you gay trump voter.

So unless I copy big files all the time, Sata SSDs are still great? Good to know again. I'll just grab a slower but bigger m.2 SSD then and maybe pair it up with Optane and tiered storage in the future.

Attached: 1528032719436.gif (384x509, 137K)

The difference between every drive is incremental you brainlet.

I think it's time to replace my years old 2.5" SSD, should I buy that in OP?

Attached: 1524214064635.png (487x490, 474K)

so how does one get "cucked" over having a super fast ssd?

overclocked ide drive on my powerpc

Attached: io.png (822x168, 6K)

Nigga did you even read the thread? They're all mostly the same shit unless you move around big files all the time.