I'm trying to look for information on the reliability of NVMe drives, and can't find any. Is there any information comparing SATA SSDs to NVMe SSDs in terms of long-term reliability? Do they fail in different ways? The controllers are completely different, and I assume the NAND modules are as well, so they might be more/less reliable as a medium.
For example, how bad would a RAID0 be?
RAID0 is always bad.
Someone post the pic.
If you have to ask you don't need RAID 0 NVME drives.
PCI-e 4.0 drives would be better anyways.
The flash memory is going to be basically the same.
>PCI-e 4.0 drives would be better anyways.
Come to think of it, won't PCIe 4.0 allow for near-RAID0 speeds on a single drive?
Why would you configure NAND drives in a RAID, especially RAID0?
The NVMe controllers aren't that good yet.
lel
Is it even worth it to get a m.2
Only if you have a drive to put in it. Whether it's SATA or NVMe is another question and depends on your use.
It helps with cable management and small form factor builds. NVMe helped my load times in Fallout but thats about it
Imagine 10 NVMe drives in RAID0. You could probably get GTAV loads under 3 minutes.
its just a different protocol, the nand is identical. They could even use identical controllers, but they scale controllers for total performance so will use more powerful ones.
The reliability should be the same, outside of us discovering the m.2 form facrtor has some physcial design flaw, and the boards all start to crack or something.
Can someone then help my small brain deal with this? I have an X470 Taichi, my M-1 slot which is nvme and shit is covered by my GPU and CPU heatsink, I am lazy and clumsy and I don't want to move it to install an NVMe, but I do have an m-2 slot which goes up to 2280. I think it will take something like an evo 970 1tb.
Or shall I just get a sata ssd and save myself hassle?
Used purely for gaming right now.
on ryzen, the first slot is directly connected to the cpu pci-express 3.0 lane. so it will have the most bandwidth. while the second slot is connected to the chipset pci-express 3.0 lane on x470. it will have the least amount of bandwidth. though it should still be plenty for a samsung 970. at least, when i had my x470 board, the second slot had no issue driving my old samsung 950 pro nvme. 950 was 2500 reads, 1500 writes. i mean worst case is you get maybe 3000 instead of 3500.
either way, having a 970 nvme, or any nvme for that matter, in the second slot will still absolutely horseshit all over any sata ssd.
I would raid 0. fuck it just take backups
Cool, if/when I upgrade I will put an nvme in the second slot, it will just be for storage and game installs, so not super vital as my old SSD is my boot drive.
>Why would you configure NAND drives in a RAID, especially RAID0?
For absolutely bonkers throughput, in case your I/O is the bottleneck.
>Is it even worth it to get a m.2
It depends, if you only browse Jow Forums and play a few games occasionally, probably not. If you do lots of work that involves large files, probably yes.
My machine boots to Win 10 LTSC in well under 5 seconds, and that's just one NVMe (970 1TB).
>first slot is directly connected to the cpu pci-express 3.0 lane
Note that not all motherboards are like this, in my CrossHair VII Hero it's the second slot (bottom one) that's wired to the CPU. It's very unintuitive.
Thanks, Taichi is as he said, m_2 slot is chipset, fine for games and photos and stuff. I don't do any heavy workloads.
>in my CrossHair VII Hero it's the second slot (bottom one) that's wired to the CPU. It's very unintuitive.
Fuck, I've had it wrong this whole time? Are you sure? The top one has the heatsink though, and I thought I checked the motherboard manual before I put it in but I could be wrong.
>Fuck, I've had it wrong this whole time? Are you sure?
Yes, according to both der8auer and Buildzoid.
IgnorantFag here...
What am I looking at?
No redundancy, all the drives are useless
Hope that dude got fired
Thanks.
It was his own personal drive system I highly doubt he can fire himself.
Reliability on flash based drives comes from bigger sizes. More chips = less they are written to = the longer they last. So if you want the most reliable nvme, you have to buy 1tb or bigger.
my nvme corrupted sectors on power failure.
I had power go out once to a horribly storm fucking the transformer, and once because maintenance happened 1 hour earlier then they posted.
if you run an ssd of any kind, its best to have a battery backup so you can at least hit a safety shutdown.
now if you go from reputable sources, sata and m.2 are about equal failure wise, which is to say, you either have an immediate or VERY immediate failure or the drive lasts till the nand gives way. There were some teething issues with controllers early on, but that's more or less been sorted.
depends, are you going to replace it? is it easy to access? does the motherboard decided to kill half of your sata for the m.2 form factor?
generally, m.2 sata is a form factor, its not worth a price premium if you have the space, but if its price parity then go for it
nvme is also not worth a price premium over good sata or m.2sata, however good sata/m.2 sata is at price parity with nvme so why not go good nvme?
The only real problem you would/should have is if your motherboards disables function for the nvme, thats where questions lie.
but most programs bottleneck around 300-400mb read, and at that point you are not getting a benefit. there is clear benefit from seek time going for hdd to ssd, even sata1 ssd, but there is next to no benefit going from sata 2 or 3 to nvme
raid0 is stupid.
I have had intel SSD purchased in 2010 start to fail in 2018 so theres that.
right now NVMe hasn't been around long enough to determine average service life
One drive fails, you lose all your data as all data is split into the raid config.
Raid0 also isnt that much faster for day to day usage,
Controller isn't something that breaks first in the SSD. NAND will go down eventually. And NAND is the same.
Though the controller will decide how fast NAND will go down, it's not like it depends on a form-factor. Usually design errors lead to fast NAND wear which has equal chances of happening with both NVMe and SATA.
There's one more thing - NVMe drives are faster and, therefore, hotter. Though they throttle to prevent setting your house on fire. I don't think it affects the reliability in any way, just that flat NAND will be faster because it can work without throttling for a longer time periods than 3d NAND.
>how bad would a RAID0 be
Like any other RAID0 - bad.
check lifetime (TeraBytes rewrites) and MTBF. MLC and TLC are usually longer lasting than the new QLC shite.
>m.2
M.2 is a fucking form factor, you stupid cunt, it isn't "faster" than anything. What you're looking for is SATA vs NVME.
Dumb nigger.
RAID0 is always for data you don't care about. Scratch disk shit, nothing more, nothing else.
man you got way too angry there. you could have just said the same thing except in a nice way
SLS > MLC > TLC > QLC
Does it really matter which slot these things go in if they're just PCI-E 3.0 speeds?
I put mine in the second slot because the first slot has heatpads which it said to take the stickers off of, but I don't know if they use any sort of paste... will I be able to just swap a new drive in there in the future?