Which one should you buy? In this we break down the differences between different SSDs- including NVME, SATA and even compare to hard drives. Hope this helps! My Spotify: open.spotify.com/artist/3Xulq...
NVME needed to people who work with giant chunks of data every day. In casual experience, games, films and etc, not for work, ordinary good SSD drive is already amazing. NVME will not give you anything better at the experience of your daily casual stuff.
actually modern games will benefit from nvme drives, and nvidia ReBAR and AMD SAM technologies require it. They require windows to be installed on a GPT formated NVMe PCIe gen 4 at minimum drive. I'm getting a new NVMe to replace my Crucial P3 1TB (dramless). I'll probably get Corsair MP600 Force (2TB), it's longevity is much better than any dramless drive I've seen (up to 3600TB of writes)
Yes, I remember the first time I put my windows and boot on a nvme from a hdd for the first time. And I was blown away how fast and responsive opening apps was and how fast windows was
Great presentation. Another big benefit of the NvMe would be 2 less cables to plug in! I’m converting my entire system from using 1 SATA, 1 NVME, 1 HDD to a single 2TB nvme. That’s going to save me 4 cables worth of cable management lol. Again great work!
best part is you can always do it over time. I just added another 1TB NVME so Now I'm 3.5 TB NVME 1TB SATA SSD. I still have my two 2 TB HDD's for a NAS I'm building now!
Nice video! For me I currently am using a NVME 3.0 PCIe currently but I am upgrading to a NVME 4.0 PCIe for faster write times and going to use my old SSD for extra stroage while the faster SSD will be my primary SSD that will boot OS, games, and anything else. There is a cost to this as the NVME 4.0 PCIe is more expensive than the 3.0 PCIe for the same storage but it's worth it for sure.
It's not really going to make a significant improvement over a normal SATA SSD for everyday use, but if you're planning on buying an SSD and you have the slot available on your MB (I didn't even know mine had the slot before I bought it and found out about it months later lol), it doesn't hurt to use it since it's not _that_ much more expensive and it's a cables free solution over SATA (at least ≤0.5 TB drives cost both roughly the same here)
the biggest factor is latency. the pipe is bigger so more data can flow through it. but when random read and writes happen it can happen faster over the lanes. so while you may not be able to use the other half of the pipe. the chips on the ssd are going to be more efficient and quicker when it comes to its task which it can still perform over your gen 3 lanes. so you still probably see some benefits from the gen 4 chips on your gen 3 lanes even though you can open the pip all the way for the drive. the pipes still snappier
Thanks for the simplified breakdown...I’m currently running two sata ssd’s, and was wondering if it would be worth getting an nvme for boot drive, but after seeing this I don’t really think I need one as I only turn on my computer for occasional gaming...I can wait the extra second or two lol.
I use a NVME PCIE 1TB Gen4 drive as my boot drive and a SATA 2TB Drive as my storage drive which I also store all on my games on. Vex you are right about the loading times, they aren't that much different, and the cost is more affordable. My motherboard is a MSI Tomahawk B650, 7700X CPU. When I built this and started using it I was shocked how fast it is, I have been mainly using laptops with a HDD for web browsing and Office 365 apps, I have changed the HDD for a SSD in the laptops. I am absolutely stunned by the performance of the boot up time too in both my laptops and my new gaming PC.. @Vex loving the content you put out, it is always really interesting and educational, one of the best channels on youtube in my view.
Overheating is a problem though. You don't have to wait for it to hit 70 Celsius for it to throttle. Even at 45-50 (depending on the brand) you start getting spikes while gaming. For someone who plays proffessional e-sports, that 1 second freeze could throw the match. So yeah. Even a Gen3 needs to be cooled if doing something demanding on it. Also another thing. The OS and the Game-drive need to be separate. Windows doesn't know, yet, how to harness all those extra IOPS that a high-speed NVMe gives you. Plus, Windows constantly reads/writes unto the OS drive, so it being used constantly, it's always slightly hotter by a few degrees. In order to keep it cool, all you need is two things. Airflow + Heatsink. Any air moved around it (if it has a heatsink), may it be a lot, may it be exhaust, or fresh air, will dramatically decrees temps and increase performance. Without a heatsink, and only relying on the airflow, the heat cannot be pulled away from it's controller/nand. The surface is too small, too thin, too low profile. As for loading times, you should do more research. In your game, you were mostly waiting 97% of the time for the connection to be established. You should try some single player games to actually see improved loading times. Also, don't rely on Advertised Read/Write Speeds. Those are sequential. That applies only when you're copying a file from an NVMe drive, to another NVMe drive inside your system. IF we're talking OS and Game-Loading times, than you need to compare 4KRandom Reads/Writes. That's for handling small files (4 Kilobytes), Randomly (The Disk needs to search for the files, or the information in the file). There's a few instances where a Sata SSD (870 Evo) feels the same as a gen 3 Nvme (Kingston Nv1) due to the fact that the NV1 doesn't have a DRam cache. Even though NV1 has faster Sequential speeds, the 4K random read is about the same, hence, it feels the same in the OS or Games. Companies have seen this, and started pricing accordingly. Therefore, a DRamless NVMe is actually cheaper nowadays, than a high-end Sata SSD.
Good honest review. If one has to have his/her games load 10 seconds faster then there are other problems. I am keeping my SATA SSD's until speed improvements become really meaningful. I don't work with super big files and don't turn on/off my computer all-the-time.
Thanks. Yeah the bottle doesn’t seem to be the drive speed when loading up games. It must be like processing or logging into servers. Glad u can see ur happy with ur stuff and u don’t don’t actually need to upgrade
@@vextakes Loading bloated Windows 11 would probably be the only real benefit for me. I have no problem waiting a few seconds longer when loading from a SATA SSD, then using the Sleep Mode to avoid booting and re-booting the system. I used to upgrade hard drives with new technology to maintain computer responsiveness. Still have next to me an old PC running on Windows XP with two FUJITSU SCSI 15k enterprise hard drives connected through a PCI SCSI controller card. No RAID, ...just 15k spinning SCSI drives for super fast responsiveness. NVME SSD's are not more responsive than SATA SSD's. Latencies are very similar. Once NVME latency improves visa-vis SATA ssd I'll buy a stick. No need to fall victim to "upgrade fever" prematurely. Same goes for DDR5 RAM. Today's DDR5 4800 memory has lower latency than DDR4 3600 resulting in a less responsive system.
meanwhile im gaming whit several games running of a modern HDD (mecahical spinn disk). whit the OS been on a SSD. would it be faster to put the game on my secondary SSD? yes... do I find the loading screen at boot worth the extra cost not really. Like sure I can boot Crusader Kings 3 45 sec from the SSD vs 1 min from the HDD. (not really worth it as i only boot up the game 1 a day at most so 15 sec a day not really worth it.
believe it or not, forza 4 and 5 had low streaming issue when I was using a SATA SSD. Since I moved to Nvme gen 3 all the stutters are completely gone in all the games and I've never seen a low streaming bandwidth warning ever again.
When it comes to power usage it is a clear win for nvme but every other aspect of it even the speed (at the present time) comes down to preference. My own experince of getting faster and faster drives is this doesn't play out in the real world price to performance particulary well or even to just straight perceived and measured performance. Jumping from HDD to SSD blew my mind away at the sheer amount of untapt power in my old computer had and was a must have upgrade for almost everyone. Jumpping from SSD to NVME 3.0 was nice but the perceived performace was almost non existent and while the measured data rates benchmarked higher all tasks took less but not subsationally less time, I have found that multiple other tech is very likely llimiting potential gains from the upgrade over the SSD which is already fine and managable. Jumping from NVME 3.0 to NVME 4.0 the perceived perfomace difference was bigger than SSD to NVME 3.0 but still very small, benchmarks are insane the same limiting factor is in place for the use of this drive.
No it's the lack of significant random read, low queue depth improvement that's causing the lack noticeable improvements. It's the exact reason old sata ssd on par with current hard drives in sequential transfers still demolish them in system performance and also why high end optane drives from the last couple years will still commonly net 50-100+% improvements in boot and load times over the best nand nvme ssds despite being over the same pcie gen 4 interface and the older nvme 1.3 version
You didn't consider the strengths of the SSD though that make it superior to the nVME. It's portable between systems. And backwards compatible. You can take it out of your system, and plug it into any system going back to 2003. You can add it to any system going back to 2003. I have two dozen computers that support SATA, and only one single motherboard that can support an nvme drive. If that motherboard fails, how am I going to get the data off??? A SATA drive is a lot easier to connect to. Just plug in two cables. An nvme you have to take apart the system and pull out that monster GPU just to get to the nvme slot, which is a huge headache. And your speed gain is not 10x, not even close. Most of your reads and writes are random, not sequential... so the real world random read and write performance is going to be a lot closer to each other than you think.
Another advantage of SATA SSD is that their electronics is covered by case, so it is protected from accidental mechanical damage and electrostatic discharges. So they can be cleaned from dust safely. Also SATA devices are hot pluggable, without switching off the computer.
@@okaravan That's true for the long run. Dust attracts moisture.... you see the ruin it causes in old PC cases stored unused for years or decades in less than ideal conditions.
Just got a NVMe gen 3 500GB at BB for 25$ I went from not being able to load anything on my 2018 dell laptop to feeling faster than my iPhone 14 pro max. I love the feel. I bought the laptop used for 200$ with 16gb ram and some good specs. It’s even touch screen but the 2T HDD was Really bad! Thank God for TH-cam. Save me 100$s. Thanks for the info!
I always thought that unless NVME is cheaper for whatever reason, there is no practical reason to buy NVME, unless you work with really huge amount of data. But now i have thought about, if you treat it like a multi core processor. Since there is so high speed, you can download, install, play and do a lot of different drive writing & reading without slowing the system/programs on the drive down. Thanks for the video!
Have a question, so I have a old Scandisk Ultra II 480Gb. I've used it for years and it's actually got about 850gb of information on it. How is this possible?
For typical use, nearly any NVMe drive will be a good choice. Unless you do side-by-side comparisons, you will very likely not notice any difference in their speeds. The above pertains to typical use. If you will be writing dozens of gigabytes of data to your NVMe drive, non-stop, that is when you will absolutely notice a difference in performance. That wildly fast NVMe drive might slow down to under 100 MB/s write speed (temporarily). Without exception (none that I am aware of), every consumer level NVMe drive has two types of NAND cells (that is where your data is stored). Typically, 10% (could be more or less) of the drive will have fast NAND cells, and the rest of the drive will have slower NAND cells (sometimes much slower NAND cells). So when you write your hundreds of megabytes (or even several gigabytes) to your NVMe drive, you will always hit the fastest part of the drive, and you will always see impressive speeds. However, if you write enough gigabytes, without rest, to the NVMe drive, you will fill up its fast NAND cells, and the drive will be forced to write directly to the slower NAND cells. Depending on the drive, you might see a moderate performance slow-down, or you might see the performance drop like a brick. When your NVMe drive is not busy (which is most of the time), it moves the data from its fast NAND cells to its slower NAND cells (you will not see it happening). So you will almost always have fast NAND cells available for all of your activities. Run Crystal Disk's benchmarking tool, and set it for 25% of the capacity of the drive (to be sure it will exceed the drive's faster NAND cell capacity). When you wake up, the next day, if the test finished, you will see lousy results, because the NVMe drive had to write lots of data to the slower portion of the drive. Chia crypt-o mining involves creating large (100+ GB) files. A common way of doing so is by utilizing an NVMe drive for the process that creates the large files. People involved with the Chia process have learned which NVMe drives slow down, and which drives maintain their pace. For typical use, nearly any NVMe drive will be fine. But for large writing jobs, that 980 Pro drive (that our host was using) is a great choice. It will not slow down (or just a bit). There are Enterprise / Data Center level NVMe drives (U.2 form factor) that are made 100% of the fast stuff. They will never slow down, no matter how much you hammer them. But be prepared to mortgage your home for those drives. By the way, that Crucial MX500 SATA based drive, that our host used, gets great reviews. But Crucial butchered the 4 TB model. It performs close to the speed of mechanical drives, and at times, slower than mechanical drives. Stay away from it, unless you need the space but not the speed. The only benefit is that it will use less power than a 4 TB mechanical drive, and it does not have platters that sleep). And shame on Crucial for using the great reviews of the other MX500 drives to snooker people into thinking that their 4 TB model would also perform at that level.
I want for a crucial p5 plus for my boot drive 500gb and 2x p5 plus 2tb for my storage drives. They where pretty cheap and got some pretty decent write and read speeds from my reading. Its a major difference from my kington a400 and a hard drive setup i was rocking before it😅
NVMe shows huge benefits when it's the location of your swap file during memory contention. Which will happen if you use a media aggregation/management app, or any app that gradually loads information into memory as you view it without ever releasing any, with thousands of items. OBS and file transcode ops will each use a lot. Do all that at once, you'll want a huge swap file on an NVMe as fast as your MB supports. I have 32GB DRAM and 32GB SWAP, ZSWAP enabled, sometimes it runs out and the OS terminates one of the apps, typically the media app playing thousands of podcasts at random.
I'm curious as to what you think today. Honestly, using my NVME day to day, I do not see a huge advantage other than taking up less space. It might be slower in some cases. When expanding zip files for example, I don't see an advantage, or when moving files around the same drive. Now moving large amounts of data between two NVME drives, oh yea, that is amazing.
Also nowadays they're basically the same price up, like a 4tb gen 4 nvme ssd is the same price as a 4tb sata ssd. Only reason to pick sata ssds now is if you don't have anymore m.2 slots on your board
Very interesting! I've seen an external Samsung 4TB USB 3.0 drive booting much faster at Batocera when loading vs a mechanical 5TB USB 3.0 Seagate 5TB. Loading the games seems the same speed. I've also noticed an 11 year old mechanical 1TB SATA 3 drive running a lot slower than an external USB 3.0 SSD: the connection is a slower technology than SATA 3, but wins it hands down!
What you don't know or told you viewer is that the technology of NVME is limited to a capacity of 8TB due to their gum physical size, meaning for those who will need big capacity in the future will have no choice but hoping that another newer technology will make this possible or even return back to sata drive, especially since 2.5 drive can accommodate more memory and larger capacity b than the limited 8TB of NVME. so in brief NVME has a short life in capacity wise.
I can't say how NVMe 4.0 performs because I don't have a way to compare it to Sata 3, but I can share my experience with Gen 3 PCIe versus Sata 3. My main gaming drive used to be a Crucial MX500 1 TB until I needed more space, so I installed a 2TB WD Black SN850X into my Gen 3 board. In my experience, both drives had similar performance whether it was transferring data, compressing data, opening and running programs, and also running games. The WD did have a slight improvement over the Crucial in certain aspects such as more stable games, but overall nothing magical happened like the noticeable difference in speed between HDD and SSD. What I like about using an NVMe is its compact form factor compared to large 3.5" and 2.5" drives. It's quite ironic how things change yet stay the same; first there was floppy disks, then mechanical disks, then slim versions of mechanical disks, then SSD disks, and now back to very thin disks. Anyway, as far as I seen the only real benefit of one is that it uses a minimal amount of space, it is somewhat faster than Sata 3 depending on what you do with it.
With how much prices have dropped now for gen 4 nvmes even, they are a no brainer. 50-55 euros for a 1Tb gen 4.0 nvme, albeit it is mid speed at 5K mb/s ,but still great price.
There is a windows log which you can use to find the delta time between when the operating system first comes online to when the os is fully ready. I was able to setup a script which rebooted a machine, wait 5 minutes, then export the relevant entries from Diagnostics-Performance and logging the BootDuration to a file, and then reboot again. If you can do things programmatically, do it.
Tech people are not code people. This is a clear distinction that is taught in all school programs related to IT. A better form of advice would be to just tell him to download a program that does all of that. I always have the same problem with those Linux guys trying to tell average people to do "x" and "y" in the terminal why a ready made program (with a GUI) already exists on the distro's app store or the author's website. There needs to be a course that trains developers and network engineers how to talk with average people.
Whooptedoo one is a few seconds faster and that's all you pay for as the rest is 100% the same. If I can buy 3 sata ssd's for 1 nvme4 the choice is made before you ask the question. Just upgraded from a crashed HDD to SSD sata, a world of difference.
just got a 1TB Teamgroup mp34 Nvme gen 3 SSD for $48.99. My pc had the oldschool set up of small ssd big HDD. It's definitely a worth while upgrade for me.
B650e-i board has 1 pcie4 +1 pcie5 +2 sata3 but SSD prices keep dropping every year so I'm still on oldschool WD Green HDD for longevity/capacity, biding my time. But man, that old HDD boot and game load 15min delay is nasty slow... May just have to grab a pcie4 soon before I go crazy, hoping more DirectStorage games launch soon. SSD is not for longevity/capacity though, so monthly backup to the HDD kept on a shelf somewhere may be a good idea until 8TB+ SSD become reliable/cheap enough to take over.
The advantage of SATA is that it goes through the South Bridge, Chipset, and this means it doesn't get in the way of game play by taking up a fast bus. That is what I do, my data drive is SATA, and it always goes through Chipset for best Desktop use.
Sorry for the people being negative. I thought this was a great video! It’s easy for people who don’t make videos to critique! Keep going! I honestly was shocked that this didn’t have as many views as I expected! Nice job!
The speed difference is only matter for doing lots of large data transfer like HD videos. Every day use: browsing internet, watching videos, running applications. Not much differenc.e
I think video rendering speed is mostly affected by GPU speed and secondly, CPU speed. The reason is it takes a lot of processing power to render video. If copying GB, TB of data from one location to another location then data transfer speed matters more then CPU, GPU.
@@finalmatrix absolutely. usually a combo of both is beneficial to rendering. and if they are overclocked. well said on data transfers between locations. what i would want to know is if the gpu and cpu are decent/balanced will the render be more efficient with an nvme m.2 ssd.
Right now, then price difference between nvme gen 3 and sata is barely 15%. So I don't think so there is any harm in buying it, considering how cheap it is.
Question is are Sata SSD's even worth it now? when 1TB nvme gen 3 models go at same or lower price offering 6 times the performance of sata ssd, and 2TB models floating just above of 2TB sata counterparts, for higher capacities - either of ssd's are stuck at 8TB models for 5 years now with hdd's offering 22TB in CMR (Conventional Magentic Recording) and 26TB in SMR (Shingled Magnetic Recording) while being priced 4 times less than 8TB nvme ssd's and 2-3 times less than 8TB cheapest sata ssd's
You have to look at what you have the ports for and how expensive they are at the size you consider. HDDs are still the king for massive storage. And not every system has available M.2 ports. (either because they're already occupied, or there are none in the first place)
For me, in England, NVME SSDs are actually cheaper than SATA SSDs! (970 Evo Plus NVME and Evo 870 SATA). My current system has a 250gb SATA SSD for Windows and my programs, and a 2tb regular hard drive for all my storage and games and so on. As a filmmaker and content creator, it's safe to say my drive is nearly full and I'm consider a huge jump in storage space. Ideally a 1tb NVME SSD for Windows and my programs, and 3x 2tb NVME SSDs for all my stuff. Though my motherboard only has 2 M.2 slots, so I'll need to upgrade that, and I've contemplating getting a new CPU too. At this rate, one thing is just leading to another lol. Any suggestions, anybody?
If you have a bunch of SATA slots, you can run SATA SSDs in RAID for high speed and redundancy and capacity and economy. But have a backup, because my friend has too spend $4000 on data recovery once.
Something else to consider is the convenience factor. I'm going to be building a beast of a computer soon, and the NVMe drive is almost underneath where the CPU cooler and GPU (RTX 4080 which is a monster) meet. So, if I ever wanted/needed to replace it, I would have to take half the computer apart just to pop out the old drive and pop in a new one. This is a similar problem with the other M.2 slot on the motherboard. It's almost right underneath the GPU. While removing the GPU isn't that big of a deal compared to taking the CPU cooler off, it's still a massive waste of time, especially if troubleshooting is necessary. (which it always is) I have nothing that is going to utilize the transfer speed of the NVMe drive, so I'm going to go with a larger 4TB SSD and call it a day. Also, those Samsung SSDs are phenomenal. I've been using them for years and never had a problem.
the theorethical max speed is set by the connector. the practical speed of loading loads of relatively small files is set by the quality of the chips. so unless you are concerned with the speed of copying movies from one drive to another, the bus isn't that important.
In my country nvme has more value tbh because most 128GB sata ssds are priced at around 25-30$ while you can get a good lexar nvme ssd which has 256GB storage for 31-35$ and the thing i notice is that the ssds (both sata and nvme) that have less storage are bad value for example i can get a 256gb nvme drive for 35 dollar so you would expect a 512gb nvme to be priced around 70$ but the price is usually 10-20$ more costing around 50-55$.
Just bought a refurbished computer with a Gen 4 i5 CPU. No M.2 slots at all, so I'd need to buy a NVMe adapter card to use a NVMe drive. I wonder what that motherboard will even support (it dates back to 2013). Plenty of drive slots and SATA sockets however. The difference between NVMe and SATA SSDs is about $10 at the 500 GByte level, I'd have to spend $5 on the adapter card. Hmmmm......
Late reply, but why not both, for gaming at least? Just like when SSDs first started hitting, people were saying to use that as the OS drive, and for games, still use a hard drive. Now, just use an NVME drive for your OS, and continue with SSD for gaming, since even today, NVMe drives really do not impact gaming performance and likely won't until DirectStorage becomes mandatory. The real benefit of the NVMe is that you can put more of them in a system without having to worry about space for external drives. That's really it. Even so, you still have to avoid using the top slot unless the motherboard specifically states that it does not take away from the x16 lanes of the top slot for your GPU.
I have old CPU so I faced a lot of bottleneck in some games and some stuttering and microseconds freezes when playing on my old hard drive But after installing the Samsung 980 pro nvme not only the performance of games drastically improved but also CPU load decreased a lot no more stuttering and smooth game performance Also the NVME costs only few bucks more than SATA SSD where I live and prices are keep falling
With Direct Storage finally starting to show up in games SATA SSD's will start to lag behind NVME more when it comes to gaming. They already do when working with large files in other real world applications where the read/write makes a big difference.
just like pcie 5.0 devices are "just around the corner"... right I learned over the years to not shop for the "future" and focus on my wallet today and what I'm getting for the dollars spent.
@@dradfulboss You can already get gen 5 PCIE SSD's and let's be honest, 5 will be supplanted by 6 very quickly. 5 is more of a stopgap as the enterprise moves to 400g ethernet and the like.
DirectStorage is a long ways away from being implemented in most AAA games, let alone any indies. This is kind of like when Nvidia released the 20 series. Look at how many years it took to get Ray Tracing to actually play at *native* 4K/60 reliably (hint: it took four years and you need either a 4080 or 4090) and Ray Tracing still has an extremely low adoption rate, despite there being hundreds of videos on TH-cam for Cyberpunk, Control, Spider-Man, Alan Wake and Avatar now. Most of the other big games that have offered it have had a lackluster implementation (*cough* RE4 Remake). Dead Space looks amazing with it, but runs like absolute shit with or without RT on.
I had a gen 3 nvme hooked up as a c drive, then switched to a gen 4 980 pro. I dont think I perceived any real difference. It already booted fast on gen 3! Games also have nearly non existent gains. But in my head i always put new games on my gen4 drive because i "think" it does something lmao.
I am glad if I can have a new cpu, motherboard, gpu and so on, The ssd drives are always the last things to consider. I don't care about my seconds if I don't have less fps is games.
Speed is relative...benchmarks aren't everything. What about work load. Most games won't even see a difference unless you have a benchmarking rig which is ok. Working on an Nvme drive requires major surgery; undo the motherboard and all the cable mgt then pretty much rebuild the rig. Sata is simpler...slide it in and you're done. Nvme is great for boot and os drive and mega apps as they will run faster. Sata is good for storage. Best choice is listen to your budget.
What on Earth are you talking about? Surgery, having to remove a bunch of cables? What? At most you'll have to unplug your GPU cables and unscrew two screws. Wow, I must be a surgeon!
When you change the motherboard, it really is best to reinstall the OS from scratch. In my opinion, you wasted $85. By the time you change the motherboard, that drive will be 40% off at least. If not already.
Thanks for the video bro I am using hdd since 2013 . I don't actually care about boot times thats why never thought of getting ssd , but modern games like 2042 , rust take time to launch and load a lot with hdd this is the reason. Also I had old gen motherboard so it doesn't support nvme so I was worried if sata ssd would be similar to hdd , but I was wrong !!
Yeah, but at least in terms of a gaming processor, you can kind of "future proof". Or at least you can go for a processor that might cost you more upfront, but you'll get many more years out of it compared to picking up a "budget" chip. Unless you regularly upgrade every three years anyway, then that likely won't matter to you anyway. I used to buy the cheaper i5 chips, and overclock the hell out of them, but anymore that's just not worth it. The thread/core count inevitably rears its ugly head, and no amount of clock speed will compensate for it. Plus, with how good most modern chips are, and how hard they're pushed out of the box, there's little head room for overclocking anyway, and you're actually better off undervolting instead. Going a little overboard on a CPU from the start allows you to upgrade to a GPU two or even four years on down the line and you won't have to worry about bottlenecking it, unless you're trying to play at 120+fps with every game.
Oh, there is a benefit in the speed, but the felt difference in regular use isn't impressive. At least not as noticeable as switching from HDD to SSD in the first place. But there are also price and capacity. And bigger capacity is cheaper on slower drives. SSDs are still twice as expensive per GB than HDDs, so for mass storage where speed isn't important, HDDs are still the best choice. For the system drive a fast SSD is superior. That is where NVMe shines. Super responsive system and fast load times, when the program can benefit form that speed. And SATA SSDs sit inbetween. Slower than NVMe, but available in large capacities. The other point where M.2 is useful, no matter of NVMe or SATA over M.2, is space. The drive is smaller and doesn't need cables.
Yep. I have two different PCs: one primary/more modern one for gaming and the one on my desktop that is used for storage, browsing and to play lighter modern games, or just emulation. Each time I do a new system build, the previous gaming rig becomes the new desktop, and I'm still using 4x 4TB - 8TB drives inside it for storage, and just recently picked up three more 8TBs with external enclosures. You can get refurbished drives from a reputable seller for dirt cheap nowadays. Since mine are mainly for storage, the chance of failure is extremely low.
A SSD is virtually the same tech as Nvme. It is limited by the bus it runs on……..the Sata bus. That is also why Sata Nvme’s are slower than M.2 Nvmes……….because they are Sata. Easy to distinguish because they have 2 slots rather than 1.
You definitely notice the second if you’re used to it. I bought a series x when they released and it’s lightning fast. Even faster than my pc and my buddies pc. By a lot. And I don’t believe it even has nvme.
That has very little to do with the drive itself. The PS5 is generally faster at loading games than PC too. Even PCs with an NVMe. It's mainly the way the data gets decompressed on the consoles. This is what DirectStorage with Windows aims to address, but for it to work, the games actually have to support it. They don't by default. Right now only two games on PC use this feature.
The Question is, if i should save a few bucks and go for a big sata ssd or buy a future proof (in terms of size and loading speeds) m2 for game Storage. a few years back (3-4) using a sata ssd or sata hdd wasnt a big difference for me (not measured) but it felt like out of nowhere it changed very fast to go with a SSD for big titles
If your games launch just as well and you have a lot of them, go with the SATA. By the time you play something that really needs that NVMe speed, you can just get one of them as well, especially since price should drop.
Nobody speaks about the fact that faster drives like m.2 NVMe wear out faster. I have an Gigabyte 256 GB NVMe drive on which the OS is running and that wears out really noticeable faster than any SATA SSD 2.5" form factor. I at least stay away in the future from any m.2 NVMe drives due to accelerated wear. On the other system I have the OS (same Windows 11) on an normal SATA SSD and that shows still 100% while the NVMe OS drive shows now I believe 96% on the other system. Be aware of that. The NVMe is double as fast on Windows Defender but otherwise I do not see any difference in speed in real life between the systems and thus drive types.
Do I have to keep formatting my floppy drives. My Commandor 64 needs an upgrade from the slow cassette tape. The monitor hurts my eyes, is there some kind of filter thing I can place over the screen? How much is this going to cost? I've already spent over $1000, and I'm still sitting in a lawn chair with a TV dinner table thing. I don't think the shag carpet that the computer is sitting is good for cooling fans that sound like it's struggling now. At least it helps keep my feet warm. When I first bought it, it only took 30 minutes to start up. I don't know what happened, now it takes over an hour. My friend suggested I should up grade my RAM to 1Mb what ever that means, seems like expensive overkill. I hope this thing doesn't turn into some kind of AI monster that wants to take over the world.
you cannot improve 125%. You would end up in -25% of the time. What you refer to is a 55% improvement. There is a load of bloat when it comes to benchmarkings. My experience: an ADATA SU800 ssd is as fast as a Patriot P300 nvme.
i hate when they write it is 10 times faster than ssd and my evo 870 is the same speed as kingston fury renegade nvme waiting the same time for game to launch on both drives. nvme is a scam
If you use torrent on NVMe with 1gb broadband is getting your CPU 100% load, if you use SATA no load on CPU at all. Imagine you are downloading 100Gb or more . Be aware of this and don't believe that NVMe are answer for everything.
NVME needed to people who work with giant chunks of data every day. In casual experience, games, films and etc, not for work, ordinary good SSD drive is already amazing. NVME will not give you anything better at the experience of your daily casual stuff.
Good, then I can just grab a SATA III SSD and call it a day. Thank you!
My recording drive is still a SATA HDD, it can do 80+ MB/s consistently, and there is no need to do 640 mbps recordings.
actually modern games will benefit from nvme drives, and nvidia ReBAR and AMD SAM technologies require it. They require windows to be installed on a GPT formated NVMe PCIe gen 4 at minimum drive. I'm getting a new NVMe to replace my Crucial P3 1TB (dramless). I'll probably get Corsair MP600 Force (2TB), it's longevity is much better than any dramless drive I've seen (up to 3600TB of writes)
just dramless NVMe drives are utter crap (using slc cache instead of DRAM cache).
What happens when 2.5" sata is the almost the same price as an nvme drive
upgrading my laptop to a samsung sata SSD has been an absolute game changer. It makes older hardware completely viable....
Yes, I remember the first time I put my windows and boot on a nvme from a hdd for the first time. And I was blown away how fast and responsive opening apps was and how fast windows was
Thank you so much for clearing it up!
Great presentation. Another big benefit of the NvMe would be 2 less cables to plug in! I’m converting my entire system from using 1 SATA, 1 NVME, 1 HDD to a single 2TB nvme. That’s going to save me 4 cables worth of cable management lol. Again great work!
True I was gonna get into that, just couldn’t get it to fit in, but great point
Especially for small SFF builds, 2.5 SATA is just a PITA :D
But if you already have the ssd and hdd installed, why do you need to get rid of the cables?
best part is you can always do it over time. I just added another 1TB NVME so Now I'm 3.5 TB NVME 1TB SATA SSD. I still have my two 2 TB HDD's for a NAS I'm building now!
❤mmm mm
Nice video! For me I currently am using a NVME 3.0 PCIe currently but I am upgrading to a NVME 4.0 PCIe for faster write times and going to use my old SSD for extra stroage while the faster SSD will be my primary SSD that will boot OS, games, and anything else. There is a cost to this as the NVME 4.0 PCIe is more expensive than the 3.0 PCIe for the same storage but it's worth it for sure.
Thank you for the explanation man. right now I'm using an HDD so I'm thinking of changing to Nvme.
Im suprised you have less than 10k subs you really deserve more. Keep up the great work man!
Thanks homie
@@vextakes Of course man, i bet in the near future you will get a huge following gain
1 year later, now he has over 60K 🥳
Good stuff. Subscribed based on quality.
It's not really going to make a significant improvement over a normal SATA SSD for everyday use, but if you're planning on buying an SSD and you have the slot available on your MB (I didn't even know mine had the slot before I bought it and found out about it months later lol), it doesn't hurt to use it since it's not _that_ much more expensive and it's a cables free solution over SATA (at least ≤0.5 TB drives cost both roughly the same here)
the biggest factor is latency. the pipe is bigger so more data can flow through it. but when random read and writes happen it can happen faster over the lanes. so while you may not be able to use the other half of the pipe. the chips on the ssd are going to be more efficient and quicker when it comes to its task which it can still perform over your gen 3 lanes. so you still probably see some benefits from the gen 4 chips on your gen 3 lanes even though you can open the pip all the way for the drive. the pipes still snappier
Thanks for the simplified breakdown...I’m currently running two sata ssd’s, and was wondering if it would be worth getting an nvme for boot drive, but after seeing this I don’t really think I need one as I only turn on my computer for occasional gaming...I can wait the extra second or two lol.
Thanks man. Yeah it’s pretty marginal, more just for future proofing ig
Excellent expanation mate!
I use a NVME PCIE 1TB Gen4 drive as my boot drive and a SATA 2TB Drive as my storage drive which I also store all on my games on. Vex you are right about the loading times, they aren't that much different, and the cost is more affordable. My motherboard is a MSI Tomahawk B650, 7700X CPU. When I built this and started using it I was shocked how fast it is, I have been mainly using laptops with a HDD for web browsing and Office 365 apps, I have changed the HDD for a SSD in the laptops. I am absolutely stunned by the performance of the boot up time too in both my laptops and my new gaming PC..
@Vex loving the content you put out, it is always really interesting and educational, one of the best channels on youtube in my view.
Overheating is a problem though.
You don't have to wait for it to hit 70 Celsius for it to throttle.
Even at 45-50 (depending on the brand) you start getting spikes while gaming. For someone who plays proffessional e-sports, that 1 second freeze could throw the match. So yeah. Even a Gen3 needs to be cooled if doing something demanding on it.
Also another thing. The OS and the Game-drive need to be separate. Windows doesn't know, yet, how to harness all those extra IOPS that a high-speed NVMe gives you. Plus, Windows constantly reads/writes unto the OS drive, so it being used constantly, it's always slightly hotter by a few degrees. In order to keep it cool, all you need is two things. Airflow + Heatsink. Any air moved around it (if it has a heatsink), may it be a lot, may it be exhaust, or fresh air, will dramatically decrees temps and increase performance. Without a heatsink, and only relying on the airflow, the heat cannot be pulled away from it's controller/nand. The surface is too small, too thin, too low profile.
As for loading times, you should do more research. In your game, you were mostly waiting 97% of the time for the connection to be established. You should try some single player games to actually see improved loading times.
Also, don't rely on Advertised Read/Write Speeds. Those are sequential. That applies only when you're copying a file from an NVMe drive, to another NVMe drive inside your system.
IF we're talking OS and Game-Loading times, than you need to compare 4KRandom Reads/Writes. That's for handling small files (4 Kilobytes), Randomly (The Disk needs to search for the files, or the information in the file).
There's a few instances where a Sata SSD (870 Evo) feels the same as a gen 3 Nvme (Kingston Nv1) due to the fact that the NV1 doesn't have a DRam cache. Even though NV1 has faster Sequential speeds, the 4K random read is about the same, hence, it feels the same in the OS or Games. Companies have seen this, and started pricing accordingly. Therefore, a DRamless NVMe is actually cheaper nowadays, than a high-end Sata SSD.
Sry I ain’t reading this
@@vextakes he wasn't making fun of you.
@@vextakes bro 💀
@@vextakesdamn that's some L right there, that comment has some good info.
@@vextakes Why should I learn from someone who is willingly ignorant lol
Good honest review. If one has to have his/her games load 10 seconds faster then there are other problems. I am keeping my SATA SSD's until speed improvements become really meaningful. I don't work with super big files and don't turn on/off my computer all-the-time.
Thanks. Yeah the bottle doesn’t seem to be the drive speed when loading up games. It must be like processing or logging into servers. Glad u can see ur happy with ur stuff and u don’t don’t actually need to upgrade
@@vextakes Loading bloated Windows 11 would probably be the only real benefit for me. I have no problem waiting a few seconds longer when loading from a SATA SSD, then using the Sleep Mode to avoid booting and re-booting the system. I used to upgrade hard drives with new technology to maintain computer responsiveness. Still have next to me an old PC running on Windows XP with two FUJITSU SCSI 15k enterprise hard drives connected through a PCI SCSI controller card. No RAID, ...just 15k spinning SCSI drives for super fast responsiveness. NVME SSD's are not more responsive than SATA SSD's. Latencies are very similar. Once NVME latency improves visa-vis SATA ssd I'll buy a stick. No need to fall victim to "upgrade fever" prematurely. Same goes for DDR5 RAM. Today's DDR5 4800 memory has lower latency than DDR4 3600 resulting in a less responsive system.
Imrproved loading times are already there wit ha SATA SSD over HDD.
meanwhile im gaming whit several games running of a modern HDD (mecahical spinn disk).
whit the OS been on a SSD.
would it be faster to put the game on my secondary SSD? yes... do I find the loading screen at boot worth the extra cost not really.
Like sure I can boot Crusader Kings 3 45 sec from the SSD vs 1 min from the HDD. (not really worth it as i only boot up the game 1 a day at most so 15 sec a day not really worth it.
Great to the point video
SF factor case> M.2 helps a lot . Fewer cables in Small form factor is a blessing
After sliding the two options over a table that dirty, I'll choose death. Lol but good video dude!
believe it or not, forza 4 and 5 had low streaming issue when I was using a SATA SSD. Since I moved to Nvme gen 3 all the stutters are completely gone in all the games and I've never seen a low streaming bandwidth warning ever again.
When it comes to power usage it is a clear win for nvme but every other aspect of it even the speed (at the present time) comes down to preference. My own experince of getting faster and faster drives is this doesn't play out in the real world price to performance particulary well or even to just straight perceived and measured performance.
Jumping from HDD to SSD blew my mind away at the sheer amount of untapt power in my old computer had and was a must have upgrade for almost everyone.
Jumpping from SSD to NVME 3.0 was nice but the perceived performace was almost non existent and while the measured data rates benchmarked higher all tasks took less but not subsationally less time, I have found that multiple other tech is very likely llimiting potential gains from the upgrade over the SSD which is already fine and managable.
Jumping from NVME 3.0 to NVME 4.0 the perceived perfomace difference was bigger than SSD to NVME 3.0 but still very small, benchmarks are insane the same limiting factor is in place for the use of this drive.
No it's the lack of significant random read, low queue depth improvement that's causing the lack noticeable improvements. It's the exact reason old sata ssd on par with current hard drives in sequential transfers still demolish them in system performance and also why high end optane drives from the last couple years will still commonly net 50-100+% improvements in boot and load times over the best nand nvme ssds despite being over the same pcie gen 4 interface and the older nvme 1.3 version
You didn't consider the strengths of the SSD though that make it superior to the nVME.
It's portable between systems. And backwards compatible. You can take it out of your system, and plug it into any system going back to 2003. You can add it to any system going back to 2003.
I have two dozen computers that support SATA, and only one single motherboard that can support an nvme drive. If that motherboard fails, how am I going to get the data off???
A SATA drive is a lot easier to connect to. Just plug in two cables. An nvme you have to take apart the system and pull out that monster GPU just to get to the nvme slot, which is a huge headache.
And your speed gain is not 10x, not even close. Most of your reads and writes are random, not sequential... so the real world random read and write performance is going to be a lot closer to each other than you think.
Another advantage of SATA SSD is that their electronics is covered by case, so it is protected from accidental mechanical damage and electrostatic discharges. So they can be cleaned from dust safely. Also SATA devices are hot pluggable, without switching off the computer.
@@okaravan That's true for the long run. Dust attracts moisture.... you see the ruin it causes in old PC cases stored unused for years or decades in less than ideal conditions.
Just got a NVMe gen 3 500GB at BB for 25$ I went from not being able to load anything on my 2018 dell laptop to feeling faster than my iPhone 14 pro max. I love the feel. I bought the laptop used for 200$ with 16gb ram and some good specs. It’s even touch screen but the 2T HDD was Really bad! Thank God for TH-cam. Save me 100$s. Thanks for the info!
Did you test m.2 vs sata ssd specifically with gaming performance.... last I checked m.2 does have an advantage but not by much overall when gaming...
I always thought that unless NVME is cheaper for whatever reason, there is no practical reason to buy NVME, unless you work with really huge amount of data.
But now i have thought about, if you treat it like a multi core processor. Since there is so high speed, you can download, install, play and do a lot of different drive writing & reading without slowing the system/programs on the drive down.
Thanks for the video!
$47 for a 1tb Nvme drive. Pretty cheap now
@@blackraven8841 just got a 4TB Gen 4 for $175.
Can it really be that much faster than sata though, in a real life example? Your gigabit Internet connection won't even come close to saturating it
Have a question, so I have a old Scandisk Ultra II 480Gb. I've used it for years and it's actually got about 850gb of information on it. How is this possible?
For typical use, nearly any NVMe drive will be a good choice. Unless you do side-by-side comparisons, you will very likely not notice any difference in their speeds.
The above pertains to typical use.
If you will be writing dozens of gigabytes of data to your NVMe drive, non-stop, that is when you will absolutely notice a difference in performance. That wildly fast NVMe drive might slow down to under 100 MB/s write speed (temporarily).
Without exception (none that I am aware of), every consumer level NVMe drive has two types of NAND cells (that is where your data is stored).
Typically, 10% (could be more or less) of the drive will have fast NAND cells, and the rest of the drive will have slower NAND cells (sometimes much slower NAND cells).
So when you write your hundreds of megabytes (or even several gigabytes) to your NVMe drive, you will always hit the fastest part of the drive, and you will always see impressive speeds.
However, if you write enough gigabytes, without rest, to the NVMe drive, you will fill up its fast NAND cells, and the drive will be forced to write directly to the slower NAND cells.
Depending on the drive, you might see a moderate performance slow-down, or you might see the performance drop like a brick.
When your NVMe drive is not busy (which is most of the time), it moves the data from its fast NAND cells to its slower NAND cells (you will not see it happening). So you will almost always have fast NAND cells available for all of your activities.
Run Crystal Disk's benchmarking tool, and set it for 25% of the capacity of the drive (to be sure it will exceed the drive's faster NAND cell capacity).
When you wake up, the next day, if the test finished, you will see lousy results, because the NVMe drive had to write lots of data to the slower portion of the drive.
Chia crypt-o mining involves creating large (100+ GB) files. A common way of doing so is by utilizing an NVMe drive for the process that creates the large files.
People involved with the Chia process have learned which NVMe drives slow down, and which drives maintain their pace.
For typical use, nearly any NVMe drive will be fine. But for large writing jobs, that 980 Pro drive (that our host was using) is a great choice. It will not slow down (or just a bit).
There are Enterprise / Data Center level NVMe drives (U.2 form factor) that are made 100% of the fast stuff. They will never slow down, no matter how much you hammer them.
But be prepared to mortgage your home for those drives.
By the way, that Crucial MX500 SATA based drive, that our host used, gets great reviews. But Crucial butchered the 4 TB model. It performs close to the speed of mechanical drives, and at times, slower than mechanical drives. Stay away from it, unless you need the space but not the speed. The only benefit is that it will use less power than a 4 TB mechanical drive, and it does not have platters that sleep). And shame on Crucial for using the great reviews of the other MX500 drives to snooker people into thinking that their 4 TB model would also perform at that level.
I want for a crucial p5 plus for my boot drive 500gb and 2x p5 plus 2tb for my storage drives. They where pretty cheap and got some pretty decent write and read speeds from my reading. Its a major difference from my kington a400 and a hard drive setup i was rocking before it😅
NVMe shows huge benefits when it's the location of your swap file during memory contention. Which will happen if you use a media aggregation/management app, or any app that gradually loads information into memory as you view it without ever releasing any, with thousands of items. OBS and file transcode ops will each use a lot. Do all that at once, you'll want a huge swap file on an NVMe as fast as your MB supports. I have 32GB DRAM and 32GB SWAP, ZSWAP enabled, sometimes it runs out and the OS terminates one of the apps, typically the media app playing thousands of podcasts at random.
I'm curious as to what you think today. Honestly, using my NVME day to day, I do not see a huge advantage other than taking up less space. It might be slower in some cases. When expanding zip files for example, I don't see an advantage, or when moving files around the same drive. Now moving large amounts of data between two NVME drives, oh yea, that is amazing.
Also nowadays they're basically the same price up, like a 4tb gen 4 nvme ssd is the same price as a 4tb sata ssd. Only reason to pick sata ssds now is if you don't have anymore m.2 slots on your board
Very interesting! I've seen an external Samsung 4TB USB 3.0 drive booting much faster at Batocera when loading vs a mechanical 5TB USB 3.0 Seagate 5TB. Loading the games seems the same speed. I've also noticed an 11 year old mechanical 1TB SATA 3 drive running a lot slower than an external USB 3.0 SSD: the connection is a slower technology than SATA 3, but wins it hands down!
What you don't know or told you viewer is that the technology of NVME is limited to a capacity of 8TB due to their gum physical size, meaning for those who will need big capacity in the future will have no choice but hoping that another newer technology will make this possible or even return back to sata drive, especially since 2.5 drive can accommodate more memory and larger capacity b than the limited 8TB of NVME. so in brief NVME has a short life in capacity wise.
Thought it was unecessary, 8tb is already a lot
@@vextakes alot for now but in future it will be small
I went to your Spotify and subbed but cant find that song at the end of this video, I wanna hear the whole song!! Whats the name of it?
Thanks homie. It’s unreleased, called “white noise”. Thinking about putting some out as a little album
I can't say how NVMe 4.0 performs because I don't have a way to compare it to Sata 3, but I can share my experience with Gen 3 PCIe versus Sata 3. My main gaming drive used to be a Crucial MX500 1 TB until I needed more space, so I installed a 2TB WD Black SN850X into my Gen 3 board. In my experience, both drives had similar performance whether it was transferring data, compressing data, opening and running programs, and also running games. The WD did have a slight improvement over the Crucial in certain aspects such as more stable games, but overall nothing magical happened like the noticeable difference in speed between HDD and SSD.
What I like about using an NVMe is its compact form factor compared to large 3.5" and 2.5" drives. It's quite ironic how things change yet stay the same; first there was floppy disks, then mechanical disks, then slim versions of mechanical disks, then SSD disks, and now back to very thin disks. Anyway, as far as I seen the only real benefit of one is that it uses a minimal amount of space, it is somewhat faster than Sata 3 depending on what you do with it.
vex would you recommend a d-ram less nvme ssd or a sata ssd with dram?
namely: Samsung 870 evo vs Sasmsung 980
Super doesn't matter to me. I just don't want a mechanical hard drive in my PC because it's L O U D
With how much prices have dropped now for gen 4 nvmes even, they are a no brainer. 50-55 euros for a 1Tb gen 4.0 nvme, albeit it is mid speed at 5K mb/s ,but still great price.
There is a windows log which you can use to find the delta time between when the operating system first comes online to when the os is fully ready.
I was able to setup a script which rebooted a machine, wait 5 minutes, then export the relevant entries from Diagnostics-Performance and logging the BootDuration to a file, and then reboot again.
If you can do things programmatically, do it.
Tech people are not code people. This is a clear distinction that is taught in all school programs related to IT. A better form of advice would be to just tell him to download a program that does all of that.
I always have the same problem with those Linux guys trying to tell average people to do "x" and "y" in the terminal why a ready made program (with a GUI) already exists on the distro's app store or the author's website.
There needs to be a course that trains developers and network engineers how to talk with average people.
Whooptedoo one is a few seconds faster and that's all you pay for as the rest is 100% the same.
If I can buy 3 sata ssd's for 1 nvme4 the choice is made before you ask the question.
Just upgraded from a crashed HDD to SSD sata, a world of difference.
Pcie gen 3 ones are abt the same price as sata. Those are worth for sure
just got a 1TB Teamgroup mp34 Nvme gen 3 SSD for $48.99. My pc had the oldschool set up of small ssd big HDD. It's definitely a worth while upgrade for me.
I've never heard of this brand. How has it been for you so far?
@@Jjjuniors so far so good. definitely faster than the old ssd
B650e-i board has 1 pcie4 +1 pcie5 +2 sata3 but SSD prices keep dropping every year so I'm still on oldschool WD Green HDD for longevity/capacity, biding my time. But man, that old HDD boot and game load 15min delay is nasty slow... May just have to grab a pcie4 soon before I go crazy, hoping more DirectStorage games launch soon. SSD is not for longevity/capacity though, so monthly backup to the HDD kept on a shelf somewhere may be a good idea until 8TB+ SSD become reliable/cheap enough to take over.
The advantage of SATA is that it goes through the South Bridge, Chipset, and this means it doesn't get in the way of game play by taking up a fast bus. That is what I do, my data drive is SATA, and it always goes through Chipset for best Desktop use.
Sorry for the people being negative. I thought this was a great video! It’s easy for people who don’t make videos to critique! Keep going! I honestly was shocked that this didn’t have as many views as I expected! Nice job!
The speed difference is only matter for doing lots of large data transfer like HD videos. Every day use: browsing internet, watching videos, running applications. Not much differenc.e
what about rendering/exporting videos? since the write speed is around 3k mbps on gen3 vs standard ssd @ 500mpbs...
I think video rendering speed is mostly affected by GPU speed and secondly, CPU speed. The reason is it takes a lot of processing power to render video. If copying GB, TB of data from one location to another location then data transfer speed matters more then CPU, GPU.
@@finalmatrix absolutely. usually a combo of both is beneficial to rendering. and if they are overclocked. well said on data transfers between locations. what i would want to know is if the gpu and cpu are decent/balanced will the render be more efficient with an nvme m.2 ssd.
Right now, then price difference between nvme gen 3 and sata is barely 15%. So I don't think so there is any harm in buying it, considering how cheap it is.
Question is are Sata SSD's even worth it now? when 1TB nvme gen 3 models go at same or lower price offering 6 times the performance of sata ssd, and 2TB models floating just above of 2TB sata counterparts, for higher capacities - either of ssd's are stuck at 8TB models for 5 years now with hdd's offering 22TB in CMR (Conventional Magentic Recording) and 26TB in SMR (Shingled Magnetic Recording) while being priced 4 times less than 8TB nvme ssd's and 2-3 times less than 8TB cheapest sata ssd's
You have to look at what you have the ports for and how expensive they are at the size you consider. HDDs are still the king for massive storage. And not every system has available M.2 ports. (either because they're already occupied, or there are none in the first place)
I have a 2013 machine i want to upgrade i srill want to keep the 1 tb hdd for storage data and use one of those for running things.
For me, in England, NVME SSDs are actually cheaper than SATA SSDs! (970 Evo Plus NVME and Evo 870 SATA). My current system has a 250gb SATA SSD for Windows and my programs, and a 2tb regular hard drive for all my storage and games and so on. As a filmmaker and content creator, it's safe to say my drive is nearly full and I'm consider a huge jump in storage space. Ideally a 1tb NVME SSD for Windows and my programs, and 3x 2tb NVME SSDs for all my stuff. Though my motherboard only has 2 M.2 slots, so I'll need to upgrade that, and I've contemplating getting a new CPU too. At this rate, one thing is just leading to another lol. Any suggestions, anybody?
If you have a bunch of SATA slots, you can run SATA SSDs in RAID for high speed and redundancy and capacity and economy. But have a backup, because my friend has too spend $4000 on data recovery once.
Something else to consider is the convenience factor. I'm going to be building a beast of a computer soon, and the NVMe drive is almost underneath where the CPU cooler and GPU (RTX 4080 which is a monster) meet. So, if I ever wanted/needed to replace it, I would have to take half the computer apart just to pop out the old drive and pop in a new one. This is a similar problem with the other M.2 slot on the motherboard. It's almost right underneath the GPU. While removing the GPU isn't that big of a deal compared to taking the CPU cooler off, it's still a massive waste of time, especially if troubleshooting is necessary. (which it always is) I have nothing that is going to utilize the transfer speed of the NVMe drive, so I'm going to go with a larger 4TB SSD and call it a day.
Also, those Samsung SSDs are phenomenal. I've been using them for years and never had a problem.
Try moving large files on an Nvme and watch its speed fall out of the sky.
the theorethical max speed is set by the connector. the practical speed of loading loads of relatively small files is set by the quality of the chips. so unless you are concerned with the speed of copying movies from one drive to another, the bus isn't that important.
In my country nvme has more value tbh because most 128GB sata ssds are priced at around 25-30$ while you can get a good lexar nvme ssd which has 256GB storage for 31-35$ and the thing i notice is that the ssds (both sata and nvme) that have less storage are bad value for example i can get a 256gb nvme drive for 35 dollar so you would expect a 512gb nvme to be priced around 70$ but the price is usually 10-20$ more costing around 50-55$.
Def a SATA at the moment because my PC is a tad too old for the motherboard to have NVMe, (there are NVMe drivers for it)
Just bought a refurbished computer with a Gen 4 i5 CPU. No M.2 slots at all, so I'd need to buy a NVMe adapter card to use a NVMe drive. I wonder what that motherboard will even support (it dates back to 2013). Plenty of drive slots and SATA sockets however. The difference between NVMe and SATA SSDs is about $10 at the 500 GByte level, I'd have to spend $5 on the adapter card. Hmmmm......
Mate your cat totally photo- bombed your video - so funny.
Late reply, but why not both, for gaming at least? Just like when SSDs first started hitting, people were saying to use that as the OS drive, and for games, still use a hard drive. Now, just use an NVME drive for your OS, and continue with SSD for gaming, since even today, NVMe drives really do not impact gaming performance and likely won't until DirectStorage becomes mandatory. The real benefit of the NVMe is that you can put more of them in a system without having to worry about space for external drives. That's really it. Even so, you still have to avoid using the top slot unless the motherboard specifically states that it does not take away from the x16 lanes of the top slot for your GPU.
I have old CPU so I faced a lot of bottleneck in some games and some stuttering and microseconds freezes when playing on my old hard drive
But after installing the Samsung 980 pro nvme not only the performance of games drastically improved but also CPU load decreased a lot no more stuttering and smooth game performance
Also the NVME costs only few bucks more than SATA SSD where I live and prices are keep falling
That is the point where upgrading the bandwith outside the CPU can do a lot. Faster drive, faster RAM.
With Direct Storage finally starting to show up in games SATA SSD's will start to lag behind NVME more when it comes to gaming. They already do when working with large files in other real world applications where the read/write makes a big difference.
just like pcie 5.0 devices are "just around the corner"... right
I learned over the years to not shop for the "future" and focus on my wallet today and what I'm getting for the dollars spent.
@@dradfulboss You can already get gen 5 PCIE SSD's and let's be honest, 5 will be supplanted by 6 very quickly. 5 is more of a stopgap as the enterprise moves to 400g ethernet and the like.
@@dradfulboss exactly, furure proof stuff is just marketing to steal your money
That puts SATA SSDs in a weird place. Too slow for Direct Storage, too expensive for massive space.
DirectStorage is a long ways away from being implemented in most AAA games, let alone any indies. This is kind of like when Nvidia released the 20 series. Look at how many years it took to get Ray Tracing to actually play at *native* 4K/60 reliably (hint: it took four years and you need either a 4080 or 4090) and Ray Tracing still has an extremely low adoption rate, despite there being hundreds of videos on TH-cam for Cyberpunk, Control, Spider-Man, Alan Wake and Avatar now. Most of the other big games that have offered it have had a lackluster implementation (*cough* RE4 Remake). Dead Space looks amazing with it, but runs like absolute shit with or without RT on.
I had a gen 3 nvme hooked up as a c drive, then switched to a gen 4 980 pro. I dont think I perceived any real difference. It already booted fast on gen 3! Games also have nearly non existent gains. But in my head i always put new games on my gen4 drive because i "think" it does something lmao.
are you using the legacy boot mode?
Don’t remember
i never had nvme i just have normal sata ssd, its enough for me
Prices dropped to like $50-60 for 1tb Nvme m.2 drives
Kitty on the hunt lol. Thanks quality work
I am glad if I can have a new cpu, motherboard, gpu and so on, The ssd drives are always the last things to consider. I don't care about my seconds if I don't have less fps is games.
Speed is relative...benchmarks aren't everything. What about work load. Most games won't even see a difference unless you have a benchmarking rig which is ok. Working on an Nvme drive requires major surgery; undo the motherboard and all the cable mgt then pretty much rebuild the rig. Sata is simpler...slide it in and you're done. Nvme is great for boot and os drive and mega apps as they will run faster. Sata is good for storage. Best choice is listen to your budget.
What on Earth are you talking about? Surgery, having to remove a bunch of cables? What? At most you'll have to unplug your GPU cables and unscrew two screws. Wow, I must be a surgeon!
i was planning on replacing my 2tb NVME for a 4tb NVME and just ended up getting a sata sdd 2tb disk for way cheaper
When you change the motherboard, it really is best to reinstall the OS from scratch. In my opinion, you wasted $85. By the time you change the motherboard, that drive will be 40% off at least. If not already.
Thanks for the video bro I am using hdd since 2013 . I don't actually care about boot times thats why never thought of getting ssd , but modern games like 2042 , rust take time to launch and load a lot with hdd this is the reason. Also I had old gen motherboard so it doesn't support nvme so I was worried if sata ssd would be similar to hdd , but I was wrong !!
Glad I could help. Surprisingly not as big a difference as u would think
@@vextakes I wanted to ask which brand should I go for ?? I'm confused between Samsung , WD and crucial which is better ? Can u help
@@aspirewot8408they're all fine. Nothing wrong with picking either of them.
NVMe just fast enough for me to know my trigger pull on call of duty hit that dude before his trigger pull hit me :)
Future proofing is silly to me. By the time you upgrade, there will most likely be better tech even if it's not the latest gen.
Yeah, but at least in terms of a gaming processor, you can kind of "future proof". Or at least you can go for a processor that might cost you more upfront, but you'll get many more years out of it compared to picking up a "budget" chip. Unless you regularly upgrade every three years anyway, then that likely won't matter to you anyway. I used to buy the cheaper i5 chips, and overclock the hell out of them, but anymore that's just not worth it. The thread/core count inevitably rears its ugly head, and no amount of clock speed will compensate for it. Plus, with how good most modern chips are, and how hard they're pushed out of the box, there's little head room for overclocking anyway, and you're actually better off undervolting instead.
Going a little overboard on a CPU from the start allows you to upgrade to a GPU two or even four years on down the line and you won't have to worry about bottlenecking it, unless you're trying to play at 120+fps with every game.
Dont forget a backup
Oh, there is a benefit in the speed, but the felt difference in regular use isn't impressive. At least not as noticeable as switching from HDD to SSD in the first place.
But there are also price and capacity. And bigger capacity is cheaper on slower drives.
SSDs are still twice as expensive per GB than HDDs, so for mass storage where speed isn't important, HDDs are still the best choice.
For the system drive a fast SSD is superior. That is where NVMe shines. Super responsive system and fast load times, when the program can benefit form that speed.
And SATA SSDs sit inbetween. Slower than NVMe, but available in large capacities.
The other point where M.2 is useful, no matter of NVMe or SATA over M.2, is space. The drive is smaller and doesn't need cables.
Yep. I have two different PCs: one primary/more modern one for gaming and the one on my desktop that is used for storage, browsing and to play lighter modern games, or just emulation. Each time I do a new system build, the previous gaming rig becomes the new desktop, and I'm still using 4x 4TB - 8TB drives inside it for storage, and just recently picked up three more 8TBs with external enclosures. You can get refurbished drives from a reputable seller for dirt cheap nowadays. Since mine are mainly for storage, the chance of failure is extremely low.
The funny thing is that now in 2024 NVME ssd's are cheaper in the Netherlands than sata ssd's
A SSD is virtually the same tech as Nvme. It is limited by the bus it runs on……..the Sata bus. That is also why Sata Nvme’s are slower than M.2 Nvmes……….because they are Sata. Easy to distinguish because they have 2 slots rather than 1.
update i have 2x 970 evo ssd, and bought a 980 nvme today, i see no difference😅 i just play games, windows seems to boot faster tho
You definitely notice the second if you’re used to it. I bought a series x when they released and it’s lightning fast. Even faster than my pc and my buddies pc. By a lot. And I don’t believe it even has nvme.
That has very little to do with the drive itself. The PS5 is generally faster at loading games than PC too. Even PCs with an NVMe. It's mainly the way the data gets decompressed on the consoles. This is what DirectStorage with Windows aims to address, but for it to work, the games actually have to support it. They don't by default. Right now only two games on PC use this feature.
The Question is, if i should save a few bucks and go for a big sata ssd or buy a future proof (in terms of size and loading speeds) m2 for game Storage.
a few years back (3-4) using a sata ssd or sata hdd wasnt a big difference for me (not measured) but it felt like out of nowhere it changed very fast to go with a SSD for big titles
I showed u all the info I got in this video so u just gotta make a decision
If your games launch just as well and you have a lot of them, go with the SATA. By the time you play something that really needs that NVMe speed, you can just get one of them as well, especially since price should drop.
In a time where nvmes cost as much as sata ssds its pretty obvious what to pick now
Or you can have both.
Nobody speaks about the fact that faster drives like m.2 NVMe wear out faster. I have an Gigabyte 256 GB NVMe drive on which the OS is running and that wears out really noticeable faster than any SATA SSD 2.5" form factor. I at least stay away in the future from any m.2 NVMe drives due to accelerated wear. On the other system I have the OS (same Windows 11) on an normal SATA SSD and that shows still 100% while the NVMe OS drive shows now I believe 96% on the other system.
Be aware of that. The NVMe is double as fast on Windows Defender but otherwise I do not see any difference in speed in real life between the systems and thus drive types.
Do I have to keep formatting my floppy drives. My Commandor 64 needs an upgrade from the slow cassette tape. The monitor hurts my eyes, is there some kind of filter thing I can place over the screen? How much is this going to cost? I've already spent over $1000, and I'm still sitting in a lawn chair with a TV dinner table thing. I don't think the shag carpet that the computer is sitting is good for cooling fans that sound like it's struggling now. At least it helps keep my feet warm. When I first bought it, it only took 30 minutes to start up. I don't know what happened, now it takes over an hour. My friend suggested I should up grade my RAM to 1Mb what ever that means, seems like expensive overkill. I hope this thing doesn't turn into some kind of AI monster that wants to take over the world.
Couldn't you have wiped the table down to get rid of the rocks and sand before you put computer hardware on it ?
I was to distracted by the empty beer(?) cans under your bed to listen to the content
That's likely Red Bull. 😆
1:30 - Wait you're telling me thzt m.2 ssd like the 980 pro got their cost reduced by 40% in les than a year Oo
i thought my computer was schizophrenic until i realized I had a sata 3 connection not nvme
is that cat really big ?
Speed in theory isn't speed in real world
To be honest, nvme can help with case space
Sorry, could you repeat that? I was locked on your cat.
you cannot improve 125%. You would end up in -25% of the time.
What you refer to is a 55% improvement.
There is a load of bloat when it comes to benchmarkings. My experience: an ADATA SU800 ssd is as fast as a Patriot P300 nvme.
hot nerdy boy consider me subbed
Transfer speeds are only one dimension. Take a look at IOPS: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOPS.
Change those headphones. AKG K92 is crap. Get AKG K361 or even better AKG K371.
cable management dats worthwhile
They are near the same price so yes nvme is worth it.
You got scammed samsung 980 pro 2TB SSD is £72 now on amazon (not £210)
i hate when they write it is 10 times faster than ssd and my evo 870 is the same speed as kingston fury renegade nvme
waiting the same time for game to launch on both drives. nvme is a scam
You can find 2tb nvme under $100
If you use torrent on NVMe with 1gb broadband is getting your CPU 100% load, if you use SATA no load on CPU at all. Imagine you are downloading 100Gb or more . Be aware of this and don't believe that NVMe are answer for everything.
lmao my ssd starting at 13 seconds
All not true it depends on the ssd and ram ur m.2 could some type be not faster there lots of m.2 out there that cant beat ssd
Well SATA SSD is better then a mechanical HDD