|
I don't have enough sata cables. I'm gonna cry 
GenericGirlName fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Jun 22, 2019 |
#
?
Jun 22, 2019 17:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
Lets say I went with either the XPG SX8200, or the Inland 1TB M.2 2280, what kind of tangible benefits would i get from running 2 of either in Raid 0? Am I talking like a 15% speed increase in installs and boot times? More? Less?
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2019 18:23
|
|
|
Klyith posted:When considering the WD drive, do you have a reason to want it in the m.2 form factor? It potentially limits re-use versus a 2.5" drive. An m.2 SATA drive means you're stuck with the m.2 socket, and in desktops you get 2 or at most 3 m.2 slots on your mobo versus 6 normal SATA jacks. (OTOH if you're putting it into a laptop ignore this question.) My use is video games, some encoding and some not too intensive data crunching. It's sounding like the extra speed of the intel isn't going to add much and while I won't fill it up completely it does seem like it's a potential headache I don't want to worry about. Thanks
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
Peaceful Anarchy posted:What other use is the m2 socket? I'm building new and have a lot of SATA HDDs for storage from previous builds, so I figure going m2 lets me have one more HDD and/or future SSD On a desktop machine it's true that m.2 isn't much use besides storage. Personally I just don't see any value to getting a m.2 SATA drive if I didn't specifically need one. I re-use a lot of components all the time so my hesitancy over m.2 sata is the future where maybe NVMe drives are priced such that I won't want to use that m.2 slot on a sata drive -- but the adapter that BeastofExmoor pointed to is a decent solution. (Also I don't have case windows & don't care that there are ugly wires going to my drives. I understand that someone building for ＡＥＳＴＨＥＴＩＣ might disagree.) quote:(I'm assuming using m2 doesn't disable a normal SATA slot). quote:My use is video games, some encoding and some not too intensive data crunching. It's sounding like the extra speed of the intel isn't going to add much and while I won't fill it up completely it does seem like it's a potential headache I don't want to worry about. Thanks Basically the 660p gets most of it's recommendation due to the price being good enough that even if you were to format it using only 95% of the space and leaving ~150gb free it comes out ahead. If you can pick up a 2tb WD for the same price those are great drives too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2019 19:04
|
|
|
Klyith posted:On many motherboards that is exactly what will happen, check the specs and manuals for yours.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2019 19:23
|
|
|
Zotix posted:Lets say I went with either the XPG SX8200, or the Inland 1TB M.2 2280, what kind of tangible benefits would i get from running 2 of either in Raid 0? Am I talking like a 15% speed increase in installs and boot times? More? Less? When running a decent NVMe device through 2x or more PCI lanes in a gaming/home system, storage performance is no longer a factor in system performance. Booting is bottlenecked by POST time and compute; games loading in ~seven seconds or fewer are decompressing resources and aren't affected by thermal limiting or storage protocol fulfillment time. As a single NVMe device meets or exceeds your system's maximum theoretical storage needs, running multiple NVMe devices adds no benefit while *technically* increasing the chance of data loss due to storage device failure by a factor of 2. Mind, the risk of ssd failure is in general quite drat low these days, so that risk is already quite negligible within the warranty period of reputable devices. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Jun 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2019 20:18
|
|
|
Peaceful Anarchy posted:I want to piggyback off this question: One is NVMe, the other is SATA, so that's the primary reason you'd choose one over the other, depending on your system requirements. The 660p is cheaper, so that would be the secondary consideration. Beyond that, performance will be sufficient with either SSD, especially considering one would likely purchase either of those 2 TB drives for bulk storage rather than highest-performance OS use. In a single-SSD scenario either would be fine, but as I mentioned I only have setups where a fast TLC NVMe drive runs the OS and the 660p is explicitly for bulk storage. Klyith posted:When considering the WD drive, do you have a reason to want it in the m.2 form factor? It potentially limits re-use versus a 2.5" drive. An m.2 SATA drive means you're stuck with the m.2 socket, and in desktops you get 2 or at most 3 m.2 slots on your mobo versus 6 normal SATA jacks. (OTOH if you're putting it into a laptop ignore this question.) As I've mentioned in the past, and as Beast indicated, SATA drives are useful because various adapters are plentiful and cheap, as opposed to NVMe adapters. You might go with an m.2 SATA SSD knowing you could easily put it in a 2.5" or USB3 adapter down the line, extending its useful life. NVMe is definitely the best choice for future compatibility, however. Zotix posted:Lets say I went with either the XPG SX8200, or the Inland 1TB M.2 2280, what kind of tangible benefits would i get from running 2 of either in Raid 0? Am I talking like a 15% speed increase in installs and boot times? More? Less? You should ONLY consider RAID if you specifically need it, i.e. the risks are outweighed by the benefits. You don't need an SSD RAID0 for "installs and boot times." Any failure with one drive will destroy the array. You will be 100% satisfied with either single NVMe drive. Peaceful Anarchy posted:What other use is the m2 socket? I'm building new and have a lot of SATA HDDs for storage from previous builds, so I figure going m2 lets me have one more HDD and/or future SSD (I'm assuming using m2 doesn't disable a normal SATA slot). I absolutely agree with populating all your m.2 slots as appropriate, because then any SATA ports left can be used for a variety of legacy devices as necessary, like HDDs or even an optical drive if warranted. I'm sure there are m.2 SATA adapters on AliExpress or BangGood or whatever that give you a SATA port but beyond that it would suck to use up all your SATA ports with m.2 slots free but then need to add an HDD or two.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
Atomizer posted:There are 2 TB 2.5" SSDs (Micron 1100, SU800) also under $200 that would be viable alternatives if 2.5" SATA is an option. Are there any others that are worth looking at other than the ones you listed? Micron 1100s are all over 200 right now from what I'm finding. The SU800 and that wd blue are at 200 even though. DeadFatDuckFat fucked around with this message at 01:21 on Jun 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 01:07
|
|
|
1TB Inland Professional M.2 arrived today. Results vs Samsung 970 pro 1tb - they're uh, not bad for a $100 1TB stick of gum. Samsung 1tb 970 pro:  Inland professional 1tb wintergreen:  The 970 pro has had some fair use in the last 2 year-ish; the inland is brand new with no data written to it at all. I have no idea if that affects the numbers above (probably). Here's a SATA 500gb 850 evo 2.5" ssd that's had a lot of use, for further comparison. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 02:18
|
|
|
The difference is that Samsung Pro line drives are MLC and should be able to sustain that measured write performance indefinitely, while QLC drives like the Inland Pro will suffer a steep drop off once you fill the SLC-mode write buffer. On the other hand it is exceedingly unlikely you care about sustaining high speed writes for minutes or hours, so enjoy!
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 02:57
|
|
|
BobHoward posted:The difference is that Samsung Pro line drives are MLC and should be able to sustain that measured write performance indefinitely, while QLC drives like the Inland Pro will suffer a steep drop off once you fill the SLC-mode write buffer. Ya it’s getting the rest of my steam library dumped on it. Three cheers for overkill!
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 03:20
|
|
|
skylined! posted:1TB Inland Professional M.2 arrived today. Results vs Samsung 970 pro 1tb - they're uh, not bad for a $100 1TB stick of gum. Did you get the Inland Professional or the Inland Premium? I believe the later is a little better on paper and the one most recommended, so I was just curious if it was a typo or not. Either way, nothing to complain about performance wise! BobHoward posted:The difference is that Samsung Pro line drives are MLC and should be able to sustain that measured write performance indefinitely, while QLC drives like the Inland Pro will suffer a steep drop off once you fill the SLC-mode write buffer. I believe both the Inland Pro and Premium drives use TLC rather the QLC. Their endurance ratings reflect that (600TBW and 1600TBW respectively for the 1TB models).
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 03:23
|
|
|
BeastOfExmoor posted:Did you get the Inland Professional or the Inland Premium? I believe the later is a little better on paper and the one most recommended, so I was just curious if it was a typo or not. Either way, nothing to complain about performance wise! With those benches he definitely got the Premium. And yes, both use TLC. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 03:41 on Jun 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:With those benches he definitely got the Premium. And yes, both use TLC. Ya good call, it's the premium.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 11:58
|
|
|
With data size of 1 GiB - wouldn't it mostly be measuring the DRAM cache performance?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 16:12
|
|
|
DeadFatDuckFat posted:Are there any others that are worth looking at other than the ones you listed? Micron 1100s are all over 200 right now from what I'm finding. The SU800 and that wd blue are at 200 even though. Last time I checked, no, the SU800 in particular tended to be the cheapest 2 TB option for SATA 2.5", especially with Adata-specific discount codes on Rakuten. The Micron 1100 is an OEM drive that wasn't intended to be available directly from retail channels, so unless it's notably cheaper then I'd seek out the SU800. skylined! posted:The 970 pro has had some fair use in the last 2 year-ish; the inland is brand new with no data written to it at all. I have no idea if that affects the numbers above (probably). It's possible that the 970 is doing some background data management, like wear-leveling. It clearly is partially filled so if you're benchmarking it by writing a ton of data to it then I would assume it's simultaneously moving existing data around. If you formatted, TRIM'd, then benchmarked the drive it could very well perform noticeably higher. Ika posted:With data size of 1 GiB - wouldn't it mostly be measuring the DRAM cache performance? Possibly, especially if the tool considers the run to be "complete" as soon as the drive receives the data set, without knowing whether or not it was fully written to flash. Note how the non-sequential results are well below the sequentials, though: if it was just writing to DRAM then there should be a much less drastic difference in performance. Clearly NAND write speed is being measured at least in part. Also a 1 TB SSD should have 1 GB of DRAM, some of which would be reserved for its data map, so some unknown portion less than the full DRAM capacity is available as a write buffer; between that and the 4 consecutive runs actual flash speed is being taken into consideration. I do agree that a larger benchmark file size should've been chosen, though. Also if I'm not mistaken, isn't the ATTO benchmark tool capable of bypassing the DRAM cache?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 23:03
|
|
|
That PCIe 4.0 SSD thing is sort of driving me nuts. In a lot of places, this is getting treated as a 5GB/s e-penis. I'd love to argue the uselessness of that metric, but having to post a primer on filesystems and how IO works gets tiresome.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:That PCIe 4.0 SSD thing is sort of driving me nuts. In a lot of places, this is getting treated as a 5GB/s e-penis. I'd love to argue the uselessness of that metric, but having to post a primer on filesystems and how IO works gets tiresome. BIGUR NUBMRS IZ BETUR 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
I'm embarrassed by how much I want to get the PCIe 4.0 SSD.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
8 cents a gig https://twitter.com/TechDeals_16/status/1143648675882815490?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 02:14
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:BIGUR NUBMRS IZ BETUR I had a discussion with someone earlier speculating how PCIe 4.0 would improve with "4K editing" so hard. Inquiring about his actual bandwidth usage, I get something like he's at "90% utilization" according to task manager. So I tell him that means nothing, because that metric gets derived from IO response times and queue depth. Repeatedly asking about actual reported bandwidth usage, essentially wanting to point out that if one of the best SSD controllers on the market (claimed to have an 970 Pro) can't reach the advertised maximum bandwidth under realistic workloads, neither would a PCIe 4.0 SSD, led to absolutely nothing. But Corsair says on their page it'll do 5GB/s. It's maybe a smidge frustrating. And no, it wasn't in r/pcmasterrace.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 02:38
|
|
|
For PCIe 4.0 I would happily take x2 SSDs with more m.2 connectors on a mobo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 02:59
|
|
|
Atomizer posted:Last time I checked, no, the SU800 in particular tended to be the cheapest 2 TB option for SATA 2.5", especially with Adata-specific discount codes on Rakuten. The Micron 1100 is an OEM drive that wasn't intended to be available directly from retail channels, so unless it's notably cheaper then I'd seek out the SU800. Thanks, pulled the trigger on the SU800 off Rakuten using the 15% off code.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 04:12
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:Yeh. But even proper arguments lead to nothing. It's usually the same people that say "hey why is Optane slower than this Samsung drive"
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 05:24
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:8 cents a gig QLC drive with 3 year warranty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 06:24
|
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:That PCIe 4.0 SSD thing is sort of driving me nuts. In a lot of places, this is getting treated as a 5GB/s e-penis. I'd love to argue the uselessness of that metric, but having to post a primer on filesystems and how IO works gets tiresome. Buckle up, console manufacturers are going to ride this bullshit out as far as they can to make their machines seem special.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 07:45
|
|
|
SlayVus posted:QLC drive with 3 year warranty. That being said would you think it'd be good for jamming into an Xbox One? The current generation is swappable right? I've wanted to do that for my daughter since her S is only 500gb
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 13:42
|
|
|
Lambert posted:Buckle up, console manufacturers are going to ride this bullshit out as far as they can to make their machines seem special. Explaining the concept of bottlenecking to a layman makes me want to tear my hair out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 14:40
|
|
|
Pcie4 is going to be a tough sell in consoles, unless games take advantage of it, I'd guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 19:36
|
|
|
“Nearly instant loading times” were a big part of the early PS5 teaser so I expect them to lean into that with custom PCIe 4.0 SSDs and games designed to take advantage of that. In theory they could do some interesting stuff with it, like truly instant-on right into a games main menu, etc. I believe Sony just recently filed a new patent for level streaming technology/algorithms to eliminate loading screens, but I can’t google it right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 20:14
|
|
|
Yeah, the consoles could actually do some cool stuff with it as long as that SSD is part of the baseline spec and all of the software written for the system is able to assume that it'll be there instead of being designed against the lowest common denominator platter drive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 22:12
|
|
|
It still won't make game code magically fast and good though, so don't hold out for some kind of miracle utopia.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 22:34
|
|
|
The future of consoles is game cartridges with 3dxpoint nonvolatile ram FIGHT ME 
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:The future of consoles is game cartridges with 3dxpoint nonvolatile ram FIGHT ME $250 neo geo style games
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
Videya Games over Infiniband-to-the-Home
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 23:02
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Videya Games over Infiniband-to-the-Home Your xbox installer will be arriving between the hours of 9am and 6pm 7 months from next Thursday!
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 23:06
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:The future of consoles is game cartridges with 3dxpoint nonvolatile ram FIGHT ME it would be the only console with the right type of RAM
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 23:08
|
|
|
I'm certainly curious as to what there's supposed to be patented in regards to "no loading screens" and "level streaming technology". There's been plenty of games over the last few years that get along without those just fine. Is there going to be a patent on memory mapping soon? Or an attempt to get one? --edit: That's probably what's going to happen, the developer dumping in-memory structures of a running game as-is into a data file to map straight back into memory, to bypass initialization and parsing. Combat Pretzel fucked around with this message at 00:28 on Jun 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 00:25
|
|
|
My current setup is a WD Black 250 (windows boot and whatever games I'm currently playing drive), samsung 850 pro 256 (dedicated linux drive), and a 1TB spinner (dedicated storage drive and rest of the steam library). When I build my Ryzen 3700 rig I want to go all m.2, trading the 850 pro and the spinner for a 1TB m.2 as a windows drive and using the black for the linux drive. Besides the inland premium, what should I be looking at? Or is the Inland just that good? A 2TB option wouldn't be horrible either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 23:09 |
|
|
Combat Pretzel posted:I'm certainly curious as to what there's supposed to be patented in regards to "no loading screens" and "level streaming technology". There's been plenty of games over the last few years that get along without those just fine. Is there going to be a patent on memory mapping soon? Or an attempt to get one? imo the entire idea is a bunch of PR nonsense so i feel like it's useless to speculate on it. it has always been possible to code a game that appears to load "instantly", it is really just a simple question of how much data the target machine can load and process before the user starts noticing that the game has not begun. if a console manufacturer switches to some poo poo-hot SSD format and gets strict on only certifying games that load within a certain amount of time, yeah, that technically counts as "removing loading screens" for a certain definition of the term. but it also would then be appropriate for every computer scientist and electrical engineer in the world to point and laugh, because the entire problem and solution is just an exercise in marketing to fanboy gamer bros
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 03:31
|
|