TR Forums

slushpuppy007 wrote:

Looking at this slide from the Optane Marketing Material: https://www.servethehome.com/intel-opta ... -nand-ssd/

At Queue Depth 1, the drive is sitting just under 100 000 IOPS.

Loading a game surely falls in this Low QD spectrum.

Any thoughts?

Yup, and that's why first thing I check is 4K IOPS at QD1,my line in the sand is 8,000 for a boot drive.

There's other things to consider as well-some drives take a "we'll do it later slowly approach to
garbage collection" others "we'll do it straight away"(Plextor comes to mind)
Some drives will stop maintenance when a request comes in some won't.
Some drives have a single core controller-some have multiple-one for write-one for read-and one
for background activity........................

anotherengineer wrote:

About this.
Does or has anyone upgraded from a good 2.5 sata SSD to an NMVe on a newer CPU??  Just wondering if there is a human perceivable noticeable real world improvement??
I am planning on building a new machine probably this summer, and I don't know if I should pay the premium to get NVMe or a larger capacity 2.5 SATA SSD??
I basically use the PC as a web-surfer and occasional gaming, with some occasional AutoCAD 2015.  Just wondering if it's worth it??

I did jump on the NVMe wagon a little too early with the Intel 600p series and subsequent reviews from other tech sources showed it had some latency issues. I noticed something like that with my setup in an X99/5820K board with memory running 3000MHz. It seemed to "stutter" a bit is best as I can describe. Also I was running Win7 Pro at the time and I had to download the hotfix NVMe driver file from MS to make it the boot drive. So I later swapped it out with the Samsung 960 EVO which has it's own NVMe driver. The Samsung runs smoother w/o issues and boot-up is a little snappier but after that I see no significant difference in load times of other programs compared to my 850EVO 2.5 SATA SSD. The main advantage I like is it's a space saver without a cable if you have the M.2 port.

HERETIC wrote:

Yup, and that's why first thing I check is 4K IOPS at QD1,my line in the sand is 8,000 for a boot drive.

Uhhh... I sure hope that's not your real line in the sand, and you're just saying that online. I feel bad for your budget; Most new and/or TLC drives don't put out anything like that.

My old Mushkin Reactor didn't beat 7K, and that was when it was empty.

Vhalidictes wrote:

HERETIC wrote:

Yup, and that's why first thing I check is 4K IOPS at QD1,my line in the sand is 8,000 for a boot drive.

Uhhh... I sure hope that's not your real line in the sand, and you're just saying that online. I feel bad for your budget; Most new and/or TLC drives don't put out anything like that.

My old Mushkin Reactor didn't beat 7K, and that was when it was empty.

Most Samsung drives do 10,000-The 850 EVO is my midrange pick.
Nearly all planer TLC drives should be avoided as boot drives.(especially the ramless ones)
Two exceptions-750EVO and Sandisc ultra2.

HERETIC wrote:

Vhalidictes wrote:

HERETIC wrote:

Yup, and that's why first thing I check is 4K IOPS at QD1,my line in the sand is 8,000 for a boot drive.

Uhhh... I sure hope that's not your real line in the sand, and you're just saying that online. I feel bad for your budget; Most new and/or TLC drives don't put out anything like that.

My old Mushkin Reactor didn't beat 7K, and that was when it was empty.

Most Samsung drives do 10,000-The 850 EVO is my midrange pick.
Nearly all planer TLC drives should be avoided as boot drives.(especially the ramless ones)
Two exceptions-750EVO and Sandisc ultra2.

If we're talking read speeds, many of them are up in that range. Writes are a different story, though.

Waco wrote:

HERETIC wrote:

Vhalidictes wrote:

Uhhh... I sure hope that's not your real line in the sand, and you're just saying that online. I feel bad for your budget; Most new and/or TLC drives don't put out anything like that.

My old Mushkin Reactor didn't beat 7K, and that was when it was empty.

Most Samsung drives do 10,000-The 850 EVO is my midrange pick.
Nearly all planer TLC drives should be avoided as boot drives.(especially the ramless ones)
Two exceptions-750EVO and Sandisc ultra2.

If we're talking read speeds, many of them are up in that range. Writes are a different story, though.

Yeah-write speeds are kind of "good enough" 4K read speeds are what gives a boot drive that nice snappy feeling-
as in-"what spinny blue thing"
The recent race to the bottom means most planer TLC drives don't make that 8,000..............................