Can Z97 motherboard boot from PCIE 3.0 x4 (M.2) and not from onboard M.2 Slot

[The_Legend_27]

So I have an Asus Maximus VII Ranger and I want to get a new M.2 Samsung 960 Evo.

 

The problem is that my motherboard has an M.2 port but its limited at 10Gbit/s.

That means 960 Evo's potential is wasted on my motherboard.

 

I thought about getting an M.2 to PCI 3.0 x4 adapter

(e.g. https://www.amazon.com/Lycom-DT-120-PCIe-Adapter-Support/dp/B00MYCQP38)

to get the maximum speeds of the M.2. But I need to know if the M.2 will be bootable.

If anyone knows if my motherboard can boot from a M.2 from PCIE 3.0 x4?

 

Please help, I have been searching for days and found nothing.

 

Thanks in advance!!

[DocSwag]

I think so, but why?

 

If you're only using the drive for os and apps I suggest you get a sata ssd. NVMe doesn't improve boot times or app launch times. It's only really useful for prosumers.

[The_Legend_27]

I already have an 128GB Samsung 840 Evo Sata SSD but I want to upgrade as I don't have enough space

 I want to know as I will get it as a gift from my father.

 

BTW what do you mean it doesnt improve boot times and app launch times?

It has 3200GB/s Read speeds right? Could you explain why it wouldnt help?

[DocSwag]

2 minutes ago, The_Legend_27 said:

I already have an 128GB Samsung 840 Evo Sata SSD but I want to upgrade as I don't have enough space

 I want to know as I will get it as a gift from my father.

 

BTW what do you mean it doesnt improve boot times and app launch times?

It has 3200GB/s Read speeds right? Could you explain why it wouldnt help?

Yeah I would just get a sata ssd instead. You could get an 850 evo if you want a decent one, if you're fine with something a bit cheaper the SU800 Ultimate, Trion 150, Ultra II, WD Blue, or MX300 are all decent alternatives.

 

Quite simply, an NVMe drive won't boot up windows any faster or launch apps any faster than most sata SSDs out there.

 

First of all, that 3200 GB/s figure is sequential performance. Nowadays, random performance is usually what matters more.

 

Second of all, that's peak performance. SSDs can't usually sustain that much performance for long before they throttle back.

 

And third of all, or the most important reason, is that SSDs aren't really the bottleneck when it comes to these tasks. Booting the OS and launching apps isn't just loading stuff from the ssd to memory, but involves other stuff like computations being done by the CPU. This is evidence of this.

http://techreport.com/review/30813/samsung-960-pro-2tb-ssd-reviewed/5

Even the 960 pro, what I would consider the fastest consumer ssd available on the market, is barely faster than something like an 850 evo.

 

Also, please quote me in the future or I might not know you replied  

[The_Legend_27]

20 minutes ago, DocSwag said:

Yeah I would just get a sata ssd instead. You could get an 850 evo if you want a decent one, if you're fine with something a bit cheaper the SU800 Ultimate, Trion 150, Ultra II, WD Blue, or MX300 are all decent alternatives.

 

Quite simply, an NVMe drive won't boot up windows any faster or launch apps any faster than most sata SSDs out there.

 

First of all, that 3200 GB/s figure is sequential performance. Nowadays, random performance is usually what matters more.

 

Second of all, that's peak performance. SSDs can't usually sustain that much performance for long before they throttle back.

 

And third of all, or the most important reason, is that SSDs aren't really the bottleneck when it comes to these tasks. Booting the OS and launching apps isn't just loading stuff from the ssd to memory, but involves other stuff like computations being done by the CPU. This is evidence of this.

http://techreport.com/review/30813/samsung-960-pro-2tb-ssd-reviewed/5

Even the 960 pro, what I would consider the fastest consumer ssd available on the market, is barely faster than something like an 850 evo.

 

Also, please quote me in the future or I might not know you replied  

Thanx for explaining this , but where are they actually useful?

I thought I could make this GTA V thing load faster .

 

So you are telling me that in real-world scenarios it will be the same as the 850 Evo, right?

 

BTW will I see better performance in 4K videos and/or gaming graphics loading?

Becuase I will soon get a new 4K display (forgot to mention it before )

Not sure if I will be able to play in stable 60 fps even after I will buy a GTX 1070, but I like to be future-proof.

 

Tbh I saw the 3200GB/s and thought wow, I could make my setup a beast with like 60 euros more (difference from 960 Evo and 850 Evo (both 500 GB)) 

[DocSwag]

11 minutes ago, The_Legend_27 said:

Thanx for explaining this , but where are they actually useful?

I thought I could make this GTA V thing load faster .

 

So you are telling me that in real-world scenarios it will be the same as the 850 Evo, right?

 

BTW will I see better performance in 4K videos and/or gaming graphics loading?

Becuase I will soon get a new 4K display (forgot to mention it before )

Not sure if I will be able to play in stable 60 fps even after I will buy a GTX 1070, but I like to be future-proof.

 

Tbh I saw the 3200GB/s and thought wow, I could make my setup a beast with like 60 euros more (difference from 960 Evo and 850 Evo (both 500 GB)) 

Na, it probably wouldn't be very useful for you. Nvme SSDs are manly useful for prosumers (I believe that it can speed up exporting, importing videos to a project, etc.) and also can lift their legs if you're transferring large files off of them. For average consumers they aren't worth it though. In scenarios that it sounds like you would be encountering, an 850 evo would perform pretty much the same.

[The_Legend_27]

1 minute ago, DocSwag said:

Na, it probably wouldn't be very useful for you. Nvme SSDs are manly useful for prosumers (I believe that it can speed up exporting, importing videos to a project, etc.) and also can lift their legs if you're transferring large files off of them. For average consumers they aren't worth it though. In scenarios that it sounds like you would be encountering, an 850 evo would perform pretty much the same.

So I guess I will get the 850 Evo (500GB), but from the money I am saving I think I could get a new 1TB HDD cuz my secondary HDD is dying and have lots of data that I would prefer not to lose .

Right now I have an old Seagate ST31000524AS 1TB.

 

Could you suggest me a good 1TB HDD (or even higher than 1TB)?

I would like to clarify that I don't mind to spend some money in order to gain some real-world performance. 

[DocSwag]

6 minutes ago, The_Legend_27 said:

So I guess I will get the 850 Evo (500GB), but from the money I am saving I think I could get a new 1TB HDD cuz my secondary HDD is dying and have lots of data that I would prefer not to lose .

Right now I have an old Seagate ST31000524AS 1TB.

 

Could you suggest me a good 1TB HDD (or even higher than 1TB)?

I would like to clarify that I don't mind to spend some money in order to gain some real-world performance. 

The WD Caviar Blue 1 tb is generally a pretty good drive. You can usually get this Seagate 2tb drive for around 30-40% more.

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/CbL7YJ/seagate-barracuda-2tb-35-7200rpm-internal-hard-drive-st2000dm006

 

The WD Black drives are generally some of the fastest HDDs out there. However, the price of the 1tb is the same as the price of the Seagate 2tb usually so it might not really be that worth it.

[The_Legend_27]

1 minute ago, DocSwag said:

The WD Caviar Blue 1 tb is generally a pretty good drive. You can usually get this Seagate 2tb drive for around 30-40% more.

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/CbL7YJ/seagate-barracuda-2tb-35-7200rpm-internal-hard-drive-st2000dm006

 

The WD Black drives are generally some of the fastest HDDs out there. However, the price of the 1tb is the same as the price of the Seagate 2tb usually so it might not really be that worth it.

Thanx again mate

 

Have a good day!!

[DocSwag]

4 minutes ago, The_Legend_27 said:

Thanx again mate

 

Have a good day!!

No problem! Have a good day as well