cummerou1

Yeah, that's fair, I was thinking of getting it only because hey, if it's the same price, why not?

Oh yeah, I think WOW shadowlands as the very first game required an SSD (until they dropped it due to an outcry). So it will probably happen eventually, but just like RTX was not widely adopted at the beginning but was several years before it featured in more than a small handful AAA games, the same is probably going to happen here.

Awesome, thank you so much for taking all this time to help me out and explain this, very much appreciated

Jesus, yeah, makes sense though, developing a design and the super low production volumes they're gonna have means that they kinda have to be much more expensive per GB to recoup costs. Not like they're gonna sell a million of them

16TB SSD here we come! Lol

Okay, that makes sense, I understand regular file transfer is very linear (2GB of music and 2GB of photos are transferred at the same speed). I use my machine exclusively for videogames, so I would be putting the AAA RPG games and such which benefit from SSD speed for faster loading times on the NVME. Where my confusion sets in is that from what I can understand, playing a videogame works a lot differently than a regular file transfer, since when it's loading an area, it's loading a bunch of different files from a bunch of different folders, while leaving many untouched. More of g

Oh really? Learn something new every day

I tried googling around but couldn't really find what I was looking for, in the video with Linus performance dropped heavily when it reached the 50% mark, but from what I understood that was due to all the cache getting full. I know regular TLC SSD's usually suffer performance wise when you fill them up above 80%, but I was wondering if I wanted an SSD to store games on, how much I could reasonably fill it up and keep it at at least SATA SSD speeds.

Very interesting, thank you very much

The specific one I found was the "Pioneer 1TB APS-SE20Q" Advertises 3400MB/s read, and 2000MB/s write, seems crazy to me that it's over 6 times faster read and almost 4 times faster write for the same price as a SATA. But I also meant it as a general trend, when I just google "NVME SSD" they are close to the same price as the SATA SSD's

That's super interesting, thank you, I didn't know that m.2 also had a SATA version, I thought it was NVME/PCIe exclusively. A quick question if I may, I know there are PCIe specific SSD's, but if something is an NVME drive, does that also mean you can plug it into the PCIe as well, or is it dependant? I also asked my original question because I found some 1TB NVME SSD's for 80 pounds (new), the same price as the cheapest SATA SSD I could find, but the manufacturer advertised speeds up to 3400MB/s, so obviously much quicker than SATA SSD's. Other NVME drives that are also supe

Thank you, will definitely check it out!

That's really cool, do you have any links for that please?

Ahh, fair, I thought the nature of the NVME drive (being plugged into the MOBO) would pretty much guarantee quicker speed due to the data having to travel much less speed. Interesting.

So I've been putting my new build together and I was looking at SSD's, I already have two 750GB ones, but they are not enough, and my 3TB HDD is not amazing speed wise. Anyway, I obviously veered towards SATA SSD's but because my new board has two m.2 slots, I figured I'd take a look just to see what the pricing was like. Now, I know that obviously Nvme SSD's were significantly more expensive 4-5 years ago when I was building my last build (I think it was something like double the price per GB compared to SATA) because they were a new technology, few boards (compared to now) support