Is cheap NVMe better than a Samsung SATA ssd?

[Supersonicwolfe]

So I am retiring my old P45 mobo and Q9550, but planning to use it to build a “workstation” for work (Excel, 2-D CAD), one thing I will need is a small low price ssd.

 

To be more specific I am deciding whether to buy a 256 GB ADATA XPG GAMMIX S11 Lite (It is a Chinese-only version NVMe 1.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 SSD, but under the hood it uses the same PCB as SX6000 with a XPG heatsink); Or, keep using my current OS boot drive, a Samsung 860 EVO SATA SSD.

 

The biggest snag bing the NVMe is DRAM-Less, but I heard they might using a SLC NAND as cache for the MLC NANDs.

 

This NVMe/860 EVO drive will be used as system drive with few games and boot-drive-only software, I usually use this computer for play games and watch LTT, not really for steaming or rendering (But might do that in future.)

The rig is a X570 Aorus with Ryzen 3600 and GTX 970, 16GB of DDR4-3200. 

 

Rapid mode will be turned on with the Samsung regardless of it is a boot drive or not.

 

If I bought the NVMe, the 860 EVO will be used as a secondary game/page file/cache drive.

Other wise I will use  the 860 EVO as OS, and a SU 800 (120GB) as a game/cache drive.

 

So to better illustrate it, in my case I will end up with following drive configurations (yes there are a lot of drives here... Oh I should mention the long-term storage drives are removable and I follow the 3-2-1 rule) 

Spoiler

 

A.

1. 256GB DRAM-less NVMe XPG S11 lite for OS and boot-drive-only apps,pagefile
2. 256GB SATA III Samsung 860 EVO for games and other apps ,cache.
3. 1TB Seagate Laptop SSHD for short-term storage (aka picture, videos, etc)
4. 1TB Seagate HD for Windows file backup
5. 2x4TB long-term storage drives

• The work computer will end up with a ADATA 120 GB SU800 + 320GB WD Blue

B.

1. 256GB SATA III Samsung 860 EVO for OS, and boot-drive-only apps.
2. 120GB SATA III ADATA SU800 for games and other apps , cache, page file
3. 1TB Seagate Laptop SSHD for short-term storage (aka picture, videos, etc) and games won’t fit
4. 1TB Seagate HD for Windows file backup
5. 2x4TB long-term storage drives

• The work computer will end up with a 256 GB ADATA SU650 or Kingston A400 etc cheap SSD + 320GB WD Blue

 

 

Some data from ADATA and Samsung

 

Spoiler

XPG GAMMIX S11 Lite PCIe Gen3x M.2 2280Comes with a heatsink

(I might replace the heatsink with the one came with my Aorus X570 mobo)

Read 188k IOPs

Write 156k IOPs

Seq. Read 2000 MB/s

Seq. Write 1600 MB/s

LDPC ECC

5 Year/150 TBW

(^Those data aside from TBW are likely for the 500GB model, to better represent how the 256 GB might be, here is the performance of SX6000 Lite which have but lower TBW)

Read 100k IOPs

Write 170k IOPs

AS SSD Seq. Read 1700 MB/s

AS SSD Seq. Write 850 MB/s

CDM (QD32) Seq. Read 1800 MB/s

CDM (QD32) Seq. Write 900 MB/s

 

 

Samsung 860 EVO 256GB SATA III SSD

Seq Read 550 MB/s

Seq Write 820 MB/s

Random 4K Read (QD32) 98k IOPs (QD1) 10k

Random 4K Write (QD32) 90k IOPs (QD1) 42k

5Year/150TBW

 

 

[Enderman]

I personally wouldn't risk putting my OS and important data on a cheap SSD.

[GoldenLag]

never go Dram-less. 

 

its likely you can pick up something like a QLC drive from intel or Micron. or a Mp34. 

[Supersonicwolfe]

1 minute ago, Enderman said:

I personally wouldn't risk putting my OS and important data on a cheap SSD.

I careless about that OS in particular, since I put all my personal data on a non-os SSHD (which contains all other games/software), which is backed up monthly to two 4TH HDD.

If I go with the NVMe, The samsung will be the one handling all the game and software while the SSHD will still store my other data.

[Supersonicwolfe]

10 minutes ago, GoldenLag said:

never go Dram-less. 

 

its likely you can pick up something like a QLC drive from intel or Micron. or a Mp34. 

I am not in desperate need of a SSD for myself. I have a Samsung 850 and 860 EVO as boot drive in both of my personal laptop and desktop.

 

However I want have a secondary SSD for holding games and such, at moment I have 80% of software/games on a SSHD. If I decided to go with the NVMe, then the Samsung will hold most of my games/personal files/cache. While the work computer can have the SU 800 (which does have Dram)

[Wh0_Am_1]

When they say SLC cache that means that only the first cell on the MLC TLC or QLC NAND is used in order to improve write times, and then when the drive either starts to fill up or is no longer under load it will then start to write the data into higher level cells. 

[191x7]

NVME is faster, but really noticable only in benchmarks. 

 

A larger capacity SATA SSD is a better buy than a smaller capacity NVME, especially for a storage or game drive.

 

I run a 256GB ADATA XPG 8200pro NVME for my OS and programs, and a 512GB ADATA SU800 for the games that require SSD (Battlefield for example).

[GoldenLag]

4 minutes ago, Supersonicwolfe said:

I am not in desperate need of a SSD for myself. I have a Samsung 850 and 860 EVO in both of my personal laptop and desktop.

 

However I want have a secondary SSD (plus I felt the work computer doesn’t really need a good SSD like a SU800 I acquired recently).

just grab a P1 or 660p, or something similar. 

 

 

or mx500 if you are going Sata (if its cheaper than th evo)

[Enderman]

19 minutes ago, Supersonicwolfe said:

I careless about that OS in particular, since I put all my personal data on a non-os SSHD (which contains all other games/software), which is backed up monthly to two 4TH HDD.

If I go with the NVMe, The samsung will be the one handling all the game and software while the SSHD will still store my other data.

SSHDs suck though, why would you buy one?

[Supersonicwolfe]

1 minute ago, 191x7 said:

NVME is faster, but really noticable only in benchmarks. 

 

A larger capacity SATA SSD is a better buy than a smaller capacity NVME, especially for a storage or game drive.

 

I run a 256GB ADATA XPG 8200pro NVME for my OS and programs, and a 512GB ADATA SU800 for the games that require SSD (Battlefield for example).

to be honest I don’t think my use case will need hyper fast storage anyway... like I mentioned I don’t do steaming/rendering, nor play any AAA games... yet...

 

In my case I will end up either with:

A.

1. 256GB NVMe XPG for OS and boot-drive-only apps
2. 256GB SATA III Samsung 860 EVO for games and other apps ,cache
3. 1TB Seagate Laptop SSHD for short-term storage (aka picture, videos, etc)
4. 1TB Seagate HD for Windows file backup
5. 2x4TB long-term stooge drives

• The work computer will end up with a ADATA 120 GB SU800 + 320GB WD Blue

B.

1. 256GB SATA III Samsung 860 EVO for Boot
2. 120GB SATA III ADATA SU800 for games and other apps , cache
3. 1TB Seagate Laptop SSHD for short-term storage (aka picture, videos, etc)
4. 1TB Seagate HD for Windows file backup
5. 2x4TB long-term stooge drives

• The work computer will end up with a 256 GB ADATA SU650 or Kingston A400 etc cheap SSD + 320GB WD Blue

[Supersonicwolfe]

9 minutes ago, Enderman said:

SSHDs suck though, why would you buy one?

It was a spare from years ago (like back in 2012, it did give my laptop a performance boost vs a 5400rpm HDD, later I moved on to the Legendary 850 EVO... and that SSHD become my laptop data drive until it was filled up...now the laptop have a 2TB regular HD as data drive)

I didn’t want to throw away that drive so it became this desktop’s data drive...

[191x7]

Just a few thoughts;

with the prices and availability we have today buying a 120GB SSD does not make a lot of sense, the 240/256 GB drives are a better choice

Adata isn't a cheap brand as many people consider it to be, adata ssd-s are amongst the best options

 

AutoCad, from my experience, does profit from being run from an SSD. That said, I haven't used any newer version, I believe the last I had was 2009.

[George.]

I'd just get a higher capacity sata ssd, nvme is cool and all but still too costy for its value imo. I don't find the speed difference very noticeable in practice.

[Supersonicwolfe]

5 minutes ago, 191x7 said:

Just a few thoughts;

with the prices and availability we have today buying a 120GB SSD does not make a lot of sense, the 240/256 GB drives are a better choice

Adata isn't a cheap brand as many people consider it to be, adata ssd-s are amongst the best options

 

AutoCad, from my experience, does profit from being run from an SSD. That said, I haven't used any newer version, I believe the last I had was 2009.

A 256 GB SSD is a must, in my opinion 120GB SSD are only good for cache since a Win7 install with Office/Photoshop/Gimp/Chrome/Few 2005 games will eat up more than half of the drive...first hand experience

 

For work I am using 2014 AutoCad, but mostly just 2-D work so hardware requirement is really low... runs quite nicely on a G3250 + GT 710 + 500 GB HDD.

 

I just haven’t decided whether to buy a ADATA SU650 SSD for the “workstation” or spend $20 more to get a DRAM-less M.2 NVMe for myself.

That particular NVMe SSD is only available in China, closest NA equivalent would be a SX6000 lite/pro (I saw a review shown the printed PCB have that number on it.)

[Supersonicwolfe]

3 minutes ago, George. said:

I'd just get a higher capacity sata ssd, nvme is cool and all but still too costy for its value imo. I don't find the speed difference very noticeable in practice.

The price difference is only 10 bucks between the $25 256G ADATA SU650 DRAM-Less SSD, and the $37 ADATA DRAM-Less NVMe SSD in my region. While a 256 GB Samsung 970 Pro is $70.

 

I am not quite sure about the price vs performance but that NVMe seems a really good deal to me vs the SU650, comparable if it better on paper performance. Meanwhile the work computer wont really need a 256 SSD anyway, so I can stick my almost new 120GB with-dram SU800 in it (And in my particular case the SU800 right now already have Win7 and software I will use on it, I just need to install AutoDesk and we are good to go).

[George.]

2 hours ago, Supersonicwolfe said:

The price difference is only 10 bucks between the $25 256G ADATA SU650 DRAM-Less SSD, and the $37 ADATA DRAM-Less NVMe SSD in my region. While a 256 GB Samsung 970 Pro is $70.

 

I am not quite sure about the price vs performance but that NVMe seems a really good deal to me vs the SU650, comparable if it better on paper performance. Meanwhile the work computer wont really need a 256 SSD anyway, so I can stick my almost new 120GB with-dram SU800 in it (And in my particular case the SU800 right now already have Win7 and software I will use on it, I just need to install AutoDesk and we are good to go).

well if it's that close money-wise then I guess It's up to your personal preference. More storage or slightly faster read/write speed

[Supersonicwolfe]

4 hours ago, George. said:

well if it's that close money-wise then I guess It's up to your personal preference. More storage or slightly faster read/write speed

From the poll and paper-data it seems a cheap NVMe SSD will be the winner, especially that means I don't necessary need to reformat the Samsung and reinstall apps on it again.

(I am making a significant upgrade, jumping from Intel to AMD, as well as jumping though 11 years old CPU/mobo, so it is recommended to reinstall OS, plus now I can use UEFI and GPT instead of stuck with legacy BIOS and MBR boot drive...)

[Supersonicwolfe]

Final update:

I actually went for ADATA S11 Pro which have Dram is only 8USD more expensive than the dram-less lite (aka XS6000). I can live without a Big Mac meal  .