Some benefits from NVMe Gen4 in the future?

[Archer42]

57 minutes ago, AzowiX said:

I dont think this model is mid-range...

In terms of performance and price it is.

How adata positions it is irrelevant...

[AzowiX]

2 minutes ago, Archer42 said:

In terms of performance and price it is.

How adata positions it is irrelevant...

I mean it is one of the very good drives on Gen3 category.

Near the performance of the 970 Evo.

 

[Archer42]

1 minute ago, AzowiX said:

I mean it is one of the very good drives on Gen3 category.

Near the performance of the 970 Evo

It is not. You get what you pay for.

It is well optimised for benchmarks, but if you hit it with relatively heavy load it can be worse than dramless sn550, for example, in some cases. Especially after being used for a while, since it tends to loose performance significantly over time.

Then there is whole controller change for slower one which made things worse too...

[AzowiX]

4 minutes ago, Archer42 said:

It is not. You get what you pay for.

It is well optimised for benchmarks, but if you hit it with relatively heavy load it can be worse than dramless sn550, for example, in some cases. Especially after being used for a while, since it tends to loose performance significantly over time.

Then there is whole controller change for slower one which made things worse too...

I know they changed the controller but this drive loose very little performance and you not notice that.

You can give me link that is worse than sn550? And what about Swordfish?

 

[Archer42]

10 minutes ago, AzowiX said:

I know they changed the controller but this drive loose very little performance and you not notice that.

You do not notice the difference not because it is not there, but because it irrelevant for simple "os+games" workload. That is completely true. That's also why i said it is generally pretty decent choice. Does not mean that it is "high-end" though.

 

10 minutes ago, AzowiX said:

You can give me link that is worse than sn550?

Read anandtech review for 8200pro, you can see the disadvantages it has pretty well there.

 

10 minutes ago, AzowiX said:

And what about Swordfish?

Completely different ssd with different controller, and significantly worse one. Dramless too.

[AzowiX]

1 minute ago, Archer42 said:

You do not notice the difference not because it is not there, but because it irrelevant for simple "os+games" workload. That is completely true. That's also why i said it is generally pretty decent choice. Does not mean that it is "high-end" though.

 

Read anandtech review for 8200pro, you can see the disadvantages it has pretty well there.

 

Completely different ssd with different controller, and significantly worse one. Dramless too.

Okay so what is your recommendation?

SN750 / 970 Evo? I prefer them but is more expensive not a little.

 

[Archer42]

5 minutes ago, AzowiX said:

Okay so what is your recommendation?

SN750 / 970 Evo? I prefer them but is more expensive not a little.

IMO 8200pro is fine. You will not practically notice the difference between it and sn750/970evo for simple "os + games". Another option would be sn550. Cost is ~similar, some numbers are worse, but again practically it'll be completely fine.

Both have disadvantages, but do they matter if they will not be really noticeable?

[AzowiX]

1 minute ago, Archer42 said:

IMO 8200pro is fine. You will not practically notice the difference between it and sn750/970evo for simple "os + games". Another option would be sn550. Cost is ~similar, some numbers are worse, but again practically it'll be completely fine.

I see the review on Anandtech and in some benchmarks it is close to 970 Evo and sometimes better..

[Archer42]

11 minutes ago, AzowiX said:

I see the review on Anandtech and in some benchmarks it is close to 970 Evo and sometimes better..

And i see this, this (look at sata mx500 for fun) and this, for example. And that's "light" load...

huge latency spikes are not fun, and 970evo does not have those...

[AzowiX]

1 minute ago, Archer42 said:

And i see this, this and this, for example. And that's "light" load...

huge latency spikes are not fun, and 970evo does not have those...

When that is "full"? only with massive workloads and transfering a lot?

Maybe I will doing video editing in the future so.. You still recommend this drive or not?

Who need Gen4 you think?

 

 

[Archer42]

Just now, AzowiX said:

When that is "full"? only with massive workloads and transfering a lot?

It is "full" with "light" workload which supposedly pretty close to desktop usage.

1 minute ago, AzowiX said:

Maybe I will doing video editing in the future so.. You still recommend this drive or not?

It's fine for simple workloads, and has pretty good price/performance. If you want relatively cheap it's a good option. If you want something better you know the options, they are pretty obvious...

2 minutes ago, AzowiX said:

Who need Gen4 you think?

Current ones? Nobody.

It's just new faster interface which in relatively short time will be the only option available, just like we do not have pci-e 2.0 ssd-s at this point. Currently manufacturers are just trying to grab as much money as they can from this shiny new theoretical speeds, even if practically they mean nothing. Not a good time to buy one of them...

[AzowiX]

2 minutes ago, Archer42 said:

It is "full" with "light" workload which supposedly pretty close to desktop usage.

It's fine for simple workloads, and has pretty good price/performance. If you want relatively cheap it's a good option. If you want something better you know the options, they are pretty obvious...

Current ones? Nobody.

It's just new faster interface which in relatively short time will be the only option available, just like we do not have pci-e 2.0 ssd-s at this point. Currently manufacturers are just trying to grab as much money as they can from this shiny new theoretical speeds, even if practically they mean nothing. Not a good time to buy one of them...

Desktop usage? that is a joke?

But the current gen4 is going to the limits of PCI 4.0 so.. maybe that is not good time to do that? because the previous drives not can handle to the limit of current gen.

I see some review that some people try to compare 970Pro to 980 and with the 980 the loading will be shorter.. and a little shorter boot time.. and some editing softwares..

I know most of the reviewers told that the Gen4 is for people that doing a lot of work and editing on their system.

[Archer42]

8 hours ago, AzowiX said:

Desktop usage? that is a joke?

Quote

Our Light storage test has relatively more sequential accesses and lower queue depths than The Destroyer or the Heavy test, and it's by far the shortest test overall. It's based largely on applications that aren't highly dependent on storage performance, so this is a test more of application launch times and file load times. This test can be seen as the sum of all the little delays in daily usage, but with the idle times trimmed to 25ms it takes less than half an hour to run. Details of the Light test can be found here. As with the ATSB Heavy test, this test is run with the drive both freshly erased and empty, and after filling the drive with sequential writes.

Here is the link.

However, this does not mean the ssd is universally bad, it is not. Everything depends on workload.

I've been using intel 660p myself, which i bought more than 2 years ago for less than 100$, which was incredible back then. And it shows even worse results in this tests, yet if i try to compare it to 905p I also have for launching games, for example, i see no difference.

 

In another words if your current workload is nothing special - buy something cheap-ish like 8200pro or sn550, it'll be completely fine. If you'll need something better later - buy it when you need it. With faster pci-e interface available we are likely to see faster ssd-s in all segments, not necessarily high-end one, in relatively short time. You'll probably be able to buy equivalent of 980pro or sn850 in a year or two for the same $100 8200pro costs now (speaking of 1TB drives).

[AzowiX]

9 hours ago, Archer42 said:

Here is the link.

However, this does not mean the ssd is universally bad, it is not. Everything depends on workload.

I've been using intel 660p myself, which i bought more than 2 years ago for less than 100$, which was incredible back then. And it shows even worse results in this tests, yet if i try to compare it to 905p I also have for launching games, for example, i see no difference.

 

In another words if your current workload is nothing special - buy something cheap-ish like 8200pro or sn550, it'll be completely fine. If you'll need something better later - buy it when you need it. With faster pci-e interface available we are likely to see faster ssd-s in all segments, not necessarily high-end one, in relatively short time. You'll probably be able to buy equivalent of 980pro or sn850 in a year or two for the same $100 8200pro costs now (speaking of 1TB drives).

I dont think that... After year only they cost so low?

I know samsung maybe released new drives every 2 years + - ..

So I think it is maybe worth it and if I will buy the 980 I dont need to upgrade every years...

How is the GAMMIX S11 Pro? It is 20$ more than SX8200..

As I told, maybe I will going to do video editing.. so good drive is needed.

 

[AzowiX]

On 2/26/2021 at 5:19 PM, jaslion said:

No point in buying it now anyways by the time you start seeing differences we are a couple years further and a couple generations of gen 4 drives later that will be much better and cheaper. Besides that all it's really been doing on consoles right now is quick resume and what any ssd users on desktop basically see as normal loading times so nothing special as of yet.

You could please read the latest comments here again and give your opinion.. have some benchmarks here and the Sx8200 is not very good..

 

[Archer42]

1 hour ago, AzowiX said:

I dont think that... After year only they cost so low?

Intel is releasing pci-e 4.0 compatible hardware, all controller manufacturers already released whole line of pci-e 4.0 controllers, from low-end to high end. Truth is - in a year or two there will simply be no 3.0 ssd-s anymore, everything will be 4.0. Does not mean that everything will be fast, but it will stop being something "special" => expensive.

 

1 hour ago, AzowiX said:

How is the GAMMIX S11 Pro?

Very similar to 8200pro. The same hardware + included heatsink.

 

1 hour ago, AzowiX said:

So I think it is maybe worth it and if I will buy the 980 I dont need to upgrade every years

It almost definitely it is not. What are you going to do specifically which might require faster ssd than 8200pro? Do you know that 980pro has pretty low sustained write speed too? Not really higher than any decent 3.0 ssd, around 1-1.5GB/s...

So if you will be writing a bunch of stuff it is not really very good, 970pro will be considerably better. And in terms of endurance too...

In a sense 980pro is just 970evo using faster interface, so with higher linear read speed.

If anything larger 3.0 drive will be more "future-proof" in long run than smaller 980pro.

[jaslion]

6 hours ago, AzowiX said:

You could please read the latest comments here again and give your opinion.. have some benchmarks here and the Sx8200 is not very good..

 

The sx8200 got basically given random hardware so cannot recommend it anymore.

 

Instead of all this discussing about speed just get this thing and call it quits. Is plenty fast for games and then when games finally start using the disk more get a gen4 drive or something. For the next couple of years this thing is basically amongst the best drives for games anyways.

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Pqm323/samsung-860-evo-4tb-25-solid-state-drive-mz-76e4t0bam

[AzowiX]

28 minutes ago, jaslion said:

The sx8200 got basically given random hardware so cannot recommend it anymore.

 

Instead of all this discussing about speed just get this thing and call it quits. Is plenty fast for games and then when games finally start using the disk more get a gen4 drive or something. For the next couple of years this thing is basically amongst the best drives for games anyways.

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Pqm323/samsung-860-evo-4tb-25-solid-state-drive-mz-76e4t0bam

I mean SX8200 Pro..

Yeah that is a good deal on 860 Evo but I think prefer more NVMe drive.

I want good one for even video editing.

[jaslion]

34 minutes ago, AzowiX said:

I mean SX8200 Pro..

Yeah that is a good deal on 860 Evo but I think prefer more NVMe drive.

I want good one for even video editing.

This is good. Even for video editing. The sx8200 is not a drive you should get because they have changed the hardware of that drive multiple times so you can get a good drive or a really bad one it's random. If you really want a fast drive do this:

 

A 1tb sn550 drive for your os and video editing scratch drive and the evo for everything else. This will be the best setup you can get for the lowest amount of money too with the most storage. That and it's going to be just as good for you as getting some stupid expensive gen4 drives.

[Archer42]

2 minutes ago, jaslion said:

his is good. Even for video editing. The sx8200 is not a drive you should get because they have changed the hardware of that drive multiple times so you can get a good drive or a really bad one it's random.

All versions of 8200pro are pretty decent. If anything different firmware settings on new "slower" one result in more stable performance.

[jaslion]

Just now, Archer42 said:

All versions of 8200pro are pretty decent. If anything different firmware settings on new "slower" one result in more stable performance.

No this is false. The 8200pro has widely different hardware options which can result in a drive that runs at half the speed it is rated for after seconds of use compared to how it should normally work. The 8200 is a bad drive now even tho there are still good ones of it out there it's literally random now and pure luck if you get a good or bad one so just get a drive that isn't a gamble.

[Archer42]

17 minutes ago, jaslion said:

No this is false. The 8200pro has widely different hardware options which can result in a drive that runs at half the speed it is rated for after seconds of use compared to how it should normally work.

Can you provide any specific info on those different hardware configurations and how they are different?

Because as I said, ALL 8200pro configs fall into ~similar performance range. People simply like drama, and this is where all the "runs at half the speed" comes from.

And yes, as i said, they have different firmware config => different size of slc buffer, which, apart from looking worse in synthetic benchmarks, also results in more stable performance over time and less delays, like those which can be seen on links I've posted above. So for any practical usage this new settings may be considered better...

[AzowiX]

15 minutes ago, jaslion said:

No this is false. The 8200pro has widely different hardware options which can result in a drive that runs at half the speed it is rated for after seconds of use compared to how it should normally work. The 8200 is a bad drive now even tho there are still good ones of it out there it's literally random now and pure luck if you get a good or bad one so just get a drive that isn't a gamble.

But it is only little loose on performance..

That is mean that the speed is slowly than 3500MB/s?

 

[jaslion]

1 minute ago, AzowiX said:

But it is only little loose on performance..

That is mean that the speed is slowly than 3500MB/s?

 

For your use case you will NOT lose performance.

[jaslion]

1 minute ago, Archer42 said:

Can you provide any specific info on those different hardware configurations and how they are different?

Because as I said, ALL 8200pro configs fall into ~similar performance range. People simply like drama, and this is where all the "runs at half the speed" comes from.

And yes, as i said, they have different firmware config => different size of slc buffer, which, apart from looking worse in synthetic benchmarks, also results in more stable performance over time and less delays, like those which can be seen on links I've posted above. So for any practical usage this new settings may be considered better...

Just check the benchmarks on multiple adata drives before and after it's pretty obvious.