Questions about SSD's

[Lilninjsways]

Hey! its been a while and I have a question :) I am currently looking to put some items on my birthday list since my family is begging me for one. 

 

I have the ASUS ROG STRIX B-450F GAMING mother board with one NVME ssd already in (the slot I believe is either right next to the top PCI-e slot or its near the bottom? its been a while) but its only enough for windows and a small sized game. 

 

I have plenty of games where I see my hard drives are not handling the loading times/performance as well as it wants too. 

 

I have 1 7200 drive thats pretty big and abunch of random drives for storage on other games that doesnt need the insane storage speed and/or just storage for abunch of emulation and random crap

 

would it be better to just grab a big SATA SSD for games? or would NVME be good if so does my motherboard support another NVME? 

 

(I remember a video where linus mentioned how a certain what looked like NMVE didnt support a certain one due to something its been a while) 

 

also how is the market when it comes to SSD's? graphics cards have been thru the roof for the past year but I dont know about storage drives.

 

the games I usually play are whatever the new big AAA game that appeals me. (call of duty cold war / Red dead redemption / Outriders (thats been lackluster recently) / whenever the new battlefield comes out I would play the crap out of that)

 

 

and of course thank you for all of the comments :) 

[Archerr]

nvme vs sata ssd for gaming load times makes almost no difference. hdd vs ssd vs nvme for in game makes no difference as well. the only noticeable difference would be load times from hdd and ssd, if you have a lot of games go for a large capacity hdd (2th, 3tb) but if you really need the extra couple of seconds saved in loading times and dont have many games for a 1tb ssd

 

I would recommend a 2-3tb hdd 

[Lilninjsways]

4 minutes ago, Archerr said:

-reply-

it may be unrelated but with cold war and battlefield V (especially battlefield V) I experienced a small but noticeable bump in performance it just ran smoother when it came to stutter. 

[SupaKomputa]

4TB HDD is getting cheaper, get that instead.

[AnirbanG007]

19 minutes ago, Lilninjsways said:

Hey! its been a while and I have a question I am currently looking to put some items on my birthday list since my family is begging me for one. 

 

I have the ASUS ROG STRIX B-450F GAMING mother board with one NVME ssd already in (the slot I believe is either right next to the top PCI-e slot or its near the bottom? its been a while) but its only enough for windows and a small sized game. 

 

I have plenty of games where I see my hard drives are not handling the loading times/performance as well as it wants too. 

 

I have 1 7200 drive thats pretty big and abunch of random drives for storage on other games that doesnt need the insane storage speed and/or just storage for abunch of emulation and random crap

 

would it be better to just grab a big SATA SSD for games? or would NVME be good if so does my motherboard support another NVME? 

 

(I remember a video where linus mentioned how a certain what looked like NMVE didnt support a certain one due to something its been a while) 

 

also how is the market when it comes to SSD's? graphics cards have been thru the roof for the past year but I dont know about storage drives.

 

the games I usually play are whatever the new big AAA game that appeals me. (call of duty cold war / Red dead redemption / Outriders (thats been lackluster recently) / whenever the new battlefield comes out I would play the crap out of that)

 

 

and of course thank you for all of the comments

I would recommend an NVME since you're investing in a storage device now. With direct storage around the corner, yes, the something which you couldn't remember, this is it, games will load textures and stuff directly from the SSD to the GPU's VRAM or something, in a nutshell, this technology is only available for drives using NVME protocol. Nvidia will enable it soon enough, or is working on it. It's at some stage of development, will come sooner or later.

 

Yes, a SATA drive would generally be cheaper, and yes, without enabling direct storage, the difference is not very perceptible, unless you're comparing load times side-by-side. But you could grab a WD SN550 (it's NVME, gen 3 PCIE), it's very similar in terms of cost to something like a Crucial MX500 or Samsung 870/860 EVO. It's dramless but will give higher transfer speeds than any of the other two very good SATA drives. Also being dramless doesn't matter as you will use them as storage drives.

 

Lastly, the market for SSD's is good right now. Just bought myself an MX500 and it was at a very good price. Cheers!

 

But yeah, ofc if you can't shell out the money, a larger and cheaper HDD is nothing to shy away from.