Is using just a Sata SSD for OS and Apps a bottleneck in any way if i have 2x other Nvme for my project files/medias and cache?

[Awman]

Hello, i hope someone could help me see clearer (no i don't need a light bulb, just an answer )

 

If i have a drives setup like this:

SSD Samsung 870 EVO >>> OS/Apps (including resolve and after effects) (so 560Mbps max)

Nvme Firecuda 530  7000mbps (found a very very good price for a 4tgb Firecuda 530) >>> for my projects files/medias and WIP for resolve and after effects

Nvme Firecuda 530 7000mbps >>> Cache/Scratch for Resolve, After Effects etc.

 

Will the SSD a bottleneck in any way? Like will reading my project files/medias etc. within resolve and after effects (timeline, effects etc.) will be limited to 550mb/s because the app themselves are on a SSD? It's confusing, because i see so often people advising to even use a nvme for OS/Apps but what's even the point if it's just useful to launch Windows and Programs few seconds faster and that it's not a bottleneck in any way, as far as we have a drive set up like the one i want?

 

Thank you

 

 

[Nord1ing]

It depend of SSD, there is SATA ssd, what in real life are much faster for random R/W then m.2 ssd.

For example, I have MX500 sata ssd what in real life is much faster compared to noname dramless nvme what is often saturated.

[Needfuldoer]

Theoretically, a SATA SSD has less bandwidth at its disposal than an NVME SSD.

 

Practically, I doubt you'll notice a huge difference unless you're editing raw 8k HDR content.

[Awman]

7 minutes ago, Nord1ing said:

It depend of SSD, there is SATA ssd, what in real life are much faster for random R/W then m.2 ssd.

For example, I have MX500 sata ssd what in real life is much faster compared to noname dramless nvme what is often saturated.

SSD = max 560MB/s nowaday, and the nvme i'l be using as excplained above are Firecuda 530 which are 7000mbps.... so almost 13 tiems faster than any sata SSD

[Awman]

2 minutes ago, Needfuldoer said:

Theoretically, a SATA SSD has less bandwidth at its disposal than an NVME SSD.

 

Practically, I doubt you'll notice a huge difference unless you're editing raw 8k HDR content.

That's not my question, but thanks

And yes, it's possible to see a huge difference even just with 4K multicam for example. Or just 4K uncompressed files but from some codecs

[Needfuldoer]

5 minutes ago, Awman said:

That's not my question, but thanks

And yes, it's possible to see a huge difference even just with 4K multicam for example. Or just 4K uncompressed files but from some codecs

Sorry, I should've been clearer. Running your OS and applications off a SATA SSD is fine. You won't notice a difference vs an NVME SSD.

 

Each drive will run as fast as it can. Your NVME SSD won't bottleneck to SATA speeds just because your boot drive is SATA.

 

If you want to be really thorough, make sure your NLEs use an NVME drive for any caching or scratch files they might create.

[Nord1ing]

5 hours ago, Awman said:

SSD = max 560MB/s nowaday, and the nvme i'l be using as excplained above are Firecuda 530 which are 7000mbps.... so almost 13 tiems faster than any sata SSD

That maximum speeds  for sequential reads/writes and does not tell the story
For example, samsung 860QVO fall under 60 MB/s in sequential with big files (loose 9x time speed). As well, my crappy nvme is saturated to 100% during opening of some programs.

This 13x times is true for very limited set of workload and still true only for high-end nvme ssds. In some workloads crappy nvme ssd can fall behind an hdd.

Check firecuda review and compare to a sata ssd to see where is that drive shine and where is no difference at all.