How many SSD ?

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[Dukesilver27-]

Out of topic, but if you haven't purchased the parts yet, I'd suggest you to look for other CPU, such as 13400(F).

It's newer, has more cores, faster, and slightly cheaper, newer is the main advantage here.

[Applefreak]

6 minutes ago, JaySonic said:

I’m still undecided on which way to go with SSD storage. With a build including Ryzen 5800X CPU, B550 MOBO, 2 x 32GB 2R RAM, and 8GB GDDR6 GPU, here’s the available ports I can utilize.

 

1 x M.2 (Gen 4.0)
1 x M.2 (Gen 3.0)
6 x SATA III

 

Computer will be used for:

 

Adobe Photoshop, Bridge, ACR (ie; Lightroom without the faff), launching 20+ RAW files at a time. Multi-file editing, masking, spot touch ups. File merging for HDR. Batch rendering to JPG of 20+ files at a time.

 

Helicon Focus: For rendering 100+ focus stacked RAW files at a time. I also run this operation with 12 different rendering algorithms, as a batch process. On my poor old current computer, this might take 30 minutes to complete

 

Reason Studios 12: A music studio software that retrieves samples, processes analog > digital signals (guitar), and relies on many instances of DSP plugins. An external USB Audio interface is part of my setup, which supports 96kHZ, 24-bit operation.

 

Video Editing: My plan is to get more into video editing, likely using either DaVinci Resolve, Vegas Pro or Premiere Pro

________

The ‘gold standard’ I encounter with high performance builds for creative folks is:

 

SSD 1 – Operating System & installed programs
SSD 2 – Dedicated Cache
SSD 3 – Primary file/asset storage
SSD 4 – Backup storage of SSD 3

 

This seems a bit over the top, and I’m working within the limitations of a budget MOBO.

 

My plan was to simply use:

 

SSD 1 – M.2 (Gen 4.0) for everything… OS & programs, Cache and file/asset storage
SSD 2 – M.2 (Gen 3.0) backup for all files / assets on SSD 1
Cloud Storage – backing up all files/assets on SSD 2

 

SHOULD I CONSIDER dedicated SSD’s for specific tasks ? Feels like I’m going to lose the performance of the Gen 4.0 somewhere in the configuration, as there’s only one of them. No idea what processes might require the higher specs most…

I'm leaning towards keeping it simple, and just have everything (OS, Programs, Cache, Assets) single M.2 Gen 4.0 SSD (using a 2TB Samsung 980 Pro), and 'whatever' as a backup drive (M.2 Gen 3.0 or SATA will not matter in the slightest)

 

 

Gen 3 is fast enough unless you transfer from gen 4 to gen 4 a lot, in which case the extra speed comes in handy. For many applications regular SATA bases SSDs will do just fine. For storing projects and alike I'd suggest getting a regular HDD (CMR type, maybe 5400 rpm to reduce noise). Using SSDs for backups is a bad idea. SSDs can fail basically overnight or by pressing the power button (tiny power surges are deadly) the next morning all data will be lost. A spinnging disk will at least let you know by getting clicky or really damn slow. But ultimately that is up to you. Before overspending on storage, consider maybe a 5900 or 5950X processor instead if your applications support that many cores.

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[kokosnh]

Be wary of cheap storage. BX500, and p3, or p3 plus are all on weak controllers, and slow QLC NAND.

They slow down very much, when hit harder.. 

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[Eigenvektor]

1 hour ago, JaySonic said:

Gen 3 is fast enough.. for what ? Application processes, launching software or something else ?

Fast enough for every day usage. Going from Gen3 to Gen4 makes very little difference to boot speed, launching apps or games. Some games can take advantage, but the difference in load times is mostly minimal. The difference may be measurable if you use a stopwatch, but in practical terms, you're not going to feel the difference in the same way you did going from a HDD to an SSD.

 

Storage speed typically stops being a bottleneck once you go past a certain speed and you're now limited by e.g. the speed of the CPU when decompressing data loaded from disk.

 

You only really benefit from Gen4 if you move a ton of data around and your source/destination has equal performance.

[Mihle]

There isn't much current benefit of PCIe 3 vs 4 SSDs, but I won't say for sure that it won't be some point in the future.

 

I don't see any point having more SSDs just to have more SSDs. Just look at the price to storage ratio on 2 and 4 TB SSDs and get two of them, and then get additional ones if you actually need them because amount of storage.

[Poinkachu]

4 hours ago, JaySonic said:

Yes, in Australia. Been buying my parts from Mwave & Scorptec (both are relativity local to me in Sydney, so I can pick up my orders).

MOBO has 1 x M.2 (Gen 4) and 1 x M.2 (Gen 3)

I guess my lack of knowledge is around what requires the most performance gains. OS/App installs, or fast retrieval of files. In a typical photo editing session of a few hours, I am opening/closing both files and the Adobe Camera RAW program (this is the same engine as Lightroom, with a different name!), well over a hundred times. Also surfing around Adobe Bridge constantly (for those unaware, Bridge is like a 'super file explorer' for photographers) which pre-loads hundreds of thumbnails at a time.

Perhaps I'm overcomplicating things, as Ive caught myself doing often for the past month as I design this first build.

Am I even going to notice a difference if I simply stick to my original plan of EVERYTHING on the M.2 Gen 4.0 (OS, Programs, Files) and an auto backup of all those files on the second M.2 module?

I know that gamers sometimes need to squeeze every last drop of performance out of their rigs, but not sure if any of that applies to my PC requirements.

I don't use photoshop as much as you, but I sure don't see noticeable difference when opening my photoshop & illustrator and any other softwares in my PC after switching to one of the fastest Gen 4 NVME from a Gen 3. And yes, that includes opening PSD files with quite a lot of layers in it. But that's me, who knows, maybe your eyes is better at catching the difference.

 

I quite see the difference when transferring a huge sized file though. Like, tens of GB sized file.

 

also, I have to say that Gen 4 NVME is.... quite smoldering hot. Like... can be up to 76-80c hot when under use. Which is prone to thermal throttling.

So if you plan on having multiple of them you probs wants to invest on a heatsink as well, especially if you do a lot of file transfers.

 

Currently my S70 blade in my desktop with low profile standard heatsink idling at like 50-53c, that with 3 Noctua fans as intake at 50% rpm  :x

The P5 Plus in my laptop idles at like 50c, while the Transcend in the same laptop (Gen 3) is idling at 35c.

[mariushm]

You get those high speeds when you're reading or writing BIG files, as in hundreds of MB at minimum. 

The operating system and most applications simply don't have files they have to read that are so big in size, so in real world scenarios you wouldn't notice any difference between a m.2 (nvme) SSD and a SATA SSD, provided the sata SSD is decent. 

 

Some budget SSDs are made with lower quality memory chips, or with fewer chips, which makes reading and writing slower (like single channel RAM versus dual channel RAM). 

 

I would suggest at minimum a 500 GB SSD for the operating system, unless you have some programs that default to installing on C: partition (and don't give you the option to change location, like for example Google Chrome) and take up a lot of disk space. In that case, I'd say go for 1 TB. 

I'd have no problem recommending a SATA SSD (for example a WD Blue, Samsung 980, other SATA SSDs that use TLC memory chips) for the operating system and programs. 

 

You won't notice difference between a pci-e 4.0 SSD and a pci-e 3.0 SSD in programs that deal with small files like Photoshop, or programs that load lots of small samples, and rather than having a pci-e 4.0 that's hot and barely achieves speeds higher than pci-e 3.0, you would be better off using a quality pci-e 3.0 SSD. 

 

For example, Crucial P3 Plus drives are OK, but they barely reach speeds higher than pci-e 3.0 and use QLC memory, which has lower endurance. 

 

P3 Plus 2 TB model is $90 on Amazon does 5 GB/s reads. 4.2 GB/s writes, but only 440 TB endurance ...

 

You have for example WD SN570 is $95, is pci-e 3.0 x4 , does 3.5 GB/s reads and 3.5 GB/s writes, but has 112 layer Toshiba TLC memory and 900 TB endurance, so if you do heavy writing on the SSD it would last longer. 

 

Alternatively, you have $90 Samsung 970 Evo Plus 2 TB also pci-e 3.0 x4, does 3.5 GB/s reads and 3.3 GB/s writes, uses Samsung TLC memory and has 1200 TB endurance.. and it's a solid time tested drive. 

 

If you go 5-10$ more at $100 you have WD SN770 which is pci-e 4.0 and still uses TLC , and does 5.15 GB/s and 4.85 GB/s writes and endurance  1200 TB

 

 

If you load a lot of samples, it may actually be worth spending money on RAM... like, get a couple 32 GB sticks and you can configure 32 GB as a RAM drive, and preload all the samples and keep them in RAM.  You don't care if the program crashes and the samples get lost (because it's a ram drive), because the program can load them again from the SSD. 

 

[ewitte]

For 2.5 are you referring to SATA or u.2?   There aren't many SATA drives made these days and there really isn't a point.  NVME had other benefits besides raw speeds like better queue depths and bidirectional transfer abilities (SATA is either read or write it has to switch between the two).

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[kokosnh]

No KC3000, fury renegate, legend 960 / 960 max?  Anything? 
 

for the 2.5” MX500 is best bet, and it’s TLC.  
for the M.2 the best are 980 pro, and p5 plus but they cost more. 

[Poinkachu]

5 hours ago, JaySonic said:

@Poinkachu

Your reported temperatures are surprising to me. Where in the world are you, and what were the ambient temps when you took those readings ? In Australia, and particularly in my apartment (no air-con), room temps can be as high as 30c in summer. High humidity can also be an issue.
 

And, can you qualify the statement that ‘Gen 4.0 runs hot’ with same-brand Gen 3.0 in the same build ? Or, do you have a lot of past experience in general using Gen 3.0 and noticed a significantly cooler SSD ?

I'm at Indonesia.

My room is always around 24-25c when I'm using PC / Laptop.

 

I have both Gen 3 and Gen 4 in both my laptop and my desktop. So far I used around 4 brands.
The one in my desktop currently is ADATA S70 Blade (Gen 4), from previously ADATA SX8200 Pro (Gen 3), each model is pretty much one of or the top of the line from ADATA for their respective gen. I monitor temp using HD Sentinel, The screenshots below is taken from my laptop because I'm too lazy to fire up desktop.

That's while running Diskmark benchmark on the Transcend Gen3 NVME, the P5 Plus Gen4 NVME is below it. Sitting at 50c unused.

 

Here's a screenshot when they're both unused

 

Seen reviews of other brands too, and yep pretty much same behavior.

 

As for a bit of review of some NVME + Photoshop CC / Premiere Pro :

for more context the advertised speed of each : S70 Blade R/W is around 7400/6800 | P5 Plus is around 6600/5000 | SX8200 Pro is around 3500/3000

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/adata-xpg-gammix-s70-blade-2-tb/12.html

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/crucial-p5-plus-1-tb/12.html

 

Gen 3 will also hit high temp if it's used continuously, but yep. Gen 4 will get there faster.

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[Poinkachu]

44 minutes ago, JaySonic said:

Indonesia   Nice to meet you, we are neighbours Was planning to explore North Sumatra a few years ago before I started getting sick. If life takes a good turn in the future, I’m still keen to drop in for a couple of weeks.

So here’s the new plan…

> Ditch the complicated ‘OS / Programs only’, ‘Cache only’, ‘Storage only’, ‘Backup only’. I’m not going to be using the PC for anything requiring such granular storage architecture design. Video production is a ‘maybe’ creative pursuit. And it’s in video editing where this complex arrangement is most often found.

> Start with 1 x M.2 Gen 3.0, and add a backup SSD later (probably 2024). This would be my C:\ drive, for everything.

> Mount this SSD in the 3.0 slot. Not because it’s a 3.0 slot, since 4.0 is backwards compatible, but because it may be a cooler location. While my instinct would be to put the C:\ drive in the top slot, there’s no reason to do so.. is there ? There’s no sequential circuitry between them

> Spend some time logging benchmark data (Im talking weeks here), then switch the SSD to the top slot and run the same tests. I would wager a bet ($5 to a charity of your choice, who’s up for it?) that the very same SSD module, with the very same contents, using the very same benchmarking tools, will yield some hotter temperatures.

SIDE NOTE: Almost inclined to buy an M.2 Gen 4.0 for the first module anyway, as C:\ , and if it runs too hot in the 4.0 slot, I can switch it to the 3.0 slot. Operating at HALF the rated MB/s might keep the temps down.

Nice to meet you too.

Sorry about the smokes we often "send" to nearby countries.

 

Lexar NM620 ?

I have to point out that Lexar NM620 is DRAM-less.

Pretty sure the fact that it is DRAMless have to be a concern if you are concerned about 1-2 seconds difference in photoshop.

Especially if you transfer a lot of files often.

 

As for the plan :
- I don't think Gen 3 and Gen 4 price is too different, if it isn't just get a Gen 4.

 

- Just mount it on the top slot, if you are concerned whether or not the motherboard NVME heatsink is a heat trapper or not, just measure temp with and without and act accordingly. And no, no need to test it for weeks.

 

- As OS drive it won't thermal throttle, I doubt it will even reach 60ish without any heatsink. Unless you use the drive to transfer shit ton of files often.

And you can simply buy a third party heatsink for it to help reduce, if your motherboard's heatsink is not good enough that is.

The main reason I told you about Gen 4 temp so that you can add the possibility of spending more money for heatsink into your calculation if your use case end up making it thermal throttle a lot.

- And also, I have to point out that there actually is NVME sold with heatsink preinstalled. Examples : 980 Pro with Heatsink, P5 Plus with Heatsink, S70 Blade comes with a thin metal heatsink you can add, doesn't help much, but better than none, SX8200 Pro also comes with thin metal heatsink.

https://www.samsung.com/sg/memory-storage/nvme-ssd/980-pro-with-heatsink-1tb-nvme-pcie-gen-4-mz-v8p1t0cw/

 

https://www.crucial.com/ssd/p5-plus/ct1000p5pssd5

 

https://www.xpg.com/us/xpg/830

 

- Me, I'd just buy 1 Gen 4 of my choosing, use it as I planned as Gen 4.

See what I want to be improved (or downgrade due to overdoing), then buy the 2nd one based on it.

[Mihle]

Don't get a DRAM-less SSD.

I have a PCIe 3 NVMe SSD and I have had zero problem with heat without a heatsink, it's located between my GPU and CPU.

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[Poinkachu]

27 minutes ago, JaySonic said:

Thanks. The chat about heat was more about using PCIe 4.

 

Manufacturer spec sheets don't seem to ever mention DRAM, and I only know that the Samsung 9xx range is DRAM because I can see it in their promotional graphics.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1B27_j9NDPU3cNlj2HKcrfpJKHkOf-Oi1DbuuQva2gT4/edit#gid=0

[Outta_Hwrw]

.

[Poinkachu]

1 minute ago, JaySonic said:

Amazing data set ! Thanks so much, I'll download when I get home tonight.

 

It wasn't made by me, I just found it when I was searching for M.2 to buy.
So yeah, I'm not responsible for any mismatch xD

Although so far it served me good enough.

[kokosnh]

The mismatch happens only when company decide to swap internal components, without telling anyone, or changing model number.