SSDs - State of the Product?

Chewy509 · Mar 8, 2019

IIRC, you need at least a Z97, X99 or Z170/270 Intel based chipset (and BIOS/UEFI) to support booting from NVMe.

(Unless the add in card has the appropriate firmware to allow it to boot on legacy systems, ala SAS cards).

This seems to confirm: https://forums.evga.com/NVMe-M2-on-X58-m2609961.aspx

Santilli · Mar 8, 2019

If you read a little further:
"

I found this, did not try it myself.

Not the Sabertooth but a similar ASUS board with a P6X58D Premium. But I made the Samsung 950 Pro work with it easy with an Asus M.2 PCI-E card and now also working with a riser cable due to space constraints. Speeds are of course PCI-E 2.0 at around 1700 mbps sequential read but still a huge increase in speeds.

AFAIK the 950 Pro is the only NVMe drive that works with X58 without bios modding cause it has a Legacy Boot Option built in. The 960 Pro/EVO doesn't have this option AFAIK.

Pics and instructions on this link:
links are gone....

https://www.asus.com/ca-e...HYPER_M2_X4_MINI_CARD/

https://audiocricket.com/...asus-p6t-se-mainboard/

"

??

Santilli · Mar 8, 2019

May look into this:
2. Install a PCIe x1 SATA 3 card and install Samsung 850 Pro and have it bottleneck over PCIe 2.0 x1, but be ensured AHCI

Stereodude · Mar 8, 2019

Santilli said:
May look into this:
2. Install a PCIe x1 SATA 3 card and install Samsung 850 Pro and have it bottleneck over PCIe 2.0 x1, but be ensured AHCI

I'm missing something... Why? It's a SATA drive. You have SATA on your motherboard right?

LunarMist · Mar 8, 2019

Holy crap that is a 2008 CPU and chipset! It should be in a museum or relegated to some secondary purpose.
Maybe replacing the ancient X25Ms with a single modern SSD will help a little.

Santilli · Mar 8, 2019

Motherboard has Sata 2. Raid 0 gives 450 mb/sec, X-25's
IIRC, that's about the limit of Sata 2. Sata 3 or 6, whichever, is around 600MB/sec.

When I looked at the options, I also came to think either a Mirror 1 Raid, or a single newer drive might be a better idea.

I use little more then half the 297 gigs for the boot drive.

Recently put a high end T-Link wifi card in it, two PCIE cards, one to USB C and 3.1, and the other 3.0, 5 ports external, and mainly two for the interior, which makes the front ports on the case work at 3.0, as they are designed.

Windows Picture viewer is having a hard time pulling up pictures off the various drives, 6 right now, and that's the only real speed issue I have.

Money is a bit tight, so I'm not likely to replace a setup that is doing everything I want it to do.

The card and the tv do an excellent job of playing 4k, or upscaling Bluray, so the picture is excellent to incredible.

Santilli · Mar 8, 2019

Decided on 860 500 GB Sata 6. III.

Santilli · Mar 10, 2019

Crystal Disk Mark Evo 860 285 mb/sec. vs. 440 for Intel Raid 0. However, the access time for everything seems instant with the 860. Pictures viewers' lag is gone.
Samsung Disk Migration works perfectly.
Samsung Magician appears to work as well.

Handruin · Mar 10, 2019

Santilli said:
Crystal Disk Mark Evo 860 285 mb/sec. vs. 440 for Intel Raid 0. However, the access time for everything seems instant with the 860. Pictures viewers' lag is gone.
Samsung Disk Migration works perfectly.
Samsung Magician appears to work as well.

I'm sure I've mentioned this to you in the past...the raw MB/sec isn't a great way to gauge a storage solution, it's one measurement of many to consider. You should compare IOps at 4KB between SSD and HDD and then you'll have a better idea of how fast SSDs can manage much smaller blocks of data in random patters. The random access is the true burden of storage performance, not monolithic contiguous access.

Example:
Samsung EVO 860 SSD: Max. 98,000 Read IOPS / 90,000 write IOPS
7,200 RPM SATA 75-100 IOPS

Santilli · Mar 10, 2019

Odd you brought that up. I was looking through my old pictures, and found my first Crystal Diskmark test of the X-25M raid, and I have the current Evo 860 test:
X-25's
493. 330. 21. 268.

860
285. 214. 214. 40.

I ran a 7200 Sata and the numbers:

111. 3.6 3.6 1.4

so 4k random 860 is 10 times faster then X-25s, and about 60 times faster then a standard drive.

If I raid 0 another drive, I might get a gaudy seq read, but little increase in actual 4k random access.

I found a guy that did just that, and the 4k Random reads were barely 40% faster then the single drive.

Also with my ancient motherboard, I wonder if the onboard controller is incapable of taking advantage of drives designed 10 years after the chipset, and raid controller came out?

Santilli · Mar 11, 2019

Hi Handruin:
Thank you for the recommendation.
I just looked at the CDM on the Samsung 960 and 970 MVME drives.
While the sequential tests are around 3500 mb/sec, the 4k randoms are only 3 times faster then the Sata drives, 600 mb/sec.
The seq test goes up 7 times, 4k random 3x.
What do you think is causing the 4k access times to not increase with the seq tests.?

Handruin · Mar 11, 2019

Santilli said:
Hi Handruin:
Thank you for the recommendation.
I just looked at the CDM on the Samsung 960 and 970 MVME drives.
While the sequential tests are around 3500 mb/sec, the 4k randoms are only 3 times faster then the Sata drives, 600 mb/sec.
The seq test goes up 7 times, 4k random 3x.
What do you think is causing the 4k access times to not increase with the seq tests.?

There's a lot going on in there that isn't described so I can only make some assumptions in the testing. For example, if your goal is to get the highest sequential transfer, you might want to do a test using a high queue depth (maybe 32 or 64) with a block size of 1MB or larger (not 4K). Higher queue depth typically equates to better performance but results might vary. Larger block sizes can be easier for the controller to manage which is why you may see larger jumps in sequential performance when testing with larger blocks. You also have to know more about how the data is stored on the internal NAND in their page size to optimize to its advantage if your goal is to get the fastest possible speed...which is unlikely to be applicable to real-world situations. That will test the limits of sequential transfer of a device as well as the bus overhead and bandwidth limitations. Most things if life are more random so the true strength of a storage device will be how it handles random data access patterns at a queue depth of 1 when compared to sequential access with a large queue depth.

You can not also compare SATA3 to NVMe and expect linear changes. NVMe is much newer and more efficient as a protocol in addition to being enabled on a much faster bus. The Samsung 970 EVO NVMe claims to have the ability to process 500,000 random 4K reads and 450,000 random 4K writes. That's 5x faster on both reads and writes when compared to a SATA SSD. That's quite significant. Real-world may be difficult to notice the difference. At this point you are just being motivated by paper specs.

You can also do the paper math to see what this means in a worst-case situation:

500,000 * 4096 = 2048000000 bytes / per sec
2.048 GB/sec random 4K reads is pretty damn good on paper.

As for your final question, I don't quite understand what you're asking me. Why would 4K access times increase with the sequential tests?

Santilli · Mar 12, 2019

Hmmm. This seems to have a LOT to do with the controller used.
I have an old drive I'm trying to get data off. Wouldn't work with bios set to Raid.
Changed to ide. It works.
The 860 evo CDM tests are:

238. 44.68 44.16 39.60

The computer seems a little bit less snappy.
the 4k random is down 80% or so...

Santilli · Mar 14, 2019

Got done working with the old drive, or at least one of them.
Decided to go back to ACHI mode.
Computer blue screens, and won't boot.
Switched to Raid, and have the following numbers:
279. 210 207. 40.

So random are now 5 times faster.

See if it's noticeable.

ulises31 · Apr 12, 2019

Hello,

I tried with samsung 961 and it did not work. I recognize that I did not spent a lot of time doing that to succeed.

I have a x58 motherboard Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD4P. ( standard bios 2009-2010 , 2011 the last update )

Im going to by a samsung 970 evo plus 500 or Adata 8200 pro 512.

I would like to install one of them on the gigabyte GA-EX58-UD4P. According to some peaple it could work on ancient motherboard X58 by using duet or similar An usb Key is necessary. I wonder if instead of using a usb key i could use a hard disk or msata. O course, i have an adapter to nvme :

https://fr.aliexpress.com/item/Socket-M-...3.0&%3Btpp=1

but im going to get this new adapter with msata : https://fr.aliexpress.com/item/M2-NVME-N....31ff3c00tmBodE

As you can see , I can use a mdata hard disk to be used in this adapter as well SSd nvme as boot like a usb key. is it possible? Of course, the price of the msata or eventually of a classical SSD is closer to the price of an usb with identical storage capacity.

is there any interest to replace the usb key for msdata or hard disk to be used as "boot" to install the windows 10 or 7 on the nvme (both disks ' msata and nvme ) on the same support ? Could be the "start" or "boot" faster using msata than by using a key usb when windows is ialready ?nstalled.

thank you for your answer

If I resume:

1. adapter nvme+msata
2. instal one hard disk nvme ( 512go)+ one msatta (128go) ont the same Adapter nvme+msata ( click on the link)
3.Used msata 128 for boot and then instal windows on the nvme.

Santilli · Apr 12, 2019

Rapid Mode, a setting in the Samsung SSD Magician software, Yields absurd, impossible data transfer speeds, and random access numbers.
Wonder what it actually does?
Anyone else played with it?

LunarMist · Apr 12, 2019

It is RAM.

sechs · Apr 14, 2019

OMG. You turn on caching software and it caches things!

Santilli · Apr 19, 2019

Got it. Thanks.

LunarMist · May 13, 2019

I finally installed the 4GB NVMe, but it doesn't boot and the Macrium doesn't see it.

Aperitif the abnormal SSD was PCIe only and able to work on Win 7 naturally.

Stereodude · May 13, 2019

LunarMist said:
I finally installed the 4GB NVMe, but it doesn't boot and the Macrium doesn't see it. Aperitif the abnormal SSD was PCIe only and able to work on Win 7 naturally.

Why did you get such a small SSD at only 4GB? Wouldn't have been my choice.

Santilli · May 13, 2019

See if it works with old hardware first?

LunarMist · May 13, 2019

Stereodude said:
Why did you get such a small SSD at only 4GB? Wouldn't have been my choice.

No, it is 4TB. The boot drive was originally 256GB M.2 PCIe, but then replaced with a 512GB PCIe SSD that also was not NVMe. Somehow I had forgotten that. It's hard to believe that this PC is about 4.4 years old already and that last SSD is dated March 2015. It is experiencing a slow increase of reallocated sectors lately.

My plan was to proceed with SSD upgrade in April and then transfer it to the next build. Since the IOPops are quite good at high que depths I figure the drive can be C: as well as the live internal data.

LunarMist · May 13, 2019

Santilli said:
See if it works with old hardware first?

My hardware is rather old, being build in early 2015 from Haswell E hexacore parts. The storage and video is of course more recent.
I'm still waiting for newer CPUs.

LunarMist · May 13, 2019

I don't know if results ARE normal or not. 8GB length usually is enough to counter any nonsense.
I cannot return it anyway as the box was sitting around for some time due to the flooding, etc.
I just returned late Saturday and now there is more travel next week. I will figure on booting later.
There is no SMART data at all. Is that a Win 7 NVMe thing?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 5.2.1 x64 (C) 2007-2017 hiyohiyo
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) : 3058.581 MB/s
Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) : 2844.122 MB/s
Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 1086.867 MB/s [265348.4 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 800.254 MB/s [195374.5 IOPS]
Sequential Read (T= 1) : 1346.022 MB/s
Sequential Write (T= 1) : 2466.475 MB/s
Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 42.744 MB/s [ 10435.5 IOPS]
Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 116.764 MB/s [ 28506.8 IOPS]
Test : 8192 MiB [Z: 3.5% (127.7/3675.8 GiB)] (x5) [Interval=5 sec]

Chewy509 · May 13, 2019

Those results look about right for a typical NVMe setup. (without knowing the exact make/model and setup).

LunarMist · May 13, 2019

It is the U.2 2.5" x 15 mm Intel 4510 something or other. I copied a couple of TB from the NADs and it definitely generates some warmth.
According to the specs it is designed for the CLOUDS, but I should be able to boot a large NVMe drive from the x99 board, right?

Santilli · May 13, 2019

I did some research, and I think you can, but the gymnastics involved where really beyond my expertise to do so. I was looking at it for my old board, and guys got it to work, but it was a really involved process, so much so that I decided I would rather go with a SSD for SATA III, and just copy over, which worked, then the gymnastics involved.
Something about the bios doesn't recognize the option in the older boards, etc.

Santilli · May 13, 2019

https://forums.evga.com/NVMe-M2-on-X58-m2609961.aspx

Chewy509 · May 14, 2019

@LM, the X99 chipset supports most NVMe devices, however you will need to check with your motherboard manufacturer if your particular board supports them and in what configuration. (IIRC, some boards will disable some the SATA ports to enable NVMe support, and some boards only support NVMe devices on the onboard M.2 slot, and not via a PCIe NVMe adapter card, and some only support vendor certified models).

LunarMist · May 14, 2019

I'm sure it will boot, but I'm jumping through some hoops to resize and restore the image.
Meanwhile, why doesn't the SMART data show? Do I need a special program?

LunarMist · May 14, 2019

Chewy509 said:
@LM, the X99 chipset supports most NVMe devices, however you will need to check with your motherboard manufacturer if your particular board supports them and in what configuration. (IIRC, some boards will disable some the SATA ports to enable NVMe support, and some boards only support NVMe devices on the onboard M.2 slot, and not via a PCIe NVMe adapter card, and some only support vendor certified models).

I'm using the M.2 port with a U.2 adapter and cable. At first I cloned the partitions from the old M.2 to an 830, resized, installed NVMe and then cloned to the U.2. Then the stupid Windows claimed I was not genuine.

It's just a pain since there is only one M.2 and no U.2 on the old broad.
It's booting fine now. The Intel toolbox displays some of the SMARt data and other info.

ddrueding · May 14, 2019

Well done working through that Lunar. I must admit that the switch to M.2 has discouraged me from using drive cloning or imaging tools lately. There are just more issues in general.

That said, I'm taking another look at network-based drive imaging/restoration with PXE boot and the whole thing. Full GbE from the file server makes this more viable.

LunarMist · May 14, 2019

It's only an issue with 7 from what I understand.
The only remaining issue is the disk activity light is always on now. Perhaps that is the result of the M.2 to U.2 adaptation. The drive runs rather warm, 38 at idle and 49 under benchmarking.

Santilli · May 14, 2019

Awesome you got it to work.

Chewy509 · May 14, 2019

@LM Those temps are pretty typical of most NVMe from what I've seen.

There are some third party heat sinks for NVMe devices available as well if it's a concern? (eg https://www.amazon.com.au/EKWB-EK-M-2-NVMe-Heatsink-Black/dp/B073RHHYCM not endorsing this one, just showing one example).

LunarMist · May 14, 2019

It's a 15mm high 2.5" drive with a rip pled case like a hestsink. Currently the SSd is just crammed in place. I should figure out how to mount it.

ddrueding · May 15, 2019

I use double-sided tape. But I also add my own heatsinks, since the foam tape prevents thermal conduction to the chassis.

LunarMist · May 15, 2019

I just want it to fit in the normal 3.5" drive carrier in my case where there is an intake fan. All the 2.5" drive adapters seem to be for SATA and/or the 9.5 mm high drives. How did people mount the 2.5" 10K drives in a 3.5" space, or were they only in special racks?

ddrueding · May 15, 2019

This one looks reasonable, 90% of the time I just get M.2 drives these days.

https://www.amazon.com/Sabrent-Internal-Drive-Mounting-BK-HDDH/dp/B00G57BN1M

SSDs - State of the Product?

Wotty wot wot.

Hairy Aussie

Hairy Aussie

Not really a

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

Hairy Aussie

Hairy Aussie

Hairy Aussie

Administrator

Hairy Aussie

Hairy Aussie

Administrator

Hairy Aussie

Hairy Aussie

What is this storage?

Hairy Aussie

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

Storage? I am Storage!

Hairy Aussie

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

Not really a

Hairy Aussie

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

Wotty wot wot.

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

Hairy Aussie

Hairy Aussie

Wotty wot wot.

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

Fixture

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

Hairy Aussie

Wotty wot wot.

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

Fixture

I can't believe I'm a Fixture

Fixture