# M.2 Speed



## atanas dimitrov (Dec 27, 2018)

hello
recently I have installed a Scan disk 512Gb M.2 drive.
After opening HWinfo, I noticed M.2 reads and writes 6GBPS same speed as my SSD drive. I thought M.2 are faster, or are my setting not optimized


----------



## Tomgang (Dec 27, 2018)

M.2 speed depends on the ssd type you have.

Is your m.2 a m.2 sata or a m.2 nvme type ssd?

If its a sata type, its not any faster than a regular sata ssd.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Dec 27, 2018)

you bought a m.2 sata drive most probably.

m.2  drives come in nvme (faster) and sata (slower) types. the m.2 connector on your mobo can use the sata lines (6gbps) or pcie-e lines (up to 32gbps) from your motherboard's chipset. that's why you have two types of m.2 drives.


----------



## Splinterdog (Dec 27, 2018)

I thought the same as the OP when buying my m.2 drive because I hadn't researched enough.
When funds permit, I'll be replacing it with an NVMe drive.
Crystal Disk Info will tell you everything you need to know. I ran it and then scolded myself for grabbing the drive too quickly. Mind you, it was half price and performance is pretty good actually.


----------



## Vya Domus (Dec 27, 2018)

M.2 is just a form factor and interface not a type of SSD.


----------



## heky (Dec 27, 2018)

Also there is no such thing as Scan disk...you probably mean Sandisk...


----------



## Splinterdog (Dec 27, 2018)

Drive Model: WDC WDS500G2B0B-00YS70

This brought tears to my eyes.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 27, 2018)

that is simply a sata III SSD, you have not bought a high speed NVME drive


----------



## Wavetrex (Dec 27, 2018)

It's even more fun when you buy a 1TB SATA M.2 drive (which was very expensive) and then discover that the motherboard doesn't support it (Only has NVME).
Apparently my GA-X99-Ultra Gaming is too PRO for SATA )

Drive went back to the store with a lot of explaining ... and got a normal Samsung 850 EVO instead.

(This happened 2 years ago, right now I do have an NVME drive and it's working great)


----------



## FireFox (Dec 27, 2018)

Mussels said:


> that is simply a sata III SSD, you have not bought a high speed NVME drive



Agree.

I guess he thinks that a M.2 form factor is NVME drive, also i am curious to know if he got a SanDisk X400 or whatever model is


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Dec 28, 2018)

Splinterdog said:


> Drive Model: WDC WDS500G2B0B-00YS70
> 
> 
> 
> ...





I have the 1TB version of this drive and here is my score. I dont know why your speeds are a bit slower but higher capacity SSDs do have higher density NAND so maybe the speed comes from there - Or maybe its because I have a heatsink ontop of my SSD to keep it cool so i have higher R&W speeds. Im not mad because I still load into games faster than 80% of people in the world anyway








I Just use it to dump some games on that i play a lot. It does the job. Once the NvMe drives get more affordable at 1TB then I will get one.





Wavetrex said:


> It's even more fun when you buy a 1TB SATA M.2 drive (which was very expensive) and then discover that the motherboard doesn't support it (Only has NVME).
> 
> Apparently my GA-X99-Ultra Gaming is too PRO for SATA )
> 
> ...





Thats a strange issue. According to gigabytes website it should support M.2 sata drives. Maybe the bios was bugged or  you were doing something wrong?? In any case, 1TB Msata drives arent that expensive anymore. I paid $205 but that then dropped to $165 two weeks later. 1TB WD Black NvMe costs $290 on offer where as a 1TB Samsung 970 Pro costs $443 currently. Crucial P1 1TB is currently on offer for $195 here but reviews are kind of meh as its QLC chips. I might actually consider replacing my WD for one later if price drops further.


----------



## bonehead123 (Dec 28, 2018)

Flash prices are dropping right now, and are expected to drop even more in Q1/2019, so don't buy any memory or storage devices right now unless you absolutely have too 

I was gonna get a bigger nvme drive during BF, but decided I could wait a while once I saw the reports of the coming price drops..



FreedomEclipse said:


> maybe its because I have a heatsink ontop of my SSD to keep it cool so i have higher R&W speeds.



You can get those speeds out of almost any decent SATA SSD nowadays. m.2 or otherwise. 

But they are ass-draggin slow when compared to nvme at 2500-3500MB/s 

And having a heatsink on these drives will not effect their performance one bit, unless you have near-zero airflow in your case and the drive is throttling like crazy.....


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Dec 28, 2018)

bonehead123 said:


> Flash prices are dropping right now, and are expected to drop even more in Q1/2019, so don't buy any memory or storage devices right now unless you absolutely have too
> 
> I was gonna get a bigger nvme drive during BF, but decided I could wait a while once I saw the reports of the coming price drops..



The funny thing is the price on the 1TB WD went back up to $209



bonehead123 said:


> You can get those speeds out of almost any decent SATA SSD nowadays. m.2 or otherwise.



I guess you didnt see the post above mine? 



bonehead123 said:


> But they are ass-draggin slow when compared to nvme at 2500-3500MB/s




yeah but NvMe drives are also ass-draggin more expensive than M.2 Sata or standard sata drives for the same storage capacity. and tests have proven (as far that i have seen) that there is very little difference in game loading times compared when youre looking at a good sata drive Vs NvMe. faster by 1 or 2 seconds aint worth the extra money. I can live with my slower read and write speeds. I load up steam and let it update across my fast internet connection which is probably the biggest bottleneck (87 Mbps connection) anyway as far as SSD write speeds go. 

I mean if you want an SSD for a server where response times are everything are absolutely mission critical then price becomes irrelevant as you have to have the best.



bonehead123 said:


> And having a heatsink on these drives will not effect their performance one bit, unless you have near-zero airflow in your case and the drive is throttling like crazy.....



Meh - it came with my motherboard anyway so i put it on. I also put an EK M.2 heatsink on my 970 evo because it looks nicer that way.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 28, 2018)

If you do go to purchase an NVMe ssd. Please ensure you take the time to research the drive there are multiple drives that are not faster than an ssd model.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Dec 28, 2018)

cdawall said:


> If you do go to purchase an NVMe ssd. Please ensure you take the time to research the drive there are multiple drives that are not faster than an ssd model.


This. Very easily can miss what you really want.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 28, 2018)

Oops that's should have said sata ssd.


----------



## Atreides (Dec 28, 2018)

Word to the wise. M.2 in any form is crap for benching PCMark. Pull out your cables and controllers kid.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Dec 28, 2018)

What's the label say on it?  Especially model. X300 series are SATA 6 Gb/s while Extreme Pro are NVMe.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 28, 2018)

Atreides said:


> Word to the wise. M.2 in any form is crap for benching PCMark. Pull out your cables and controllers kid.



Curious what that has to do with anything in any way shape form or fashion?


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Dec 28, 2018)

I bought the 
*WDS256G1X0C It's WD's 1st attempt at NVMe and while it's still better than SATA its still slow for NVMe.*
*I originally thought I had accidentally purchased the SATA version....I was relieved...*


----------



## cucker tarlson (Dec 28, 2018)

frankly,the OP did himself a favor by choosing a sata m.2 drive. nvme drives are only slightly faster in loading/installation times,they only outperform sata based ssds in file transferring.a bigger sata ssd is a better buy than a smaller nvme ssd any day,not only is the performance difference negligible in real world use,but you have to worry about losing performance once the drive gets near full. a bigger sata ssd has more space to use before it gets full and starts losing some file transfer performance.



jmcslob said:


> I bought the
> *WDS256G1X0C It's WD's 1st attempt at NVMe and while it's still better than SATA its still slow for NVMe.*
> *I originally thought I had accidentally purchased the SATA version....I was relieved...*



4k r/w times are the same as on my 128gb sata su900 and slower than my 256gb 850 pro.
the only performance metrics where a drive like that is faster is sequential r/w and high queue depths, something that you will very,very rarely notice in a normal home/gaming/semi-professional use.
nvme drives are nice for clean builds if you don't want to use a sata drive,then your option is to get a sx8200,a great budget drive with almost 960 ev performance,or if you want bleeding edge performance,then you just buy a 1TB samsung 970 drive. most of those small 250/500 nvme drives shouldn't even exist, the price is +50-100% of their sata equivalents while their average performance is just 10-20% in best case scenario.


----------



## puma99dk| (Dec 28, 2018)

It would be nice if OP @atanas dimitrov would tell os which SSD he actually purchased to help trouble shooting...



Vya Domus said:


> M.2 is just a form factor and interface not a type of SSD.



Correct but still would help to know which SSD he purchased


----------



## Splinterdog (Dec 28, 2018)

I know numbers don't often lie - I should know, since my wife's an accountant - but _perceived_ speed and performance is also a factor. I may be comparing apples and oranges here, since my performance boost has been as a result of a major upgrade - mobo/ram/cpu- and, numbers aside, I couldn't be happier with the improvement.
However, the OPs question is useful in that it helps us realise that a bit of research is always a good idea before buying, as I now know myself.
Still, I'm not crying into my beer.


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 28, 2018)

which one of the connectors does yours look like


----------



## Atreides (Dec 28, 2018)

cdawall said:


> Curious what that has to do with anything in any way shape form or fashion?


 Umm are you just dense or just drunker than I..?


----------



## cdawall (Dec 28, 2018)

Atreides said:


> Umm are you just dense or just drunker than I..?



He didn't make a post asking what is the best PCMark drive. So again what on earth does PCMark have to do with him not knowing the difference between sata and nvme?

I have three dogs would have been an equally useless amount of information.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 28, 2018)

Atreides said:


> Umm are you just dense or just drunker than I..?


Instead of being an arse, perhaps tell him why you think this is important.


----------



## moproblems99 (Dec 28, 2018)

I admit that I didn't read every post but in case it hasn't been mentioned:  Research your board and make sure that you have enough lanes (and NVME) support on your motherboard.  I nearly bought an NVME drive but realized my board was only x1 at the list minute.  The performance jump that wasn't there to justify the double cost.  That will wait until the new build starts next year.


----------



## Atreides (Dec 28, 2018)

cdawall said:


> He didn't make a post asking what is the best PCMark drive. So again what on earth does PCMark have to do with him not knowing the difference between sata and nvme?
> 
> I have three dogs would have been an equally useless amount of information.



It is relevant to many who might read this as many up and coming benchers might like to know that M.2 drives in any flavor do not well In PCMark a benchmark that recieves points @ HWBOT. So instead of wasting money on one or 2 thinking it will help performance they can read that and put their money elsewhere.


EarthDog said:


> Instead of being an arse, perhaps tell him why you think this is important.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Dec 28, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> frankly,the OP did himself a favor by choosing a sata m.2 drive. nvme drives are only slightly faster in loading/installation times,they only outperform sata based ssds in file transferring.a bigger sata ssd is a better buy than a smaller nvme ssd any day,not only is the performance difference negligible in real world use,but you have to worry about losing performance once the drive gets near full. a bigger sata ssd has more space to use before it gets full and starts losing some file transfer performance.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


When I bought that drive I got it for the same price as any decent 256gb SSD on the market at the time on Amazon... I made a thread about it on the hot deals section and I'm fairly certain the Press Release for WD's PRO NVMe was the next day or two later. 

I prefer an outside mass storage solution and do a lot of large file transfers.
I don't see the point of slower larger storage solutions within the PC these days


----------



## cdawall (Dec 28, 2018)

Atreides said:


> It is relevant to many who might read this as many up and coming benchers might like to know that M.2 drives in any flavor do not well In PCMark a benchmark that recieves points @ HWBOT. So instead of wasting money on one or 2 thinking it will help performance they can read that and put their money elsewhere.



They don't do well in PCMark and PCMark alone. There is improvements in performance in multiple other categories and in PCMark it isn't because the 840 pro drive is better performing nor is the Intel 520. The reason they do well in PCMark is because the storage test is blatantly flawed. 

If you are going to try and talk down on products at least know the reason as to why and don't just make a blatantly incorrect blanket statement based off of minimal information in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with it. I don't know if this was you trying to have some weird flex of knowledge you think you knew, but it's worthless incorrect information.

There is no actual performance detriment using a m2 based drive in any form. Please don't spread misleading information.


----------



## Atreides (Dec 28, 2018)

cdawall said:


> They don't do well in PCMark and PCMark alone. There is improvements in performance in multiple other categories and in PCMark it isn't because the 840 pro drive is better performing nor is the Intel 520. The reason they do well in PCMark is because the storage test is blatantly flawed.
> 
> If you are going to try and talk down on products at least know the reason as to why and don't just make a blatantly incorrect blanket statement based off of minimal information in a thread that has absolutely nothing to do with it. I don't know if this was you trying to have some weird flex of knowledge you think you knew, but it's worthless incorrect information.
> 
> There is no actual performance detriment using a m2 based drive in any form. Please don't spread misleading information.


So your agreeing with me that they don't do well in PCMark and being haughty b/c it is flawed... I was not talking any product down simply pointing out an observation to those who might care. I'm sure you know more than me sir. I'll not waste my time any longer bantering over nothing.


----------



## EarthDog (Dec 28, 2018)

Atreides said:


> It is relevant to many who might read this as many up and coming benchers might like to know that M.2 drives in any flavor do not well In PCMark a benchmark that recieves points @ HWBOT. So instead of wasting money on one or 2 thinking it will help performance they can read that and put their money elsewhere.


lol, this isnt an place for heavy overclocking. Many here, their head explodes when they see ln2 results and they have no idea what hwbot is. 

Come to overclockers.com for more hardcore.


----------



## Atreides (Dec 28, 2018)

Well sir with all due respect I aim to change that here. Stay tuned for a team on the rise.


----------



## Mussels (Dec 29, 2018)

Atreides said:


> Umm are you just dense or just drunker than I..?



you're either shitposting or trolling, nothing you've posted here makes sense or is even related


----------



## Atreides (Dec 29, 2018)

Well that is a bit harsh. But we reap what sow do we not? Nice to see decorum from a staff member...

First it makes sense to benchers. Well that's all that matters too me.

Second my  comment was uncalled for and for that I extend apologies.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2018)

It makes sense to the 5 guys doing PCMark and no one else.


----------



## Atreides (Dec 29, 2018)

cdawall said:


> It makes sense to the 5 guys doing PCMark and no one else.



I have already made my bones. It seems and I have been known too have persecution complex you like poking@ noobs to the forum.


----------



## cdawall (Dec 29, 2018)

Atreides said:


> I have already made my bones. It seems and I have been known too have persecution complex you like poking@ noobs to the forum.



I help folks who can be helped reasonably well. Just get annoyed with misinformation easily


----------



## Super XP (Jan 1, 2019)

Something weird was happening with my two M.2 Slots. I had a Corsair Force MP500 480GB (My OS Drive) on the M.2 Ultra Slot and this newer Force MP510 480GB on the regular M.2 none Ultra slot. I moved my entire STEAM folder onto this new drive. Had many random Blue Screen of Deaths and several times my Force MP510  would simply disappear. So I switched both around, now my Force MP510 is in the M.2 Ultra slot. Haven't had an issue ever since.

Before, this flash drive would give me random read's of about 800 MB/s on the none Ultra M.2 slot. And now on Ultra, I get well over 3000 MB/s. Huge different both in speed and stability. From now on, any motherboard I choose MUST HAVE at least 2 x High Speed ULTRA M.2 Slots.


----------



## Gorstak (Jan 1, 2019)

Atreides said:


> Word to the wise. M.2 in any form is crap for benching PCMark. Pull out your cables and controllers kid.



What seems to be the issue with nvme?

my score:
http://www.3dmark.com/pcm10b/94883


----------



## Super XP (Jan 1, 2019)

Gorstak said:


> What seems to be the issue with nvme?
> 
> my score:
> http://www.3dmark.com/pcm10b/94883


So far so good, no issues with NVME on my end. And games seem to load up much faster too.

For comparison, my M.2 Corsair Force MP500 480GB is much faster than these results, but the M.2 slot is the limiting factor here. My MP510 had similar results before I moved it to the Ultra M.2 slot.


----------



## moproblems99 (Jan 1, 2019)

Gorstak said:


> What seems to be the issue with nvme?
> 
> my score:
> http://www.3dmark.com/pcm10b/94883



An inability to have a rational conversation and the need to call someone a 'kid' and to go back to consoles.  Sata doesn't have that problem.


----------

