# So where are all the NVMe SSDs?



## Octopuss (Feb 9, 2016)

If we disregard those enterprise level costy products, months after Samsung's 950 was released, there's still nothing on the market.
What's going on?


----------



## RejZoR (Feb 9, 2016)

I grabbed Samsung SM951 for my SSD caching needs. It's an AHCI version, but I know NVMe was also available. What I need are bigger capacities. 2TB SM951 would be nice. But I guess I'll have to settle for 2TB Samsung 850 Evo sometime soon as M.2's are nowhere to be found in such capacities that don't cost 4 digit prices.


----------



## cdawall (Feb 9, 2016)

I'm curious why they are so expensive and so few out there.


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 9, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> I grabbed Samsung SM951 for my SSD caching needs. It's an AHCI version, but I know NVMe was also available. What I need are bigger capacities. 2TB SM951 would be nice. But I guess I'll have to settle for 2TB Samsung 850 Evo sometime soon as M.2's are nowhere to be found in such capacities that don't cost 4 digit prices.


That's not what this thread is about... Don't derail it please.


----------



## Slizzo (Feb 9, 2016)

Besides Intel's and Samsungs NVMe, yeah, there really isn't anything else out there. Other manufacturers may be waiting on other suppliers? That's the only thing I can think of.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Feb 9, 2016)

i am curious ... are they really useful or even cost efficient ... they might just be a brainfart from their original designer ... which would explain why there are fewer than expected ...

aside from that i don't like at all the M.2 interface wiring ... choosing between 2 slot on the mobo and sacrificing some PCIeX slot or even standard SATA 3 plug is not really balanced by the usefulness of those M.2 drive (AHCI or NVMe) plus they tend to heat more than SSD's or other (luckily they don't throttle ... do they? )



Octopuss said:


> That's not what this thread is about... Don't derail it please.


that was in the axis of the thread ..... AHCI NVMe ... M.2 SSD on PCI express interface
ok there is some difference between AHCI and NVMe obviously ... but even the AHCI is ridiculously fast (and likely bottlenecked by the CPU, or not ... i don't remember where i did read that ...)


----------



## RCoon (Feb 9, 2016)

cdawall said:


> I'm curious why they are so expensive and so few out there.



Who wants/needs one? I certainly don't. My guess is there's not enough money to be made off of them yet (how many users actually have NVMe M.2 slots available? I bet its less than 1% of the PC market).

They don't increase SSD capacities, they take up PCI-E lanes, they don't make Windows load significantly faster to want one, and games don't see an appreciable gain in load times to warrant one.

Aside from jerking off to big benchmark numbers, there's almost no reason to buy an NVMe SSD over a standard SATA one. I'd rather spend the money on a SATA SSD that's twice the size.


----------



## Aquinus (Feb 9, 2016)

RCoon said:


> Who wants/needs one? I certainly don't. My guess is there's not enough money to be made off of them yet (how many users actually have NVMe M.2 slots available? I bet its less than 1% of the PC market).
> 
> They don't increase SSD capacities, they take up PCI-E lanes, they don't make Windows load significantly faster to want one, and games don't see an appreciable gain in load times to warrant one.
> 
> Aside from jerking off to big benchmark numbers, there's almost no reason to buy an NVMe SSD over a standard SATA one. I'd rather spend the money on a SATA SSD that's twice the size.


This. Adoption numbers has got to be dead low in comparison to the size of the SATA market. I'm not planning on upgrading my platform any time soon but, I do want a 512GB SSD. For reasons like that, M.2 in general isn't taking off. Plus, the only time I could see myself wanting a small SSD like that would be for a laptop or a low profile mini-ITX build. Beyond that, other than benchmarks, there isn't a whole lot of justification for it in my opinion.


----------



## alucasa (Feb 9, 2016)

RCoon said:


> Who wants/needs one?



Pretty much this. I don't want one. I don't need one.

Okay, maybe I want one but don't really "need" one.


----------



## cdawall (Feb 9, 2016)

RCoon said:


> Who wants/needs one? I certainly don't. My guess is there's not enough money to be made off of them yet (how many users actually have NVMe M.2 slots available? I bet its less than 1% of the PC market).
> 
> They don't increase SSD capacities, they take up PCI-E lanes, they don't make Windows load significantly faster to want one, and games don't see an appreciable gain in load times to warrant one.
> 
> Aside from jerking off to big benchmark numbers, there's almost no reason to buy an NVMe SSD over a standard SATA one. I'd rather spend the money on a SATA SSD that's twice the size.



No one needs a $2000 computer, plenty want a faster unit. PCI-e based SSD's are faster than Sata, other issue is manufacturers are forcing adoption the new Asus ROG laptops have one 2.5" and 2 NVMe slots. That's it for hard drive expansion. It is not like the older units with dual 2.5's. They will become more popular because they are getting put in a multitude of laptops and desktop boards even have them now. Even the new Dell XPS's have NVMe, laptop and desktop variants.


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 9, 2016)

I don't need one. I do want one  It's not like I need higher speeds (there are some situations where I'd benefit from those though, or better performance when dealing with lots of small files)
@RCoon is probably right though.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 9, 2016)

I have the 950pro 256GB.... I will never look back to SATA3 drives As for primary OS drive.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 9, 2016)

Needs? Very few. 

Wants? COMPLETELY different story....

The whole point of these is to get around the SATA bandwidth limitations. It is, or trying to be, the next standard. From my discussions with some vendors at CES, they are putting some final touches on controllers etc. Remember the Samsung, while first to the market (consumer) the thing throttles because of heat. I have a feeling others took notice and are looking to do something about that as well.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 9, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> Remember the Samsung, while first to the market (consumer) the thing throttles because of heat. I have a feeling others took notice and are looking to do something about that as well.



I just use a PCIe adapter and heatsink... Mimicking the Intel 740 Looks... Heat solved.

But the installations and programs that recheck crc for flash files + drm, the heck even stupid razer synapse moves its arse faster. Those little moments sum up.

My X79 bridge is old unsupported crap as such already, I got a nice boost bypassing it. I got one more free connector that I lack really.


----------



## GC_PaNzerFIN (Feb 9, 2016)

I can't explain why and it doesn't make any sense at all but after using 1.2TB Intel one for few days I just knew I would like to... want to.... HAVE TO buy one. 

(400GB only)


----------



## RejZoR (Feb 9, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> That's not what this thread is about... Don't derail it please.



Derailing is when you start talking about oranges and apples in a thread about cars. Talking about SM951 in a thread where opp talks about 950 drives, it kind of fits, doesn't it?


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 9, 2016)

RejZoR said:


> Derailing is when you start talking about oranges and apples in a thread about cars. Talking about SM951 in a thread where opp talks about 950 drives, it kind of fits, doesn't it?


Which part of "NVMe" didn't you understand?


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 9, 2016)

They are both NVMe based drives... The SM951 is the OEM of the 950, IIRC, with the 950 having a couple of different tweaks. The SM951 had two versions, AHCI and NVMe. 

Move on or take it to PM...


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 9, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> They are both NVMe based drives... The SM951 is the OEM of the 950, IIRC, with the 950 having a couple of different tweaks. The SM951 had two versions, AHCI and NVMe.
> 
> Move on or take it to PM...



The main thing is different... nand type.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

Ferrum Master said:


> The main thing is different... nand type.


oh..sorry, the op wanted to focus on nvme. Anyway, carrying on - myself included, isn't helping. 



Aquinus said:


> This. Adoption numbers has got to be dead low in comparison to the size of the SATA market. I'm not planning on upgrading my platform any time soon but, I do want a 512GB SSD. For reasons like that, M.2 in general isn't taking off. Plus, the only time I could see myself wanting a small SSD like that would be for a laptop or a low profile mini-ITX build. Beyond that, other than benchmarks, there isn't a whole lot of justification for it in my opinion.


 These are new, super fast, and expensive...remind you of SSDs when they were first released? It took more than a few months for ssds to catch on too...now look.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 10, 2016)

I think the reason for limited selection right now is because it's hit or miss with motherboard support.  Enterprise buyers know to verify motherboard support with NVMe and they're also aware of the benefits.  The technology is just too new to have mass market proliferation yet.  LCD screens and SSDs had the same enterprise -> consumer trickledown.  In time, NVMe will become the norm because SATA just doesn't have the bandwidth for the fastest SSDs out there.

It's kind of like the 32-bit wall come to think of it.  When developers limited themselves to 32-bit, they knew that virtually all computers would support their software and they also know what memory constraints they have to program for.  Going from SATA to NVMe (PCI Express based) the wall comes crashing down but you limit the number of buyers.  Over time, the wall matters less and less.  We're in that transition period now.

I think SATA 3.2 (16 Gb/s) will catch on before NVMe does in the consumer space.  I think NVMe will remain in the enterprise segment for quite a while yet because of the lack of backwards compatibility and the cost of stupidly fast NVMe chips.


I think the NVMe card I recommended to a client recently was 1400 MB/s and 1.2 TB of storage.  Only NVMe can do that.


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 10, 2016)

I hope the situation will change once Intel releases new microarchitecture. Wasn't it only with Skylake that chipsets got NVMe support?


----------



## puma99dk| (Feb 10, 2016)

If Sata3 SSD's was a bottleneck for 9 out of 10 pc users there would be more of the M.2.  NVMe SSD's around.

Personal it would be nice with the speed, but i rather have the around 500/500mbps and the storage space than the speed.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Feb 10, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> Wasn't it only with Skylake that chipsets got NVMe support?


i don't think so since i saw some X79 build use them .... and Skylake is not X79 (nor even X99 )

at last having 2 M.2 on my motherboard are less useless than the 3 SATA express (which are luckily converted into 6 SATA 3 if not using them ... well how would i use them... SATA Express drive are non existent, even less represented than M.2 NVMe)
M.2 is flawed tho, how come the overheat solution is : "put them on PCIeX adapter and slap a heatsink" NGFF(Next Gen Form Factor) my @ss ... why even do a new interface if the solution is putting them in the same form factor of a PCIeX SSD ... U.2 is what to come next ...

i suspect Samsung and intel are refraining to launch any more NVMe on the M.2 interface for that reason ... M.2 is already dead




puma99dk| said:


> If Sata3 SSD's was a bottleneck for 9 out of 10 pc users there would be more of the M.2.  NVMe SSD's around.
> 
> Personal it would be nice with the speed, but i rather have the around 500/500mbps and the storage space than the speed.


true that ... 170chf is more "well spent" on a 520/500mb/s 850 Evo 500gb than 198chf on a 2150/1260mb/s  256gb NVMe drive that can potentially overheat, specially when nothing show a bottleneck on a SATA 3 SSD depending the usage you have.


----------



## Hood (Feb 10, 2016)

Aquinus said:


> This. Adoption numbers has got to be dead low in comparison to the size of the SATA market. I'm not planning on upgrading my platform any time soon but, I do want a 512GB SSD. For reasons like that, M.2 in general isn't taking off. Plus, the only time I could see myself wanting a small SSD like that would be for a laptop or a low profile mini-ITX build. Beyond that, other than benchmarks, there isn't a whole lot of justification for it in my opinion.


My justification was; Newegg had the Intel 750 400GB on sale for $300 (.75/GB), I paid $.70/GB a year ago for my 850 Pro 256GB (now $.47/GB), and storage speed was the only real bottleneck my system had.  I too had deep reservations about whether it would be a complete waste of money, but besides an expensive upgrade to Haswell-E ($1000+), which I can't really afford and don't even like, this was my only upgrade option for this system. 
   So I took the plunge, and was pleasantly surprised to discover that the 750 is fast enough to actually feel the difference (after using the fastest SATA drive for the past year).  The difference is subtle but definitely there.  Programs, games (and levels), Windows utilities, Windows Update,etc all loaded a little faster.  A few things run a lot faster, like WinRAR, virus scanners, Windows drive cleanup, defragmenters, photo and video editors.  I'm definitely glad i bought it.
  Anyone who has a Z97, X99, or Z170 board can boot an NVMe drive on Windows 7 SP1 or later, using a PCIe 3.0 x 4, 8, or 16 slot and the latest BIOS (an adapter for M.2-to-PCIe 3.0 x 4 is <$30).  Running on my Z97 system with a 780 Ti in the top slot and the Intel 750 in the 2nd slot, the board has to split the lanes into x8 x8, so the graphics card now runs on 8 lanes (but suffers no measurable performance loss thereby, no card can saturate even 8 lanes of PCIe 3.0).
  The number of systems that could benefit from this upgrade is increasing every day, and we should see a lot more options in 2016, and lower prices.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> I hope the situation will change once Intel releases new microarchitecture. Wasn't it only with Skylake that chipsets got NVMe support?


is it in the chipset? I thought that was on the drive...

Anyway, nvme based drives work on x99... I hAve a 950 pro on x99.


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 10, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> is it in the chipset? I thought that was on the drive...
> 
> Anyway, nvme based drives work on x99... I hAve a 950 pro on x99.


Well the motherboard has to support such drive somehow, doesn't it? Thus I assume there has to be a chip somewhere.


----------



## Aquinus (Feb 10, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> Well the motherboard has to support such drive somehow, doesn't it? Thus I assume there has to be a chip somewhere.


Not for PCI-E based M.2 cards. They connect directly to PCI-E lanes. It's the SATA-based M.2 cards that need a SATA controller like the one in your PCH. You can't run the SATA-based ones on slots directly wired to the CPU since it's strictly PCI-E. So it depends on how the motherboard is wired up.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

GreiverBlade said:


> i suspect Samsung and intel are refraining to launch any more NVMe on the M.2 interface for that reason ... M.2 is already dead


they have only been out for a couple of months... you expect to see more already?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 10, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> I hope the situation will change once Intel releases new microarchitecture. Wasn't it only with Skylake that chipsets got NVMe support?


I think it is X79 and newer.  Not sure on the AMD front.  Also, supports has to be coded into the motherboard BIOS--it's not just a chipset feature so not all X79 boards support it.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.2


			
				WikiPedia said:
			
		

> Computer bus interfaces provided through the M.2 connector are *PCI Express 3.0* (up to four lanes), *Serial ATA 3.0*, and *USB 3.0* (a single logical port for each of the latter two). It is *up to the manufacturer of the M.2 host or device to select which interfaces are to be supported*, depending on the desired level of host support and device type.


NVMe would therefore only work on M.2 connectors with PCI Express 3.0 support (which isn't all of them).  NVMe is all about cutting out the middleman which increases latency.  It needs direct access to the PCI Express bus.

At the same time, PCI Express doesn't imply NVMe.  It could be communicating via the Advanced Host Controller Interface (AHCI).

I believe U.2 (SFF-8639) is always NVMe capable because the U.2 specification _requires_ PCI Express 3.0 connectivity. U.2 is deliberately not backwards compatible with anything...at least not without adapters:


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 10, 2016)

It just needs a bios module. You can put it in and it should work in any AMI bios. I tried from Supermicro X79 and ASUS Z97 module, everything is fine and my 950th is bootable from PCIE expanson card without the module you cannot boot from it. It will work in windows thou.

Basically any chipset from up from 6th series can support the NVME drives.

http://www.win-raid.com/t871f16-Gui...for-Intel-Chipset-systems-from-Series-up.html


----------



## GreiverBlade (Feb 10, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> they have only been out for a couple of months... you expect to see more already?


Specifically i don't expect to see more of them ... neither now nor later ...

since in the interval they jumped from Sata express (none to be seen except the "demo" from the start ) M.2 well we have M.2 SATA and PCIeX since more than some month but still not a lot of them, M.2 NVMe/AHCI well logically not a lot of them tho they are moving to U.2 interface it seems ... so i don't expect to see more of them on M.2 indeed.

A little to bad since i have 2 M.2 slot on my board, one that cripple the SATA layout if used (in X2 X4 and sata mode no difference ) and the other that is more interesting ... it use the bandwidth of the physical X16, X4 wired at the bottom (that no one use most of the time )

i guess i will check on the 950 pricing a little more regularly ... i guess a 128/256gb would not hurt to replace my OCZ Vertex III as OS drive (and recycle the Vertex and Blaze i use as game drive for some)

(and every one of those new interfaces promised wonders and universal adoption ... and ... nope not even remotely true ... tho for the NVMe i give it more time ... but if they only releasy PCIeX card ... then nope )


----------



## AsRock (Feb 10, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I think the reason for limited selection right now is because it's hit or miss with motherboard support.  Enterprise buyers know to verify motherboard support with NVMe and they're also aware of the benefits.  The technology is just too new to have mass market proliferation yet.  LCD screens and SSDs had the same enterprise -> consumer trickledown.  In time, NVMe will become the norm because SATA just doesn't have the bandwidth for the fastest SSDs out there.
> 
> It's kind of like the 32-bit wall come to think of it.  When developers limited themselves to 32-bit, they knew that virtually all computers would support their software and they also know what memory constraints they have to program for.  Going from SATA to NVMe (PCI Express based) the wall comes crashing down but you limit the number of buyers.  Over time, the wall matters less and less.  We're in that transition period now.
> 
> ...




Yeah, ASRock added support for my Z77 mobo although i am totally not interested and better of just buying more SSD's.

http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/Z77 Extreme4/index.us.asp?cat=Beta


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

GreiverBlade said:


> Specifically i don't expect to see more of them ... neither now nor later ...
> 
> since in the interval they jumped from Sata express (none to be seen except the "demo" from the start ) M.2 well we have M.2 SATA and PCIeX since more than some month but still not a lot of them, M.2 NVMe/AHCI well logically not a lot of them tho they are moving to U.2 interface it seems ... so i don't expect to see more of them on M.2 indeed.
> 
> ...


U.2 you think? I don't... not at all. Look how few boards have one on them... even Z170 its quite a rare bird. Though Z170 and X99 and Z97 are loaded with M.2 NVMe based slots....

That said, you will see more M.2 PCIe NVMe devices from OCZ, Kingston, and Patriot... I know as I met with them at CES. I also believe Mushkin is coming out with one. So, there absolutely will be more. M.2 will not die the quick death you believe it will. The PCIe cards are there for compatability reasons so boards without M.2 PCIe NVMe drives are able to reach their potential... you have it backwards I am afraid.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 10, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> M.2 will not die the quick death you believe it will.



Yes, too many ultrabooks have only this type of slot... so it will live for sure.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

I didn't even think of that small form factor market... good call!


----------



## newtekie1 (Feb 10, 2016)

The answer to the OP is simple.  We don't see a lot because there isn't a lot of demand.  Same reason we see no SATA-Express drives, no demand.  And right now, NVMe doesn't really provide any tangible real world benefits for non-enterprise users.



Aquinus said:


> Not for PCI-E based M.2 cards. They connect directly to PCI-E lanes. It's the SATA-based M.2 cards that need a SATA controller like the one in your PCH. You can't run the SATA-based ones on slots directly wired to the CPU since it's strictly PCI-E. So it depends on how the motherboard is wired up.



PCI-E based drives will work on any computer with PCI-E slots(regular or M.2).  However, to boot from the drive the BIOS has to support it.  And even if the chipset technically supports NVMe drives, that doesn't guarantee that the motherboard manufacturer put the ability to boot from those types of drives in the BIOS.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

newtekie1 said:


> NVMe doesn't really provide any tangible real world benefits for non-enterprise users.


Well, at least not enough to justify their cost to most users...

My boot times improved over a Vector 180 (I boot to a fully functional desktop in ~15s). Game load times are improved as well. That doesn't matter much in multiplayer as you have to sit and wait, but, the improvements are there on that front. Also, just being in the desktop and loading basic things.. Word/Excel and other applications, its more snappy. I cannot quantify for you sadly, though I did 'butt dyno' testing with the same exact image and both my wife and I could notice a difference on the desktop for a lot of every day uses. Now, was it worth the $300 for the 512GB over my Vertex 180 256GB? Perhaps not...but I needed more space and WANTED the speed. But with more in the market, pricing will go down.

As I said earlier, this, to me, is no different than the HDD to SSD days... it took a while for market saturation. The 950 Pro the first 'consumer' drive came out 10/22/2015. Here we are 3.5 months later and people are calling it dead...


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 10, 2016)

I didn't even know there was a new SATA standard. Guess they failed to implement it.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> I didn't even know there was a new SATA standard. Guess they failed to implement it.


 Standards are defined WELL before they are introduced to the public. 

SATA Express and M.2 SATA, I believe, is a part of the 3.2 Spec. The 3.1 and 3.2 jump were minor additions to the SATA3 major specification... since most do not know those were part of the 3.1/3.2, its just called SATA3 by most people.


----------



## AsRock (Feb 10, 2016)

I just want SATA4 already.


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 10, 2016)

The 3.2 changes seem to be pretty major. But seeing as it's from 2013 and the industry apparently never gave a shit, I guess it's a fail


----------



## cdawall (Feb 10, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> The 3.2 changes seem to be pretty major. But seeing as it's from 2013 and the industry apparently never gave a shit, I guess it's a fail



Minus the sheer number of boards that support SATAe you mean? My current board has it as well as hundreds of others. So what's the fail?


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 10, 2016)

cdawall said:


> Minus the sheer number of boards that support SATAe you mean? My current board has it as well as hundreds of others. So what's the fail?


No products at all, apparently zero press coverage, and most people not even knowing it exists. That qualifies as a fail to me. NVMe at least got presented as something awesome and revolutionary, which is a good start.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

Sorry you missed the memo(s) in 2014 : https://www.google.com/webhp?source...spv=2&es_th=1&ie=UTF-8#q=SATA+express&es_th=1

When this was discussed it was the savior for a faster 'sata' based SSD... it just never really caught on.

SATAe can also be AHCI or NVME. 

Drive availability, or lack there of,  I DO agree with, however.


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 10, 2016)

I really should start reading news sites in other times than when itching for an upgrade then


----------



## cdawall (Feb 10, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> Sorry you missed the memo(s) in 2014 : https://www.google.com/webhp?source...spv=2&es_th=1&ie=UTF-8#q=SATA+express&es_th=1
> 
> When this was discussed it was the savior for a faster 'sata' based SSD... it just never really caught on.
> 
> ...



There are a few enterprise drives, but that is it unluckily. People are cheap they have to supply the masses first.


----------



## GreiverBlade (Feb 10, 2016)

oh well ... indeed for ultrabook yep i concur, tho for desktop more brand does a M.2 to U.2 card adapter and i did read somewhere that U.2 will be implemented as stand alone connector along SATA3 on later board (tho that might be totally wrong since i can't find back where i did read that )

i talk about that:


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

Im assuming you are responding to me a dozen posts above Greiver? (you should quote who you are talking to, LOL!).



GreiverBlade said:


> tho for desktop more brand does a M.2 to U.2 card adapter and i did read somewhere that U.2 will be implemented as stand alone connector along SATA3 on later board


I haven't seen many of those adapters on Z170 boards I reviewed honestly. it is there, and it wouldn't surprise me that another generation of boards will add it (a rare couple already have it native), but, that isn't the case right now. Its M.2 that is leading the way for the moment it seems.


----------



## Hood (Feb 10, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> No products at all, apparently zero press coverage, and most people not even knowing it exists. That qualifies as a fail to me. NVMe at least got presented as something awesome and revolutionary, which is a good start.


Yes, it's a fail - for all the above reasons, and for the fact that it's not fast enough to feel like an upgrade.  SATA Express is limited to a "theoretical" 2 GB/s (much slower in real world), because it can only use 2 lanes of PCIe or 2 SATA3 ports.  The same reason my Plextor M6e M.2 PCIe 2.0 x 2 drive was a total disappointment ( it felt slower than my 850 Pro)
(random 4k IOPS is worse), and added 10 seconds to boot time.  At least the 950 Pro uses 4 lanes and has the low overhead and latency of NVMe.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 10, 2016)

To each their own...


----------



## GreiverBlade (Feb 10, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> Im assuming you are responding to me a dozen posts above Greiver? (you should quote who you are talking to, LOL!).


Aye, sorry about that  

i was in a hurry


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 11, 2016)

U.2 is so, so rare.  I don't think there's a single X99 motherboard with it.  The only way to get M.2 is via U.2 adapter.

Reason why I care is because the client wants another NVMe machine. 


I think I'm going to recommend the client waits for Broadwell-EX.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 11, 2016)

You mean get u.2 via m.2 adapter...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 11, 2016)

Yeah, that.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 15, 2016)

Ah did a test for the lulz, as new nvidia driver came out...

Comparing my drives... see specs... I didn't expect to see a difference in such a short benchmark actually.


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 16, 2016)

What exactly does each of the pictures represent?


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 16, 2016)

Judging by System Specs:
Samsung 950Pro 256GB *M.2 NVMe SSD*
Crucial M550 256GB *SATA SSD*
Seagate SV35 2TB *SATA Surveillance 7200 RPM HDD*

NVMe M.2 is 13% faster than SATA.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 16, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> NVMe M.2 is 13% faster than SATA.



Yeah at least some numbers, and that's the gain we get using daily workloads, do you feel the latency difference, is up to you, we have to consider that the nvme also resides with OS, but it shouldn't change the results much, and M550 is a hell of a good SATA SSD too. But we can definitely assure gaming from HDD really sucks ballz .


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 16, 2016)

13% is pretty significant especially when you consider the technology of the SSD itself should be similar.  Granted, it's not the same and maybe 90% of that difference is from the chips themselves and not the NVMe interface.  At the same time, why would Intel bother if it were insignificant?

And remember, it's just loading.  Note the FPS--pretty much a flat line (0.16% between high and low).  HDD/SDD only matters to people who despise looking at loading screens.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 16, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Note the FPS--pretty much a flat line (0.16% between high and low).  HDD/SDD only matters to people who despise looking at loading screens.



Yes that's why I like this benchmark, it produces very stable results... I and loading screens are evil it causes beer loss  this benchmark killed one weissbeer. But seriously an example like Witcher 2, it has actually loading screens in between regions in the same map... using SSD's they are not present actually. I bet MMO's also greatly benefit from this fact, but I don't play them.

13% yes, it is a lot actually... this only one type of benchmark... I din't expect to differ even for a second... the difference is enough for me to never look back to SSD as main OS drive. For storage, that's another story... I need to get rid of my SV35 soon... just because it is way too noisy.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 16, 2016)

I've always steered clear of the SV line.  Barracuda and Constellation are more my type.

I think 13% still sounds excessive.  I wouldn't expect any more than 5% boost from NVMe, everything else being equal.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 16, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I've always steered clear of the SV line.



Got it as a RMA replacement... didn't have much choice then... Well keep in mind this is X79 and it's older SATA3. Well those are the real numbers... pretty much straightforward test tbh. If you have any other non synthetic test suggestion, please go on, later in the evening might try them if I wont crash directly into bed...


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 16, 2016)

That's ridiculous.  When I RMA'd a broken 320 GB Constellation, they sent me back a 500 GB Constellation.  You'd think they'd only send out SVs to replace SVs.

The problem is that the MLCs are likely not identical between that Crucial and the Samsung and that's a huge variable.  One would have to find the same chips that appear on NVMe and AHCI with the same claimed preformance then benchmark them both to compare the two.  Preferrably, both would be M.2.  There might already be a review out there that does exactly that.

Edit: Here we go: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9396/samsung-sm951-nvme-256gb-pcie-ssd-review

Paging through that, NVMe seems to have a pretty strong lead even when it should technically be at a disadvantage because it has fewer NAND chips.

Edit: Their results mirror yours:


			
				Anandtech said:
			
		

> Typically the NVMe version offers about 10-20% improvement in average latency over the AHCI version, which is a healthy boost in performance given that the two utilize identical hardware.


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 16, 2016)

I think it is really simple. Price, and expected gains.

The actual real world gains are minimal at best. Once you saturate SATA 600 for the vast majority of users there is nothing, like literally nothing, to be gained from NVME or any other storage solution/interface. It doesn't add jack shit. Numbers don't mean anything when they actual performance gain cannot be 'felt' in real world use. Nobody cares about benchmarks, everybody cares about responsive system. Once it is responsive, it is fine. This is also why the super fast mechanical HDD's don't sell in large numbers and have always remained a niche market.

For 95% of all consumers/PC users storage is about capacity, and then about price, and after that, they consider speed. The SSD only got mass adoption when it came down in price signficantly.

If you ask me, these 95% of consumers got it right with regards to storage needs, and that's one of the rare cases where the majority is being smart about it.


----------



## Ferrum Master (Feb 16, 2016)

FordGT90Concept said:


> be at a disadvantage because it has fewer NAND chips.



Nada... NAND type also matters... my M550 MLC has 16 chips two layers per chip... so 32 layers... The 950pro 3D stacked NAND has two chips with 32 layers so 64 layers... so technically the Samsung MEX can dump much more data in single cycle due to 3D NAND write/read mechanisms... the better algorithm will be the next magic... no wonder the existing ones struggle and are kind of hot... they actually do a lot of job.

PS.

I had end of 3rd year... got it instead of Barracuda 11... pretty much I was also WTF... but oh well... it would cost me more time to quarrel with them.


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 16, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> Once you saturate SATA 600 for the vast majority of users there is nothing, like literally nothing, to be gained from NVME or any other storage solution/interface. It doesn't add jack shit. Numbers don't mean anything when they actual performance gain cannot be 'felt' in real world use.


You seem like you have a LOT of real world experience with NVMe drives to back those claims up.


----------



## Vayra86 (Feb 17, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> You seem like you have a LOT of real world experience with NVMe drives to back those claims up.



No, but I do know that SSD's are more than fast enough for whatever I want to do, and I do use PC's quite a lot. The thread was about why they don't appear, I think this is part of the cause...


----------



## nomdeplume (Feb 23, 2016)

The lack of higher end large capacity M.2 PCIe NVMe drives could be due to a security flaw or infrastructure weakness industrial servers have exposed.  Realistically almost no consumer level user would see days out of a week saved by having a 10TB M.2 drive anyways.  BIOS support in legacy machines is the real story here anyways.  

New Z170/Q170 mb's still only have 20 PCIe lanes max to carve up.  Is there even any video cards using NVMe SSD's?


----------



## R-T-B (Feb 23, 2016)

Vayra86 said:


> No, but I do know that SSD's are more than fast enough for whatever I want to do, and I do use PC's quite a lot. The thread was about why they don't appear, I think this is part of the cause...



Speaking as someone who actually went from 850 Pro (SATA3) to a NVMe 950 Pro, you do feel a difference.  It's just very small, but it's there.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 24, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> Speaking as someone who actually went from 850 Pro (SATA3) to a NVMe 950 Pro, you do feel a difference.  It's just very small, but it's there.


Oh its absolutely there... agreed. I had a Vector 180 and went to a 950 Pro. Boot times are 15s to active desktop (from around 20s) with the same Windows image. Game level loads are a bit faster as well. If those increases are 'worth it' is up to the person contemplating the purchase. 


nomdeplume said:


> The lack of higher end large capacity M.2 PCIe NVMe drives could be due to a security flaw or infrastructure weakness industrial servers have exposed. Realistically almost no consumer level user would see days out of a week saved by having a 10TB M.2 drive anyways. BIOS support in legacy machines is the real story here anyways.
> 
> New Z170/Q170 mb's still only have 20 PCIe lanes max to carve up. Is there even any video cards using NVMe SSD's?


What are you going on about here? Security flaws? Where was this exposed? Do you have a link to this information? Who is talking about 10TB M.2 drives? 

Also, what are you asking here about video cards using NVMe SSDs? For what?


----------



## R-T-B (Feb 24, 2016)

> Also, what are you asking here about video cards using NVMe SSDs? For what?



I think he's trying (incomprehensibly) to say something about the PCIe lanes.  But you don't USE the CPU pcie lanes on z170/Q170 for the SSD, you'd use the chipset...  so no idea...


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 24, 2016)

Woooooooooooooow... way to read between the lines on that one RTB!


----------



## R-T-B (Feb 24, 2016)

EarthDog said:


> Woooooooooooooow... way to read between the lines on that one RTB!



I'm good at it.

(Or it's possibly a spambot...  but you can't win them all.)


----------



## Octopuss (Feb 24, 2016)

R-T-B said:


> I'm good at it.
> 
> (Or it's possibly a spambot...  but you can't win them all.)


Nope, no viagra or cheap Rolex watches advertisement.


----------



## R-T-B (Feb 24, 2016)

Octopuss said:


> Nope, no viagra or cheap Rolex watches advertisement.



I like the ones that want you to install software so you can "hack money from the internet"

Like seriously...  This isn't Command and Conquer:  Generals, spambot.


----------



## nomdeplume (Feb 25, 2016)

Such cute replies.  Somehow I'm sitting here feeling like the kid who got laughed at for setting down his Nintendo 64 controller and complaining about how long it is going to be until games are fun and have decent graphics.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 25, 2016)

That reply made me feel that way. 

But being serious, I was looking for clarity and support for your assertions...


----------



## R-T-B (Feb 25, 2016)

nomdeplume said:


> Such cute replies.  Somehow I'm sitting here feeling like the kid who got laughed at for setting down his Nintendo 64 controller and complaining about how long it is going to be until games are fun and have decent graphics.



Yeah, I just couldn't really understand you to be honest.  I meant no offense...  unless of course you actually were a spambot.  Then I wanted you to burn in hell.  But you clearly aren't, so we're chill.


----------



## nomdeplume (Feb 25, 2016)

I was just saying we take for granted the technical side that makes things work so well and so safely when we complain the next new thing isn't dancing into our lives.  I see this as a great time to drop three bills on an old system with a spare x4 slot instead of building a new system.  Just like the console racket it never seems like anybody really makes good use of a platform at first blush.  I'd have no idea what to do with a 10TB NVMe SSD it would be so fast and almost certainly unstable at this early stage.  A well designed 1gb is grin inducing.  

Didn't mean to be disruptive as I engaged in some navel gazing.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 25, 2016)

So, why do you think a 10TB NVME drive would be unstable? I would imagine the big problem in with such drives would be the extremely prohibitive costs for such a monstrosity and not stability.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 25, 2016)

13 TB SSD was announced last month.  It's slow and SATA though.  The only reason a 10 TB NVMe solution hasn't been made is because there's not enough demand for it.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 25, 2016)

Its double+ the speed of HDDs...with its IOPS exponentially more. That article showed it was tuned that way.. I bet it could be faster but like consumer level drives, the writes will slow after a while.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 25, 2016)

You can get 1.2 TB 2000+ MB/s NVMe drives now.  Performance scales fairly linearly with capacity so...

I don't think there are any controllers capable of handling ~10 GB/s.  If there are, they're in server space.


----------



## TheBense (Mar 3, 2016)

Impatiently awaiting for a few M.2 NVME drives to be released, to drive down the sm950 pro  

Looks like the *OCZ RevoDrive 400 M.2* will be the next one. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/toshiba-xg3-ssd-ocz-revodrive-400,4434.html


----------



## EarthDog (Mar 3, 2016)

I got to see the Revo at CES when we met with OCZ... I can't wait to review it...


----------

