# PCI-E 4.0 SSD tested - slower than 3.0



## cucker tarlson (Jul 22, 2019)

seems like with the exception of synthetic scores the drives are performing much better on intel's pci-e 3.0
if you take a look at small file copy,multitasking (simultaneous copy+install) and installation times, the same drive is 15% faster on intel's 3.0 than ryzen's 4.0
LINK TO FULL REVIEW

damn that mp600 is fast though.


----------



## Aquinus (Jul 22, 2019)

Or maybe single-threaded performance is the bottleneck and not the drive? Installation could be doing a lot more than just copying data. For example, the installation data might be compressed, in which case you're testing the decompression algorithm more than I/O. They needed other 3.0 devices tested on the same AMD platform in order to come to the conclusion that PCIe 4.0 is actually slower (which it's not, it's far more likely that latency is the problem, which would be apparent on PCIe 3.0 devices as well,) when that's contradicted by the synthetic benchmarks which are designed to specifically only test I/O.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Jul 22, 2019)

1. Expand your sources.
2. You could start here 








						PCI-Express 4.0 NVMe SSD Performance on Ryzen 3000 & X570
					

AMD's new Ryzens are the first desktop processors to support PCI-Express 4.0, which doubles transfer rates over PCIe 3.0. We test real-life performance gains using the 2 TB Gigabyte Aorus Gen4 M.2 NVMe SSD, which reaches over 5 GB/s in sequential speeds.




					www.techpowerup.com
				



3. Keep in mind that the Phison E16 controller is a PCIe 3.0 controller strapped to a PCIe 4.0 bus, it's not a good representation of what PCIe 4.0 SSDs will be capable of.


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jul 22, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> 1. Expand your sources.
> 2. You could start here
> 
> 
> ...


sorry,but no one except ppc tested intel's 3.0 vs amd's 4.0
neither the link you provided


Aquinus said:


> Or maybe single-threaded performance is the bottleneck and not the drive? Installation could be doing a lot more than just copying data. For example, the installation data might be compressed, in which case you're testing the decompression algorithm more than I/O.


well not for file copy probably.
and doesn't amd boast highest ipc ?

btw this is pretty much in line with what ryzen 1000 showed






						AMD Ryzen SSD Storage Performance Preview
					

We provide an early look at AMD Ryzen SSD storage performance versus Intel in a range of different early tests.




					www.tweaktown.com
				




so no improvement for 3 generations despite the 4.0 feature


----------



## jsfitz54 (Jul 22, 2019)

@cucker tarlson :  Did you see and read this yet? 









						PCI-Express 4.0 NVMe SSD Performance on Ryzen 3000 & X570
					

AMD's new Ryzens are the first desktop processors to support PCI-Express 4.0, which doubles transfer rates over PCIe 3.0. We test real-life performance gains using the 2 TB Gigabyte Aorus Gen4 M.2 NVMe SSD, which reaches over 5 GB/s in sequential speeds.




					www.techpowerup.com


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jul 22, 2019)

jsfitz54 said:


> @cucker tarlson :  Did you see and read this yet?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


yas!


----------



## jesdals (Jul 22, 2019)

Well it depends on test methods - I had a much higher score on my old Z170 based system than my x570, but In real life I am pretty sure that they score of my x570 is the more realistic one.




Above from my Skylake Z170 setup




Same disk on my x570 setup

So its not easy to compare these benchmark


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jul 22, 2019)

lol that is not possible to have 8000mb/s sequential read and 250mb/s 4k random read.
btw the review is comparing z370 and 8700k,I think older gens (kay and older) were much more heavily impacted by smeltdown patches.On my 5775c/z97 4k write dropped from 110mb/s to just 85mb/s (-23%) after the patch,disabled it's back to normal.That's probably why TPU shows sx8200 running on 7700k at 93% performance of ryzen.Wonder why test Kaby.


----------



## EarthDog (Jul 22, 2019)

The dude is using caching for those results, lol.


----------



## Deleted member 178884 (Jul 22, 2019)

jesdals said:


> Same disk on my x570 setup
> 
> So its not easy to compare these benchmark


It is, if you notice you've actually ramcached the drive on Z170.


----------



## jesdals (Jul 22, 2019)

Xx Tek Tip xX said:


> It is, if you notice you've actually ramcached the drive on Z170.



My rapid mode and Asus ramcache where actually attached to my two SATA SSD drives so thats not it - but for some strange reason the score with both my Samsung EVO 960 and the Corsair MP600 where high. So there must be some other windows/intel caching that helped the score. The point being that its is dificult to compare these benchmarks across different platforms


----------



## cucker tarlson (Jul 22, 2019)

jesdals said:


> The point being that its is dificult to compare these benchmarks across different platforms


no,the higher number wins.


----------

