About 10 y/o hardware, rebuilt process

[lexluthermiester]

Every NVME I've thrown into a z97 capped around 800-900MB/s. Only with a PCI card did I get full speeds.

Screen shots from my MSI Z97 4770k system with a Samsung nvme @ PCIE2.0x2, from a few years ago.

Same here on an old system I use to download files.

Mobo: Gigabyte GA-Z97-D3H
CPU: i7-4770K
SSD: Crucial 1TB CT1000P3SSD8

Crystal Disk Mark 8.0.4
SEQ1M Q8T1:
791.71MB/s Read
511.81MB/s Write

i.e. only slightly faster than a 2.5" SATA drive.

With an M.2 drive installed on the GA-Z07-D3H, two of the SATA ports/SATA Express are disabled.
(M.2, SATA Express, and SATA3 4/5 connectors can only be used one at a time.
The SATA3 4/5 connectors will become unavailable when an M.2 SSD is installed.)

Weird. The specs say PCIe3.0 on Gigabyte's website.

 

[Harlow]

Weird. The specs say PCIe3.0 on Gigabyte's website.

I think I've worked it out from this discussion on LinusTechTips back in 2015:

https://linustechtips.com/topic/376516-question-about-pcie-lanes-on-z97/

The important bit is:

"But most boards only have an M.2 solt [sic] with 2 PCI-E 2.0 lanes."

It would seem many motherboard manufacturers connected Z97 PCIe 2.0 lanes to the M.2 socket (if fitted), not faster PCIe 3.0 lanes, which they reserved for "more important" devices.

At the time the Z97 was released, M.2 drives were probably not so popular and were more expensive per Gigabyte than 2.5" SATA SSDs, so they used slower PCIe 2.0 lanes for M.2. It's just a guess on my part but it might be true.

 

[SL2]

As a side note, maybe don't buy a QLC SSD. They're usually not cheaper anyway (where I live).

 

[Bill_Bright]

Haswell can absolutely keep up with NVME drives with zero issues.

Just because it has a long tooth doesn't mean it's not capable.

Gee whiz! Did I say or even suggest it wouldn't keep up or that it was not capable? No!

In fact, in terms of being able to "keep up", your comment really does not even make any sense! What kind of dog does a CPU have to be that a SSD is waiting on the CPU to "keep up"?

The pricing between SATA and NVME is so small that it's not a concern.

I am always amazed how some on this site are so eager to encourage others to spend their money in a certain way, as if everyone has deep pockets.

Yes, there are some very affordable NVME SSDs. There are also some very affordable SATA SSDs. The OP's dad does not game. This is a 10 year old computer. You trying to, in effect, force the OP to NVME removes a full host of potential, affordable options available to him in the form of fully capable, reliable, affordable SATA SSDs.

I am NOT saying SATA is the best option. I am NOT saying NVME is the best either. I am saying a SATA SSD will easily meet the needs of his dad too. I am saying the OP needs to "do his homework" and look at all the options. Just because the board has a m.2 slot, that does not mean he must go m.2.

 

[Toothless]

Gee whiz! Did I say or even suggest it wouldn't keep up or that it was not capable? No!

In fact, in terms of being able to "keep up", your comment really does not even make any sense! What kind of dog does a CPU have to be that a SSD is waiting on the CPU to "keep up"?

I am always amazed how some on this site are so eager to encourage others to spend their money in a certain way, as if everyone has deep pockets.

Yes, there are some very affordable NVME SSDs. There are also some very affordable SATA SSDs. The OP's dad does not game. This is a 10 year old computer. You trying to, in effect, force the OP to NVME removes a full host of potential, affordable options available to him in the form of fully capable, reliable, affordable SATA SSDs.

I am NOT saying SATA is the best option. I am NOT saying NVME is the best either. I am saying a SATA SSD will easily meet the needs of his dad too. I am saying the OP needs to "do his homework" and look at all the options. Just because the board has a m.2 slot, that does not mean he must go m.2.

There are cost effective NVME drives with much higher endurance than most SATA drives. Longevity is where it's cost effective.

 

[lexluthermiester]

I think I've worked it out from this discussion on LinusTechTips back in 2015:

https://linustechtips.com/topic/376516-question-about-pcie-lanes-on-z97/

The important bit is:

"But most boards only have an M.2 solt [sic] with 2 PCI-E 2.0 lanes."

It would seem many motherboard manufacturers connected Z97 PCIe 2.0 lanes to the M.2 socket (if fitted), not faster PCIe 3.0 lanes, which they reserved for "more important" devices.

Ok, that would explain the bandwidth. Gigabyte website seems to have a typo(shocker).

As a side note, maybe don't buy a QLC SSD. They're usually not cheaper anyway (where I live).

This! @KrazyT make sure you get a drive that states it's TLC.

 

[Bill_Bright]

There are cost effective NVME drives with much higher endurance than most SATA drives. Longevity is where it's cost effective.

That argument is total nonsense. There are extremely reliable, cost effective SATA SSD drives - as well as junk M.2 NVME drives too.

Why can't you just admit a SATA SSD is also a viable option here? Obsessive, close-minded, biased, dogged persistence resulting in tunnel vision that makes no sense! But worse, it denys the OP all the information and available options he deserves to make informed decisions that best meets his (or his dad's) needs.

Once again, I am not saying to avoid M.2 NVME. I am saying there are many excellent, affordable, reliable SATA SSDs out there too. It makes no sense to not consider using one in this 10-year-old computer which will not be used for gaming.

For the record, my first, all SSD build was back in May 2013, using Samsung 840 Pro 256GB. That computer with its SSD is still working just fine. Every computer we've built here since has been SSD only (at least for the boot drive) with many using SATA SSDs. Most have been Samsung but also WD and OCZ too. I have yet to have any SSD drive fail (or run out of writes - before someone goes there ). In fact, all but one are still in use in their original builds, or have been transferred to new computers as secondary drives. The only other one has been retired simply because it is too small at only 128GB.

I will add this about M.2 NVME SSDs. Overheating and thus proper cooling is typically a greater concern with M.2 NVME SSDs than with SATA drives. This "might" (I did NOT say "will) be an issue with a 10 year old case - depending on the case and its cooling.

 

[SL2]

Obsessive, close-minded, biased, dogged persistence resulting in tunnel vision that makes no sense!

I think you are able convey your thoughts without such a harsh language, please.

 

[lexluthermiester]

@Bill_Bright is right.
There is nothing wrong with SATA SSD's, the durability is identical. Whether you buy an NVMe Drive, MSATA drive or normal SATA drive, NAND is NAND and it doesn't care what controller it's attached too. As long as the NAND itself is of good quality, the drive will perform well and last a long time in the system of this topic.

I think you are able convey your thoughts without such a harsh language, please.

You think THAT is harsh? Wow..

 

[SL2]

You think THAT is harsh? Wow..

Compared to what he replied to? Compared to the overall tone in the whole thread? Yes. Over the top, out of nowhere. Mind boggling. The emoji is one I NEVER use tho lol.

What, do you think @Toothless is harsh here?

Never said I haven't seen worse tho..

 

[eidairaman1]

@Bill_Bright is right.
There is nothing wrong with SATA SSD's, the durability is identical. Whether you buy an NVMe Drive, MSATA drive or normal SATA drive, NAND is NAND and it doesn't care what controller it's attached too. As long as the NAND itself is of good quality, the drive will perform well and last a long time in the system of this topic.


You think THAT is harsh? Wow..

Temerature is the biggest reason I'd rather use SATA, day to day it's no slower than nvme. If anything SATA should have been revised for higher bandwidth-throughput.

Guess I will just use a pcie slotted nvme drive that can be actively cooled and not a m.2 style which gets thermal soaked.

 

[Macro Device]

I have yet to have any SSD drive fail

But they do. I personally witnessed at least two. Not to mean NVMe drives are immune, of course they're not.

Overall, this thread was about whether if the OP can use an NVMe drive or not. They can. No need to yell, "consider SATA options too!" because firstly, this is off-topic, and secondly, OP stated they have a backup SATA option in case they don't find luck with m.2. You're right, SATA drives are a valid option but you kicked an open door.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Temerature is the biggest reason I'd rather use SATA, day to day it's no slower than nvme. If anything SATA should have been revised for higher bandwidth-throughput.

Guess I will just use a pcie slotted nvme drive that can be actively cooled and not a m.2 style which gets thermal soaked.

There is no denying that the NVME port is faster. But on that particular board, the difference is not going to be huge. Because of that, the temps for an NVMe drive will never be a problem. Also something to consider: NVMe is currently less expensive than SATA per GB. A 512GB NVMe drive is going to be about 10% less expensive right now unless the OP ops for a used drive, and for this system, that is not a bad idea.

 

[Bill_Bright]

Temerature is the biggest reason I'd rather use SATA, day to day it's no slower than nvme. If anything SATA should have been revised for higher bandwidth-throughput.

Yeah, I agree. I am "guessing" part of the reasoning is the form factor for m.2 (and PCIe) drives is cheaper to manufacturer (no outer case, for example).

***

You're right, SATA drives are a valid option but you kicked an open door.

Kicked an open door? No I didn't. My first post in this thread simply said to do one's homework and that "I" would go SATA. Had my comments been left to that, this would not have become an issue. But instead, misinformation followed, such as Haswell keeping up or not being capable, and then that followed by the suggestion SATA drives don't have the longevity.

The door might have been open (obvious) for you, but that does not mean the OP was there to see what was on the other side to realize SATA was a viable option too.

But they do. I personally witnessed at least two.

Really? You mean they won't last 1000 years. OMG! Really? FTR, I never said I have not "seen" any. I said none of mine have failed. ALL electronics will fail - eventually.

Not to mean NVMe drives are immune, of course they're not.

Then why even pose that argument, except to obfuscate the issue even further?

Yes, the OP said he can put in a SATA but that was later on in the thread - and yet it before the dogged insistence (and additional misinformation) was posted later about NVME drives.

So you might want to look at the chronological order of events before adding your own criticism of others that doesn't help the OP either.

***

Sorry if SL2 believes my comment was "over the top" and too harsh, or if I hurt Toothless' feelings. I have to agree with Lex, however. If you think THAT was harsh, not sure where you've been. Compared to so many other very harsh personal attacks I have seen levied at (and by) various folks on this site, that was mild. That said, I appreciate you saying you have seen worse.

What I think is "over the top" is misinformation in technical replies - like suggesting repeatedly SATA's are not a viable option for the OP. How does that help the OP and other readers looking for advice in updating a 10 year old computer?

How, @SL2, is adding two posts with the sole intent of criticizing another and to invite further criticism - without providing any help or advice for the OP - any better? That's rhetorical - no need to reply.

***

What is apparent is the OP has the information he needs so time to move on. At least I am. Have a good day.

 

[DaemonForce]

A 4790K for entry desktop/VR or 5775C (if you can find it).
Pair with some Acer or Crucial M.2 and that's the best chance it can get.
The PCI-E layout of this board looks really cool. Don't let it go to waste.

 

[Toothless]

Good lord. Let me clear some things up real quick before y'all keep going to the local fuel station to keep the blaze going.

I've personally used SATA and NVME on z97 and x99 (where the x99 board had the same m.2 speeds as z97. Don't ask why that is because I don't know.)

Yes natively on board it's only 300MB/s faster than SATA and yes that's not a huge difference. However whenever I go to look at getting a new drive while LOOKING AT ENDURANCE the NVME side typically wins.

I'll use the MP34 as an example. Even the 512GB has 800TBW endurance rating with a good solid warranty. Yes it is a little more spendy than SATA but these are 100% solid drives and less potential replacing can effect cost savings down the road.

On top of endurance, if OP wanted to go for a cheap PCI adapter the access times are a good quality of life bonus on top getting the full speed the drive has. If this isn't an issue then sure they can just stick with the on board or go SATA. I have simply been stating options and suggestions based on what I've seen with my own experiences. I still have a 4790k in service and have had this going since 2015.

I never said SATA isn't an option. Quit assuming and putting your own text in my posts. Other people said their side on SATA so I'm going to add in the potential options for NVME.

 

[KrazyT]

Thanks for answering guys !

I'll let you know the progress of the rebuild.
Step 1 : choose the SSD

The Crucial P3 or the Patriot P300, 35 € for 500 Go (512 for the Patriot), PCIe 3.0, NVMe, 5 years warranty both.
Hard to find the tech used, MLC, QLC ... cheap SSD shouldn't be top tier, but good enough I think

 

[eidairaman1]

There is no denying that the NVME port is faster. But on that particular board, the difference is not going to be huge. Because of that, the temps for an NVMe drive will never be a problem. Also something to consider: NVMe is currently less expensive than SATA per GB. A 512GB NVMe drive is going to be about 10% less expensive right now unless the OP ops for a used drive, and for this system, that is not a bad idea.

I'm thinking an external source of heat such as a gpu causing thermal soak being right in close proximity to it, it just just adds more to the device and as small the m2s are they don't have enough surface area to dissipate heat even with what mobo makers call heatsinks-more like a ihs...

 

[KrazyT]

I'm thinking an external source of heat such as a gpu causing thermal soak being right in close proximity to it, it just just adds more to the device and as small the m2s are they don't have enough surface area to dissipate heat even with what mobo makers call heatsinks-more like a ihs...

There is a i5 4690K on the board.
I could use the iGPU. But I doubt the old Gigabyte 970 will runs hot in there.
The case is an Corsair Obsidian 650D, with a huge 200mm fan in front, it should keep all this people in the frost, paired with an 120mm fan at the back.
(at least I hope )

For the one interested, here the MB diagram ... but not more infos :/

 

[lexluthermiester]

I'm thinking an external source of heat such as a gpu causing thermal soak being right in close proximity to it, it just just adds more to the device and as small the m2s are they don't have enough surface area to dissipate heat even with what mobo makers call heatsinks-more like a ihs...

Than can happen on some boards, but the board subject of this system has the NVMe slot on the other side of the GFX slot. So it's not an issue here.

There is a i5 4690K on the board.

That's a damn good CPU, no need at all for an upgrade there.

 

[Bill_Bright]

I never said SATA isn't an option. Quit assuming and putting your own text in my posts.

Practice what you preach, dude. I never accused you of saying that. I said you "suggested", as in implied, inferred or whatever verb you wish to use (other than "said") that NVME is the way to go, and as such, suggested, implied or inferred SATA was not.

And you are still at! You continue with your persistent, dogged, tunnel-vision insistence that "endurance" of some NVME drives plays such a major, significant role here (as in the OP's scenario) that, once again you are "suggesting" the OP should avoid SATA SSD.

Again, that argument is total nonsense. Why? Because it is EXTREMELY unlikely the OP's dad is going to tax any SSD so much than "endurance" will ever be a factor - even if that SSD gets migrated to a newer system.

But you won't accept that or let it go, will you? You still insist on adding in your most recent post "the potential options for NVME" again when NO ONE, not even me, ever said, suggested, implied, or inferred NVME was not a viable option.

This is all you having a herd of cows over what? That I said SATA is a viable option? Really dude? Seriously, I think you have a problem and it is not me.

I will add this. I am assuming the use of a quality SATA SSD from reliable maker. Are you suggesting any M.2 NVME SSD from any maker is a better option? I sure hope not.

***

Than can happen on some boards

True. But that is why case selection and proper case cooling (and maintenance - cleaning) is so important and of course, those are user responsibilities.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Primary drive configuration on that board is Sata 6Gb Port 0/1.
I'd utilize 2x Sata Drives in raid 0 and it'll be fast.
Muh 2 cents!!

 

[damric]

Would be funny to go on eBay and find a time period accurate OCZ drive, if any are even working anymore

 

[Macro Device]

if any are even working anymore

They are. A friend got a 2012 OCZ drive of 60 GB capacity, no nonsense working condition, about 25 to 30 % write health left.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Would be funny to go on eBay and find a time period accurate OCZ drive, if any are even working anymore

I have one. 800GB MLC based Intrepid model.

EDIT: And it still performs well!

88% life after nearly 7years of good service? Great value for money IMHO.
Note: It's connected to my system in this screen shot via USB3-SATA adapter, so the performance is a bit lower than optimal due to adapter overhead.