Keep my 850 evo as boot drive or upgrade?

[Chrispy_]

I swap between machines with NVMe and SATA boot drives all the time.
Yes, NVMe is measurably faster but we're talking such small real-world margins that I wouldn't go to the bother of swapping out a perfectly-working SATA drive.

From power button to desktop, NVMe maybe shaves 2-3 seconds off a 20-second process that I perform twice a day at most. If you can justify the hassle for 5 seconds a day, then sure - go for it.
Just think about it though, the 15 seconds you spent reading my post is 15-seconds of your life that you'll never get back, and that's five times more than you'll save each boot with an NVMe drive.

Games and applications barely care about the difference in speeds between NVMe and SATA at the moment. Unless you are doing a specific workload that you know is being slowed down SATA's bandwitdth hampering, large multi-gigabyte sequential transfers, then there's almost no point.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Yeah I've gone mostly back to 2.5" ssd's
Only one machine I use m.2 just for win-10 and not sure why either lol

I started using linux so last thing I want is linux grub sludge on m.2 or dealing with grub switching to windows so I'm back to using my easy swap evo dual ssd tray to remove and insert which ever os i want to use.

easy swap dual ssd bay

 

[WatEagle]

Yeah in my case I want to do this "upgrade" also because I can put on of my 850 evo into my old laptop with an HDD. It's a bit of a turn around but it should work, with a bit of benefits also.
I'm perfectly aware that this wouldn't be a change with day and night differences, but still a bit of an improvement

 

[Chrispy_]

Yeah in my case I want to do this "upgrade" also because I can put on of my 850 evo into my old laptop with an HDD. It's a bit of a turn around but it should work, with a bit of benefits also.
I'm perfectly aware that this wouldn't be a change with day and night differences, but still a bit of an improvement

Makes sense, especially if the old laptop doesn't have an NMVe slot.

 

[WatEagle]

So it arrived a week ago and I cloned windows without any problem. It's faster in benchmarks but loading windows is almost the same ad the 850 evo
is it normal or do I have to change something in bios?
I also installed NVMe driver as suggested the cloning software

 

[P4-630]

is it normal

Yes it is.

 

[Chrispy_]

So it arrived a week ago and I cloned windows without any problem. It's faster in benchmarks but loading windows is almost the same ad the 850 evo
is it normal or do I have to change something in bios?

That's what I was telling you earlier, there's no difference in speed between a SATA SSD and an NVMe SSD for 99% of typical consumer workloads.

The fact that you see no difference is normal. The difference is measurable, but insignificant - like a reduction in boot time from 15 seconds to 13.5 seconds, for example.

Unless your workload depends on large sequential throughput, a SATA SSD is not your system's bottleneck so replacing it for a faster NVMe SSD will change nothing of value.

Fastest SSD ever reviewed: 7.6 seconds to boot windows. Cheap MX500 SATA drive 9.3 seconds. Unless you reboot 50 times and day and sit there with a stopwatch, the difference is utterly meaningless.

If you want to check that your new SSD is performing properly, go and download Crystal Diskmark which should give you sequential speeds.

• SATA is about 550MB/S
• NVMe 2x is about 1800MB/s
• NVMe 4x is about 3500MB/s

 

[WatEagle]

Yes it is.

Correct me if i'm wrong but my laptop has a lower end nvme drive compared to the 970 evo plus but still has far better loading times, in the order of 5s maximum.
Has this thing to do with the other drives I have in the system?

That's what I was telling you earlier, there's no difference in speed between a SATA SSD and an NVMe SSD for 99% of typical consumer workloads.

The fact that you see no difference is normal. The difference is measurable, but insignificant - like a reduction in boot time from 15 seconds to 13.5 seconds, for example.

Unless your workload depends on large sequential throughput, a SATA SSD is not your system's bottleneck so replacing it for a faster NVMe SSD will achieve absolutely nothing of value.

Yeah I was expecting a little difference, but in this case i have no difference, same boot time. That's a bit disappointing

 

[dirtyferret]

So it arrived a week ago and I cloned windows without any problem. It's faster in benchmarks but loading windows is almost the same ad the 850 evo
is it normal or do I have to change something in bios?
I also installed NVMe driver as suggested the cloning software

Unless I'm running a benchmark I can't tell the difference between windows/games/office on my NVMe or SATA SSD drives

 

[WatEagle]

NVMe 2x is about 1800MB/s
NVMe 4x is about 3500MB/s

it's working perfectly speed wise
probably it's just me that thought a bigger difference than the reality

 

[Chrispy_]

FAste

Correct me if i'm wrong but my laptop has a lower end nvme drive compared to the 970 evo plus but still has far better loading times, in the order of 5s maximum.
Has this thing to do with the other drives I have in the system?


Yeah I was expecting a little difference, but in this case i have no difference, same boot time. That's a bit disappointing

The chart I posted is boot times of a clean, minimal test image used by reviewers.

A real-world boot with startup applications and normal services running on a PC with an internet connection waiting on much more than the SSD. So even if the SSD loads what Windows asks for in 9s or 7s, it doesn't matter because initialising your network adapter and obtaining an IP address takes 14 seconds, for example.

Stop worrying about bootup time. There are far more important things you could be doing

probably it's just me that thought a bigger difference than the reality

Everyone here with experience in the matter said "you probably won't see any difference" (paraphrasing).

I'm not sure why after that you expected any improvement at all !

As I understood it, your justification was to shuffle the old SATA drive over to your laptop and use it as an opportunity to get a larger/more modern SSD for your desktop. Mission accomplished, don't overthink it

 

[WatEagle]

FAste

The chart I posted is boot times of a clean, minimal test image used by reviewers.

A real-world boot with startup applications and normal services running on a PC with an internet connection waiting on much more than the SSD. So even if the SSD loads what Windows asks for in 9s or 7s, it doesn't matter because initialising your network adapter and obtaining an IP address takes 14 seconds, for example.

Stop worrying about bootup time. There are far more important things you could be doing


Everyone here with experience in the matter said "you probably won't see any difference" (paraphrasing).

I'm not sure why after that you expected any improvement at all !

As I understood it, your justification was to shuffle the old SATA drive over to your laptop and use it as an opportunity to get a larger/more modern SSD for your desktop. Mission accomplished, don't overthink it

yeah probably we can close this chapter, I admit I overthink about things

 

[Chrispy_]

Correct me if i'm wrong but my laptop has a lower end nvme drive compared to the 970 evo plus but still has far better loading times, in the order of 5s maximum.
Has this thing to do with the other drives I have in the system?

5S means your laptop isn't shutting down and starting up, it's probably just hibernating and resuming with fast startup. Here's where the settings to enable/disable that are:

How to disable Windows 10 fast startup (and why you'd want to)

If Windows 10 fast startup is not something you want to be enabled, you can disable it with relative ease.

www.windowscentral.com

 

[Zareek]

Correct me if i'm wrong but my laptop has a lower end nvme drive compared to the 970 evo plus but still has far better loading times, in the order of 5s maximum.
Has this thing to do with the other drives I have in the system?


Yeah I was expecting a little difference, but in this case i have no difference, same boot time. That's a bit disappointing

You mentioned a laptop that booted in 3 seconds before. That probably wasn't a true full Windows cold boot rather it was a fast boot or hybrid boot. A lot of laptops come with that Windows setting enabled. By default, it prevents a traditional shutdown. It's more of a hybrid between a traditional cold boot and hibernation. It is really fast paired with an SSD! It also has its own set of issues because you aren't really getting a true cold boot most of the time. Issues from your previous Windows login persist until a true cold boot happens again.

A small article on it from how to geek.

 

[WatEagle]

That's interesting to know... Honestly I mainly take care of my desktop, my laptop is like the workhorse....
So that's explains why in activity manager there were stellar power on hours