General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: Gman on March 22, 2015, 01:42:45 PM
Title: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Gman on March 22, 2015, 01:42:45 PM
A couple magazines and sites have been including these as their boot drives in their builds, PC Gamer, anandtech, and a couple others recently.
Most seem to pick the Plextor M6e Series PCIe M.2, which is a 256gb SSD.
Has anyone used these, or have an opinion if they are worth it, price not being on object (they seem to around double the cost of what an average 250ish sized SSD costs)? The stats they are throwing down seem to show a significant on paper increase in reads and writes, but what's the real world deal, if it's for primarily a gaming machine that isn't building videos or rendering and all that jazz.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: 2bighorn on March 22, 2015, 09:04:29 PM
A couple magazines and sites have been including these as their boot drives in their builds, PC Gamer, anandtech, and a couple others recently.
Most seem to pick the Plextor M6e Series PCIe M.2, which is a 256gb SSD.
Has anyone used these, or have an opinion if they are worth it, price not being on object (they seem to around double the cost of what an average 250ish sized SSD costs)? The stats they are throwing down seem to show a significant on paper increase in reads and writes, but what's the real world deal, if it's for primarily a gaming machine that isn't building videos or rendering and all that jazz.
It has less overhead, lower latency, direct lane to CPU, etc, compared to SATA SSD, but unless you do a lot of sequential read/writes or you need larger queue depth like on workstations and servers (that's what it is optimized for) you won't really notice the difference.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on March 23, 2015, 01:12:01 AM
A couple magazines and sites have been including these as their boot drives in their builds, PC Gamer, anandtech, and a couple others recently.
Most seem to pick the Plextor M6e Series PCIe M.2, which is a 256gb SSD.
Has anyone used these, or have an opinion if they are worth it, price not being on object (they seem to around double the cost of what an average 250ish sized SSD costs)? The stats they are throwing down seem to show a significant on paper increase in reads and writes, but what's the real world deal, if it's for primarily a gaming machine that isn't building videos or rendering and all that jazz.
I own two PCI-E SSD:s. I'd say that in regular use it's hard to tell the difference between a SATA6 SSD and a PCI-E one. Both are pretty much so fast that you don't notice much delays. But once you get used to them, using a machine with spinner hdd:s is like moving in molasses. Annoying and slow.
My first PCI-E SSD (OCZ Revodrive 3) was a disappointment mainly because I went cheap and bought a 120Gb model. It is simply too small. It is blazing fast but simply too small to hold even the whole steam library. My second one (Intel 910 800Gb) doesn't share that problem.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Gman on March 23, 2015, 02:29:34 PM
Ok, figured I would see how folks using them thought they worked before putting them into my new build. I think I'm going to go with SSDs in Raid 0 instead. I have the same problem w/Steam folder Ripley, mine is close to 600mb now, and I can't fit it on a single 500gb SSD drive, and the SteamFolder program has been a little buggy, which lets you put single programs from Steam on certain drives, so I'm going back to all of Steam on one drive (or Raid array in this new system).
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Chalenge on March 23, 2015, 05:32:38 PM
Hehe, Steam library is over 850GB currently and growing. . .
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Gman on March 23, 2015, 09:18:41 PM
I thought mine was bad. I was considering deleting some stuff, but I still play various stuff JUST often enough to make it a PITA to have to download it again, even at 13mb/sec, some stuff is pretty big now, and the d/l rates will fall down to 2 or 3mb/sec sometimes for me with Steam, regardless of what server or VPN I try with it.
Yep, going to have to get at least 1 gb in SSD either through RAID 0 or a single drive. I think getting 2 is almost the same price, and will offer more speed what with the stripping and all.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on March 23, 2015, 09:55:50 PM
I own two PCI-E SSD:s. I'd say that in regular use it's hard to tell the difference between a SATA6 SSD and a PCI-E one. Both are pretty much so fast that you don't notice much delays. But once you get used to them, using a machine with spinner hdd:s is like moving in molasses. Annoying and slow.
My first PCI-E SSD (OCZ Revodrive 3) was a disappointment mainly because I went cheap and bought a 120Gb model. It is simply too small. It is blazing fast but simply too small to hold even the whole steam library. My second one (Intel 910 800Gb) doesn't share that problem.
Tell me if I got this right..............
A PCI-E SSD has it's own onboard PCI-E bus controller & when put in the PCI-E slot communicates directly w/ CPU & system mem over the PCI-E lane(s) bypassing the mobo chipset & it's controller. Correct?
If this is so then my interest is perked up a little as I can see some potential.....but it would depend on just how good/fast the PCI-E SSD's onboard bus controller is........correct as well? Can be a little expensive but par the course.........................
I'd like to know.........................
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Chalenge on March 23, 2015, 11:45:39 PM
On the Z97 board I tested the M.2 variety of SSD forced the ASMedia SATA controller offline, which blocked a potential of 12TB of storage. I consider that to be very bad.
If you have a PCI-Express slot open then Ripley's method is superior for the obvious reasons, except dollar-for-dollar it will be about twice as much per GB.
Yes, Pudgie, you can do the same with a PCI-Express SATA controller and a platter drive, except it will not be as fast obviously. On my server I never filled out any controller more than half of the available capacity, because adding a new controller maintained the system snappiness. I still prefer enterprise level NAS-type platter drives.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on March 24, 2015, 06:39:11 PM
Thanks, Chalenge!
Appreciate the info....................................
Got me a little researching to do..........................................................
I'll let cha know what I cook up here........................
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on March 24, 2015, 08:57:48 PM
The Plextor is consumer grade but the Calvary is enterprise grade & doesn't come w/ a heat sink on the NAND & shield......
I like the Plextor one as well as I like the Asus......................
Sigh................ decisions..............
in progress.......................
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on March 28, 2015, 01:40:39 PM
If you're looking for a fast boot drive and/or game storage I would go with a Samsung 850 or Intel SATA drives instead. I only got the Intel PCI-E card because I got it dirt cheap (450 euros for 800gigs pci-e and 240gigs sata combo).
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on March 28, 2015, 07:25:51 PM
If you're looking for a fast boot drive and/or game storage I would go with a Samsung 850 or Intel SATA drives instead. I only got the Intel PCI-E card because I got it dirt cheap (450 euros for 800gigs pci-e and 240gigs sata combo).
Thanks for the post Ripley.
I already have a 500Gb & a 120Gb Samsung 850 EVO SSD on my SSD wish list at Newegg....planning to use the 500Gb 1 for OS & programs & the 120Gb 1 for sacrificial page file duty when I get around to doing an OS reinstall as I want to do it on fresh SSD's......if I choose to go this way.
What I have been doing is reading up on the advantages\disadvantages of PCI-E SSD's over SATA III based SSD's since Gman started this thread & researching the different PCI-E SSD's out there & posting them here for comment to help me to arrive at a direction....I currently have 2 OCZ Vertex4 SATA III 256Gb SSD's in my box that I have been using as noted my intended use w/ the 850's since I've installed them over 2 1/2 yrs ago w/o issues (10-6-12 to be exact) & the tests that I've done on both of them over this time frame using AS SSD Benchmark software shows that neither drive is showing signs of slowing down to date....but I'm interested in the aspects of going to a PCI-E SSD at the moment................
The price of a PCI-E SSD isn't a major concern of mine, OTOH the performance of 1 is..................
This info is what I'm seeking for so if you could give me some perspective on how your Intel PCI-E SSD performs\performed....good or bad.....I would appreciate it.
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on March 29, 2015, 03:56:30 AM
I already have a 500Gb & a 120Gb Samsung 850 EVO SSD on my SSD wish list at Newegg....planning to use the 500Gb 1 for OS & programs & the 120Gb 1 for sacrificial page file duty when I get around to doing an OS reinstall as I want to do it on fresh SSD's......if I choose to go this way.
What I have been doing is reading up on the advantages\disadvantages of PCI-E SSD's over SATA III based SSD's since Gman started this thread & researching the different PCI-E SSD's out there & posting them here for comment to help me to arrive at a direction....I currently have 2 OCZ Vertex4 SATA III 256Gb SSD's in my box that I have been using as noted my intended use w/ the 850's since I've installed them over 2 1/2 yrs ago w/o issues (10-6-12 to be exact) & the tests that I've done on both of them over this time frame using AS SSD Benchmark software shows that neither drive is showing signs of slowing down to date....but I'm interested in the aspects of going to a PCI-E SSD at the moment................
The price of a PCI-E SSD isn't a major concern of mine, OTOH the performance of 1 is..................
This info is what I'm seeking for so if you could give me some perspective on how your Intel PCI-E SSD performs\performed....good or bad.....I would appreciate it.
:salute
If price is no issue then go ahead with the PCI-E card, of course. My practical use has shown that I can't see much difference if any between a SATA6 SSD and a PCI-E SSD. In benchmarks the PCI-E model is much faster but for my casual use (loading the odd game or app now and then) they both perform with almost instant speed. Situation would be different it it was server use and hundreds of thousands of requests per minute.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on March 29, 2015, 05:42:41 PM
If price is no issue then go ahead with the PCI-E card, of course. My practical use has shown that I can't see much difference if any between a SATA6 SSD and a PCI-E SSD. In benchmarks the PCI-E model is much faster but for my casual use (loading the odd game or app now and then) they both perform with almost instant speed. Situation would be different it it was server use and hundreds of thousands of requests per minute.
Appreciate the response!
In my research on these PCI-E SSD's I have found 2 of these that have perked my interest as 1 of the main uses that is touted for their existence is gaming along w/ video encoding\editing & CAD work or any use where the read\write speeds are paramount as they are essentially RAID0 SSD solutions put on a PCI-E PCB platform w/ onboard PCI-E bus controller so that the SSD will look to the OS as a single SSD but performance along the line of a hardware-based SSD RAID0 using multiple flash NAND controllers sectioning out the NAND into "separate" SSD's w/ onboard dedicated RAID controller to manage them across the PCI-E lane(s) that support all of the optimization\protection goodies that a single SATA SSD can........in short an easier method of running RAID0 SSD's w/o the limitations of the SATA bus & chipset holding the "RAID" array back from it's full potential & enjoy full OS protection/optimization of a SATA SSD. Also they are supposed to be capable of being paired in a RAID0 to RAID0 configuration or "RAID the RAID".............. :bolt:
The Asus 1 uses 2 120Gb "SSD's" in RAID0 across 2 physical PCI-E lanes & the GSkill 1 uses 4 120Gb "SSD's" in RAID0 across 8 physical PCI-E lanes. Both these are consumer grade products & have a decent warranty on them. Price isn't for the faint-hearted............
Here is another PCI-E SSD that uses the M.2 vers of it's SSD that Gman inquired about on a PCI-E PCB adapter supposed to be optimized over the original one, thus the BK badging & also listed as consumer grade but not in RAID0 & uses 2 physical PCI-E lanes:
You can get this 1 in 256Gb & 128Gb capacities as well. Pricing is a lot more reasonable if you stay below 512Gb.......
All are PCI-E rev 2.0 spec.......
What I'm curious about is using 1 of these on my Asus RIVG X79 mobo as this mobo has 40 PCI-E 3.x lanes available (12 extra lanes than the mainstream offerings) & a PCI-E SSD could provide some extra disk performance thruput down those extra lanes that I'm not gonna use (not going to SLI\Crossfire graphics cards.....) & by by-passing the SATA bus along w/ it's X79 chipset may actually "see" some of this performance right now......not so much in faster boot times or in faster loading times but in faster reads/writes across the PCI-E lanes themselves as opposed to the SATA bus as the PCI-E lanes are in direct connection w/ the CPU, system mem, graphics card, LAN, etc & run MUCH faster w/ greater bandwidth capacity than the X79\SATA III bus currently has. This is what has perked my interest & is begging for me to test this out. Of course you will need to run apps that can actually bear this out..............who says that I ain't gonna do that? :D
Yes I can agree that on a more practical level all this is overkill for most uses but modern games will start taking more & more advantage of this kind of hardware now & in the future, including AH some day so why not?
All the reading that I have read is pointing to the SATA bus going the way of the PCI bus & the PCI-E bus will be the predominate communication subsystem in use due to it's compatibility w/ all computer hardware devices & it's massive speed & bandwidth capability......
Who knows I might branch out into CAD work & be flying AH at the same time when I retire..........................
One thing will be for sure.....I probably won't be able to afford this kind of stuff if\when retirement comes along so I better get in on it now.................
;) :D :salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on March 29, 2015, 09:57:05 PM
After reading the reviews on the GSkill Phoenix Blade PCI-E SSD off Guru3D, Hexus & reading the Gskill forums on this product it is the real deal but it is a little more cumbersome to use as opposed to the others (treat it as a RAID array if using it for boot drive duty or storage....will need to load GSkill RAID drivers at F6 prompt during Win OS install if boot drive duty or load drivers in Win Disk Management & reboot if using for storage after Win recognizes the drive is present & you DEFINATELY want it in AHCI mode....) & is REALLY OVERKILL when I was checking the performance results over the other PCI-E & SATA SSD's also tested (which included the Plextor M6e @ 256Gb capacity in both M.2 & PCI-E flavors). In the SATA category the Samsung 840 EVO & 850 EVO were the big dogs of the bunch consistently performing right up against the SATA bus ceiling of 500Gb\s read/write performance limit.
Since the Plextor M6e 256 Gb PCI-E SSD tested to consistently hit the 700Gb\s-800Gb\s read\write speeds in both the M.2 & PCI-E variants (the ceiling for M.2 spec SSD's @ PCI-E 2.x specs...not limited by the current PCI-E bus lane speeds of 985Gb\s @ 3.x PCI-E spec...as they interface directly into the PCI-E bus) & consistently scored very high when compared to this Phoenix Blade, this has really moved me towards the Plextor M6e BK edition PCI-E SSD (really the M.2 vers on a PCI-E black PCB adapter board w/ good looking heat shield & red anodized aluminum heatsink attached to the SSD module itself by the heat shield.....real pretty to look at :D) to start out with. No drivers are needed w/ this SSD to be used for either storage or boot duty & can run on legacy BIOS or UEFI BIOS & also has the ability to use the 12v SATA power connector if needed and has a SDD LED connector so that you can use the existing HDD activity light on your case. Very appealing I must say.......................... :D
The only issue is whether I want to get the 256Gb version or up it to the 512Gb version for any future program expansion plans as I am getting this SSD exclusively for boot duty to run my OS & programs off it & will most likely continue to use 1 of my existing OCZ Vertex4 256Gb SSD's for page file duty\storage & the 2nd 1 for strictly storage across the X79 SATA III bus.
Well this is where I'm at right now.....most likely will be pulling the plug on ordering this soon & will be installing this w/ a fresh clean install of Win 7 SP1 on it (I cloned my WD Cavier Black 500Gb HDD boot drive onto my OCZ Vertex4 256Gb SSD 2 1/2 yrs ago using free vers of TODO EaseUS....all went OK & was contiguous but the system reserved partition was a lot larger than what I wanted it to be) so I hope Win 7 sets up the std 1024 contiguous spacing for SSD service upon install................
I'll post more on this when I get it.
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on April 01, 2015, 07:59:49 PM
This is OTW to my carport door.........should be here by Saturday.........................
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on April 04, 2015, 01:05:04 PM
Update:
Every time I get into trying some product on my box I learn other things that I wasn't looking for...............................
:)
After reading up on Plextor's web site concerning this M6e BK PCI-E SSD as being both legacy BIOS & UEFI compatible, I Bing'd on the topics "Legacy Opt Rom", "legacy BIOS" & "UEFI" & learned just what all this was & what they provide in the process of computer startup or POST & how the various devices are "seen" & processed during this part of computer operation..................
Then I pulled out my RIVG's manual again & went back over the mobo set up..................
I now realized that my mobo has the UEFI interface (always thought of this as a fancy BIOS that you could use your mouse in......NOT!) & I don't have the mobo set up to take advantage of it as all the devices that I have connected to it (& the Plextor PX-512M6e Black Edition PCI-E 2.0 x2 SSD I have coming as well) are UEFI-compliant devices.
Man, I missed this for over 2 1/2 yrs!.......... :old:
Went in the Boot section & set all up to look for the UEFI driver on the devices (originally set up to look for both w/ priority set for legacy BIOS....assuming for compatibility purposes), saved & rebooted....................
Now I see just what it really means to fast boot!
:D
This box now POST so fast that it's scary as now after the CPU, mem & vid card initialize the rest of my devices now initialize at the same time instead of 1 after the other............cut out a good 15-20 seconds of POST time & this is w/ me setting a 5 sec delay time to allow me to hit the Del button in time to get into the UEFI before Win7 starts up!
Gonna go & set up the wife's box now.........I'll get a kick out of her when she starts up her box after I do this....................
:D :aok
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on April 05, 2015, 08:01:00 PM
Here is the 1st consumer-grade NVMe SSD to market on a PCI-E platform.......... Also comes as a 2.5" x 15mm drive w/ adapter cable to plug into a M.2 slot..........
Has native NVMe support in Win 8.1 & up......there is a hotfix out for Win 7 SP1 to give it native NVMe support but you will also have to do some registry setup when you install it. Will work on most Z97 & x99 mobos to date.
Mobo manuf's will also need to issue a BIOS update for older mobo NVMe compatibility. Have checked the Asus site on my mobo.....no updated BIOS issued yet.
According to the reviews & write-ups the NVMe spec is the spec that truly will fully optimize SSD performance....................
Rumor is that Samsung has a NVMe vers of it's XP941 M.2 SSD developed but no one has seen it yet.
Will continue w/ my current installation but as soon as Asus posts a BIOS update to give my RIVG NVMe compatibility I'm gonna get 1 of these to test it out.............
FYI..............................................
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: eagl on April 05, 2015, 11:24:59 PM
They're really fast but only the small ones are really affordable. That means your data will still be on another larger/slower drive.
I prefer a less expensive but large single SSD for everything. I currently have 2 Samsung 840 evos and 1 Samsung 850 evo, and they're fast enough that for general use I'm not waiting for the HD anymore, ever. 2 are 1TB and 1 is 750GB yet they cost about as much as a "pro" series 256 or 500gb model of the premium brands, so I'm not relying on secondary storage devices for the data I use daily.
If you're going to go pci-e SSD, bite the bullet and go big or you'll still be stuck with slower storage for your data and then you'll have the added admin hassle of managing multiple drives too.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on April 08, 2015, 01:05:59 AM
Update:
The SSD arrived today (SSD made it to Farmington early Sat morning but didn't distribute to routes. UPS instead transferred it to the USPS Monday morning too late for distribution so I got it today) & I have installed it in my box.
I pulled my SATA III boot drive & storage drive to ensure that Win 7 would find it. I had to set up the mobo UEFI to Legacy OPT Rom so that it could see the SSD (SSD came w/ partition in MBR) & Win 7 would configure it into GPT partitions (made 3 partitions, 1 for EFI driver files, 1 reserved for Microsoft stuff (MSR) & 1 for the rest (476Gb of the 512Gb)) then installed Win 7 on the 3rd partition....all went clean. Once OS was installed I went back in mobo UEFI & changed UEFI to look for UEFI devices.....all went w/o issue.
All I'm gonna say at this point is this......This Plextor PX512M6e Black Edition PCI-E SSD is definitely faster than the 2 SATA III OCZ Vertex4 256Gb SSD's that I have & these SSD's were no slouch performance-wise.
Am currently loading all programs back on & will be back in the game by the weekend..................
Its looking good so far........................!
:aok :D :salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on April 09, 2015, 11:18:44 PM
Update:
Finally got the OS fully updated (ran to date a total of 236 updates), most of my apps\games installed & have checked\set up Windows to optimize this SSD over & above what Win 7 hadn't already done itself as I had done when I installed the OCZ Vertex4 SSD's some 2 1/2+ yrs ago.
I can see why these SSD's are touted for their performance but the main improvement that I have noted w/ this Plextor BK PCI-E SSD over my OCZ Vertex4 SATA III SSD that I can see up front is in latency & bandwidth. This has more to do w/ comms directly over the PCI-E bus vs the SATA bus IMHO. The Plextor is noticeably faster in response time vs the OCZ's then the read\write speed advantage over the 2 PCI-E lanes makes up the rest. I ran both this Plextor & OCZ SSD thru AS SSD Benchmarking software & the results of both SSD's showed this to be true. The Plextor reads\writes much more data\s in sequential tests, reads faster but writes slightly slower in random 4K1T tests, reads faster but writes slightly slower in random 4K64T tests, reads much faster but writes slightly slower in access time tests for an aggregate score advantage of 62 (I tried to post the benchmarking results but the free image host that I was using wouldn't upload them as AS saves the results in HTML format & postimage.com won't upload HTML content). The slower random write speeds also have to do w/ the extra provisioning that the SSD controller has to process when writing across the 476 Gb partition on the Plextor SSD vs the 238 Gb partition on the OCZ SSD so this is something that I will overlook as 1.) the random write speed difference is very small between the 2...less than 10 Mb\s & the sequential write speed advantage of the Plextor would hide this & 2.) I know that most of what we as consumers would notice is the access time & read performance of any drive over write performance of the same drive in most ordinary consumer usage & this PCI-E SSD consistently accesses & reads faster than the SATA III SSD's that I have & I can easily see this difference while in use so this thing is the real deal in my assessment.
Now w/ all this being said, this PCI-E SSD (or any PCI-E SSD) would NOT be attractive for normal consumer use due to the cost per Gb & the performance advantage that this Plextor has is not enough for a "normal" consumer to want to spend this kind of money for....but in fairness these SSD's are not aimed at the mainstream market....they are specifically aimed for the consumers who are more "prosumers" in usage (video editing & playback, CAD, movie editing & playback, servers & in some of the most modern games where the game(s) is coded to use more reads/writes of data to\from mem & drive) & professional gamers....the main target that Plextor's advertising of this SSD that I have is aimed at so keep this in proper perspective.
Ain't trying to sell it, just posting the results of my testing & usage of this product to share w/ all. :D
I got this SSD to 1.) test its performance capabilities, 2.) test the prospect of by-passing the SATA bus & X79 chipset completely (outside of USB connectivity) & run all storage devices as direct as was possible on the PCI-E bus system on my mobo (have 40 lanes of PCI-E bus to use & since I'm not gonna do any Crossfire\SLI vid card setups that leaves a BUNCH of untapped PCI-E lanes to use) & that the PCI-E bus is MUCH faster & has MUCH more usable bandwidth than SATA III I hoped to see some up front performance improvement & lengthen the usable time frame of my mobo, 3.) I have the extra disposable cash on hand to afford it at this time & 4.) this SSD looks good & matches my case theme (CM Storm Scout 1st gen black w/ red accents). Yep I'm 1 of those users..........
:D
In all I am pleased w/ this PCI-E SSD & its performance....so much so that I will not be looking to go back to using any SATA drive as a boot drive going forward. Once I get all buttoned up on this Plextor SSD I will perform a secure erase of my OCZ Vertex4 boot drive & use it as storage along w/ my other OCZ Vertex4 being used as storage\page file duty.
In the future I will definitely be looking to get 1 of the new Intel 750 sers NVMe PCI-E SSD's & test it.........this will depend on whether\when Asus will put out an updated UFEI to bring NVMe compatibility to this RIVG mobo as only the Intel X99 & Z97 series mobos will be NVMe-compliant at this time. There is already a hotfix out for Win 7 SP1 to give it native NVMe support (Win 8.1 has native NVMe support already) so the wait is on Asus...................or a new platform upgrade.
We'll see which happens 1st............
Now its getting time to set up my HOTAS maps for AH........forgot to check to see if I had saved my CH maps & AH settings\sounds folder to my ghost SSD before I pulled the SATA boot drive to install this PCI-E SSD.........found out that I hadn't done that so I'm trying to figure out a method to get these files from my SATA boot drive w/o having to pull my PCI-E boot drive out as both have the exact same OS vers & ID on them.................................. :old:
Enjoy!
:aok :D :salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Skuzzy on April 10, 2015, 09:40:47 AM
Just a FYI. Video editors today, need at least 2TB of space to work in for HD content. This is the number most video professionals use today.
The only real gains in performance for the video editor is during the encoding stage and the gains are not that great as most of the time is spent in the encoding process itself.
Read performance of Sony Vegas Pro or any of the other high end editors is really not an issue as they really only need to read small amounts of the data at any given time. If the source files are not compressed, you might get a small boost, but it would be negligible. Compressed sources would be better served with a really fast GPU which would be used to encode/decode the stream.
Then there is the cost/benefit issue which is what most all the professionals argue about. When you think about spending upwards to $7,000.00 for 2TB, you have to be really certain you are going to get a measurable benefit from it. Most of the editors balk, as they do not want the management to plunk down that kind of change and only see a 5% improvement in production.
The 5% is about right, considering most of the time spent editing involves cutting and splicing clips together, which is not really hard drive intensive to begin with.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on April 10, 2015, 07:34:14 PM
Thanks for the reply, Skuzzy!
I'll keep all this in mind as I'm still a novice when it comes to software & understanding what the coding will need concerning hardware to optimize its usage............Mainly focused on Windows OS's...................
Spent far more time working w/ gaming softwares & learning what types of hardware & how best to match it\set it up within the Windows OS for total system performance optimization of a particular game software..............such as AH & others.............. :D
I was trying to relate the use of this PCI-E SSD w/ softwares & applications that would make more use of it's strengths & thus be more appealing & straight forward if someone was reading this posting of mine concerning this piece of hardware....................
So from your post I can discern now that video editing\playback\encoding softwares generally would need a LOT more disk capacity relative to disk performance to operate smoothly & since the Plextor M6e PCI-E SSD has only 512 Gb total capacity it would not be a good choice to use w/ that type of software & since I don't do any video editing, playback or encoding...especially w/ a computer...is most likely the reason why I didn't already know that so I appreciate the info..........
Duly noted.......................
:aok :salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Chalenge on April 10, 2015, 08:02:30 PM
So, same conclusion.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on April 11, 2015, 02:49:02 AM
The difference between a PCI-E card and a good SATA6 SSD is so small in everyday tasks that it doesn't make sense to buy a PCI-E based card, at least moneywise.
Only if you get a good deal like I did with the 800+240Gb combo there's even marginal sense. I got a terabyte worth of SSD storage for less than a 1TB SATA SSD would have cost.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on April 11, 2015, 07:51:04 PM
If this article is any indication......the process of Intel switching over to PCI-E-based storage instead of SATA-based storage in consumer based mobos is already in progress.......................
It doesn't appear to be an "if" scenario but more like a "when" one......................
Apple has already made the conversion in it's Mac Pro line of computers.
We'll see how long it will take for AMD to get in line...................
FYI...........................................
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on April 19, 2015, 04:24:42 AM
Here's a recent review of M.2 PCI-E cards. Surprisingly they even beat the Intel 750 in some tests: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Storage/PCIe-SSD-Roundup-Samsung-SM951-NVMe-vs-AHCI-XP941-SSD-750-and-More
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on April 19, 2015, 06:19:22 PM
Update:
I have got all set up & operating now & I am very happy w/ the Plextor PXM6e BK PCI-E SSD's performance.
I just now enabled the Plextor Turbo Cache (sets up a virtual cache in system mem for this PCI-E SSD to decrease the amount of reads/writes to the SSD & since system mem is faster it speeds up the SSD's "performance") & ran AH & I noticed a BIG improvement in game performance.....not in FPS as 60 FPS is 60 FPS but the SMOOTHNESS of the game running was very noticeably improved.
I have noticed that everything else has improved quite noticeably in performance since I have enabled PlexTool Turbo Cache.
I ran the PlexTool's sequential read\write diagnostics test on this PCI-E SSD w/ Turbo Cache enabled & this is the results:
That is approx. 10 times the sequential read\write speeds of the SSD alone...........good stuff.
This SSD caching really does give a marked improvement in system performance. I saw that some SATA III SSD manuf's are including caching software for their products as well...............
All I can say is that it works & works well!
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: MrRiplEy[H] on April 20, 2015, 02:15:35 AM
I have got all set up & operating now & I am very happy w/ the Plextor PXM6e BK PCI-E SSD's performance.
I just now enabled the Plextor Turbo Cache (sets up a virtual cache in system mem for this PCI-E SSD to decrease the amount of reads/writes to the SSD & since system mem is faster it speeds up the SSD's "performance") & ran AH & I noticed a BIG improvement in game performance.....not in FPS as 60 FPS is 60 FPS but the SMOOTHNESS of the game running was very noticeably improved.
I have noticed that everything else has improved quite noticeably in performance since I have enabled PlexTool Turbo Cache.
I ran the PlexTool's sequential read\write diagnostics test on this PCI-E SSD w/ Turbo Cache enabled & this is the results:
That is approx. 10 times the sequential read\write speeds of the SSD alone...........good stuff.
This SSD caching really does give a marked improvement in system performance. I saw that some SATA III SSD manuf's are including caching software for their products as well...............
All I can say is that it works & works well!
:salute
Just FYI the 'turbo cacbe' is usually a ram cache which explains the speed.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on April 26, 2015, 10:56:13 PM
Just to put this out there I was on pcper site yesterday & they had a link to an Asus users poll for Asus to determine which chipset-equipped mobo(s) to come up w/ a BIOS to enable NVMe support on:
The 2 leading legacy Intel chipset-equipped mobos in the poll by a huge margin was the X79 & Z87 mobos...............
Naturally I pitched in w/ another vote for the X79 as well.......................
So if all holds up it looks like my Asus RIVG X79 ROG mobo will be getting a BIOS upgrade to enable NVMe support...............
Booyah!
:aok :D :x
Now if only Intel would feel sorry for me & make a limited run of I7 Haswell-E 2011 DDR3 4\6-core CPU's w/ all 40 PCI-E 3.x lanes w/ a base clock of 4.0Ghz, turbo cache speed of 4.4Ghz just for my X79 mobo then I would be 1 happy dude............................
If only.................................... :pray
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Chalenge on July 24, 2015, 12:17:47 AM
Punting this as I am coming to the end of a very long test cycle that started because of Gmans' question on this topic.
First, I guess I should mention that I have been using a Plextor M.2 128GB PCIe 80mm card with Windows 7 x64 installed with Office apps, while a few games have been installed to a HGST 7,200 rpm 6TB SAS 128MB cache HDD and a 1TB WD Velociraptor 10,000 rpm drive. The OS was also cloned to a 1TB Mushkin Reactor SATA III SSD. Additionally, I used a Crucial Adrenaline 50GB SSC (solid state cache) to accelerate the HDDs with the NVELO Dataplex caching software.
Right off it is obvious that the boot times with the M.2 card are about half what they are with the Reactor SATA SSD. I do not consider boot times to be important, because I rarely have to boot. So, if this saves me twenty seconds each day it's not much to talk about.
As you might expect the M.2 device set the pace for all of the other devices. The Reactor was keeping pace in everything beyond the boot process. The real surprise comes from the Dataplex caching which allowed the 7,200 RPM HGST HDD to keep pace with, and even surpass the Velociraptor (similarly cached and in load times with Civ. V) and in some cases match the Reactor (loading 16k images in PS CS6). I believe you might be able to use a low-end HDD and match SSD performance (or very nearly) with the Adrenaline SSD and the Dataplex software.
As to the M.2 card, if you can afford one large enough to house your OS, and then match that with a standard HDD and caching SSD I think you will have a blazing fast system. I believe that very shortly the drive manufacturer's will begin to release kits for that very purpose. SSDs that are large enough for my storage needs are still too costly, so this is the way I will go.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: GSakis on July 25, 2015, 09:32:01 AM
Punting this as I am coming to the end of a very long test cycle that started because of Gmans' question on this topic.
First, I guess I should mention that I have been using a Plextor M.2 128GB PCIe 80mm card with Windows 7 x64 installed with Office apps, while a few games have been installed to a HGST 7,200 rpm 6TB SAS 128MB cache HDD and a 1TB WD Velociraptor 10,000 rpm drive. The OS was also cloned to a 1TB Mushkin Reactor SATA III SSD. Additionally, I used a Crucial Adrenaline 50GB SSC (solid state cache) to accelerate the HDDs with the NVELO Dataplex caching software.
Right off it is obvious that the boot times with the M.2 card are about half what they are with the Reactor SATA SSD. I do not consider boot times to be important, because I rarely have to boot. So, if this saves me twenty seconds each day it's not much to talk about.
As you might expect the M.2 device set the pace for all of the other devices. The Reactor was keeping pace in everything beyond the boot process. The real surprise comes from the Dataplex caching which allowed the 7,200 RPM HGST HDD to keep pace with, and even surpass the Velociraptor (similarly cached and in load times with Civ. V) and in some cases match the Reactor (loading 16k images in PS CS6). I believe you might be able to use a low-end HDD and match SSD performance (or very nearly) with the Adrenaline SSD and the Dataplex software.
As to the M.2 card, if you can afford one large enough to house your OS, and then match that with a standard HDD and caching SSD I think you will have a blazing fast system. I believe that very shortly the drive manufacturer's will begin to release kits for that very purpose. SSDs that are large enough for my storage needs are still too costly, so this is the way I will go.
1 Terabyte SSD for 340 dollar (http://target.georiot.com/Proxy.ashx?TSID=9350&GR_URL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2Fdp%2FB00OBRFFAS%2F%3Ftag%3Dhotoge-20) so you see not so expensive anymore.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Chalenge on July 25, 2015, 10:58:16 AM
Yes. On this board though that is quite often half, or nearly half, of the budget someone has for the entire PC. The idea of the cache approach is that they can get a lot more storage space and the speed by adding a $50 SSD.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Pudgie on July 25, 2015, 02:50:28 PM
Punting this as I am coming to the end of a very long test cycle that started because of Gmans' question on this topic.
First, I guess I should mention that I have been using a Plextor M.2 128GB PCIe 80mm card with Windows 7 x64 installed with Office apps, while a few games have been installed to a HGST 7,200 rpm 6TB SAS 128MB cache HDD and a 1TB WD Velociraptor 10,000 rpm drive. The OS was also cloned to a 1TB Mushkin Reactor SATA III SSD. Additionally, I used a Crucial Adrenaline 50GB SSC (solid state cache) to accelerate the HDDs with the NVELO Dataplex caching software.
Right off it is obvious that the boot times with the M.2 card are about half what they are with the Reactor SATA SSD. I do not consider boot times to be important, because I rarely have to boot. So, if this saves me twenty seconds each day it's not much to talk about.
As you might expect the M.2 device set the pace for all of the other devices. The Reactor was keeping pace in everything beyond the boot process. The real surprise comes from the Dataplex caching which allowed the 7,200 RPM HGST HDD to keep pace with, and even surpass the Velociraptor (similarly cached and in load times with Civ. V) and in some cases match the Reactor (loading 16k images in PS CS6). I believe you might be able to use a low-end HDD and match SSD performance (or very nearly) with the Adrenaline SSD and the Dataplex software.
As to the M.2 card, if you can afford one large enough to house your OS, and then match that with a standard HDD and caching SSD I think you will have a blazing fast system. I believe that very shortly the drive manufacturer's will begin to release kits for that very purpose. SSDs that are large enough for my storage needs are still too costly, so this is the way I will go.
Good stuff, Chalenge. Thanks for posting it!
Storage & the costs per Gb to maintain it should be a concern for those who have a viable purpose for it & SSD's are getting better but can still be expensive & a concern over a HDD so I get that.
Where I was going w/ my testing was strictly performance driven. Where IMO SSD's can help w/ this is not in regards to FPS....CPU, GPU, system mem, display monitors & mobo subsystem performance will determine this, but in the area where a game (but mostly other apps besides a game), whether written well or poorly, or the Windows OS (mostly via the vid card swap file usage but other instances as well) will periodically call for data to be accessed from storage & read into system mem for the game or the OS or the vid card to use or unused\unnecessary data to be paged out of system mem to storage due to either full system mem saturation or the OS deems it unnecessary or the vid card is calling for the rendered frame(s) stored in the swap file created in storage to be flipped to display as the faster this can be done the less chance of interrupt to the flow of the game\app running (CPU & GPU waiting) which can be noted also as a stutter (or a CTD), IOW's the game\app experience is improved. The faster the subsystem this data travels over can help w/ this as well....ie, PCI-E bus vs thru the mobo chipset via SATA III bus.
Now as I understand that AH in particular was written to try to offset this by the game actually calling for data to be "prefetched" directly into system memory in advance before it is needed to try to lessen this effect by--I'm assuming this part but it makes sense to me--utilizing the CPU's wait times when it is not busy processing a thread (this is where & why it makes sense to use devices--NIC's, sound cards, etc--that have their own onboard signal processing capabilities as these devices do not tie up the CPU time processing these signals making more time for the game to use the CPU to operate & prefetch data...mostly texture data as these data packets are fairly large) & this is also where a SSD's speed can help out as the unnecessary texture data has to be paged out of system mem to storage to make room for the new texture data requested to prevent system mem from becoming saturated (fully addressed) causing the game to momentarily "hang" when the OS will then intervene & make room by dong further paging out of deemed unnecessary data to storage to prevent the system from this situation to "protect itself" to ensure there is sufficient memory addressing for the OS (& AH) to operate. This is what I believe Skuzzy is referring to when he says that AH calls for a lot of small writes to storage hence his reluctance to support the usage of an SSD w/ AH in this forum due to the wear induced to the SSD's NAND & subsequently inviting a SSD failure.....not saying that you can't use 1 w/ AH. The advent of TRIM & improving SSD quality & performance is making the risks of using SSD's w/ AH less of a concern--my own testing & usage can attest to this--but should still be taken into account when making decisions on their use......& I get that as well.
Since my setup is all about the performance & storage isn't a concern (I use mem sticks & DVD's to store any media that I deem important to keep....my storage needs are very small & infrequent), so I went the full SSD route to address the total performance realm of computing........& to satisfy the geek that stirs within me........ :aok :D
Since the advent of MS starting w/ Vista having the OS to also perform prefetching on a larger scale, called SuperFetch (which the OS will try to load the system mem fully to address the paging issues as well.....all due to address the slower access time & read\write speeds of a typical HDD using the page file located on it) there will still be instances where a SSD can help an app--& even some games--to run better\smoother (note I didn't say FASTER, this is misunderstood too frequently) as opposed to a HDD in the general sense of operation. Now the gains may be incremental in nature for the costs necessary to gain them, but the gains are there to be had & I have noticed this in my experience. As hardware & software improve, the gains will become less as the issues will be rectified up front & so will cease to be an issue.
What I take from your work here is you have come across & posted a method that can provide the same similar type benefits as using an SSD exclusively, especially a PCI-E SSD, w/ much less exposure to the higher costs per GB & volativity of using SSD's exclusively & IMO that's good stuff to know................. BTW I have shut down the Plextor TurboCache SSD caching software on my PCI-E SSD as I have deemed it to be more overkill for the already noted performance that I'm currently getting out of this SSD w/ the games\apps that I currently use but I know its there to implement if & when the situation changes.............
:aok
In the end all this is essentially geek speak & is good reading & discussion & has some practical usage now but to most all this is irrelevant due to the current development cycle time but in time all will be going down these paths at some point, just like all else concerning computer usage.
:salute
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Chalenge on July 25, 2015, 10:32:35 PM
I should have also pointed out that using a cache drive like that requires that you really know what you are doing. I think the SSHD is probably a better approach for people that just want to install and go, rather than fuss around with configurations. Also, using the cache method locks the data to that drive to a single OS, and if something goes wrong there is a potential for severe data loss (50GB can be a lot of data). However, in situations where you have a good backup plan and want the speed you have the option.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: GSakis on July 26, 2015, 02:34:50 AM
This video shows how everything you do on the computer will be faster with ssd. Hybrid is still much slower even when test was done with very old and cheap 60Gb ssd.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Chalenge on July 26, 2015, 02:47:30 PM
Look if you do not do a fair assessment then your test is worthless. In the case of the SSHD posted it is a 7200 rpm drive augmented with a 4 GB SLC SSD. It hardly compares to a similar HDD with a 64 GB SSD. Even if it were an 8GB/500GB as they claimed it could not compare.
However, what this demonstration does show is how the SSHD compares, which is still a fair compromise for capacity versus speed. What is still lacking is the peak capacities that HDD have to offer, which will soon be in the 12-24 TB range (currently I have 6TB drives in large numbers).
The Dataplex system that I mentioned before has been purchased by Samsung, potentially for a new line of drives (still not announced). Nvelo ceased development on the W8 update during the Samsung notice period and have let it be known that there will be no further updates for W8, or W10 (it's Samsung property now). Dataplex is the best option when it comes to cache setups, but it comes with several requirements that prevent it from being used in certain setups. There are hacks that allow it to be used on single volume data drives (the license key requirement has been removed since buyout), but the "no multi-boot OS configurations" remains. Still, Dataplex is not recommended for all situations for obvious reasons.
And finally, the M.2 PCIe SSD vs M.2 SATA SSD is an option that allows the SATA ports to remain open for data drives (unless the BIOS defeats some ports on certain MBs that I have not heard about). Of these two card options the M.2 PCIe SSD is the best if you don't mind the cost (128GB for about $1/GB), because the bandwidth it makes use of is potentially PCIe v.3 x4 (depending on the MB). That equates to 24GB/s vs 6GB/s for SATAIII, though usually MBs offer 10-20GB/s. Even if the MB is limited to a v2 x2 setup that translates to 5GB/s which matches almost perfectly what SATA III delivers in reality. The real advantage, to anyone that could care less about the speed (such as myself) is an OS that does not take a SATA port away from data.
Are SSDs more reliable than HDDs? No. The primary reason that no data system is perfect comes from the fact that data is always vulnerable. Whether you choose to accept it, or not, anything you put on a HDD or SSD can be gone forever in an instant. I would say that SSDs are more accident prone because of their sensitivity to electrostatic events. Even on this board we continue to see systems made by hardware manufacturers and suggested by users with PSUs that are prone to issues in the short term that will eventually lead to the loss of the system. That danger is not going away, so any electronic device can suffer from a short lifespan.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Chalenge on July 26, 2015, 03:04:48 PM
I used Anvil's Storage Utilities to benchmark the hard drives I have cached.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: GSakis on July 26, 2015, 03:46:52 PM
Chalenge has 20 terabytes of data. Average user has 200 gigabytes of data. Chalenge needs hybrid - average user is best off with SSD. Simple as that. Don't confuse yourself with others.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Skuzzy on July 26, 2015, 03:59:04 PM
Chalenge has 20 terabytes of data. Average user has 200 gigabytes of data. Chalenge needs hybrid - average user is best off with SSD. Simple as that. Don't confuse yourself with others.
The storage requirements of end users has been growing annually for years. There have been many environmental elements driving that and it continues to do so.
Yes, not everyone needs 20TB of storage, today. More and more are needing in excess of 1TB as the popularity of posting videos continues to grow. When 4K video support is well entrenched, that number could easily double or triple.
The need for more storage could easily surpass the ability to reduce the price per TB of SSD's.
Title: Re: PCI-E SSDs
Post by: Chalenge on July 26, 2015, 04:02:21 PM
I would call that a classic case of underestimate.
I'm going to walk away from this thread now, because I smell the foul air that precedes use of the BAN STICK. :bolt: