# Why SSD Speeds matter



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

So I installed Win 10 on a Test Machine, and try to find out what exactly are the differences between a Hard Drive, aa SSD, and on one of those new Nvme Drives.
The first one is a regular Hitachi 500 GB Hard Drive, made in 2012, but tested fine with no errors:


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

The second one I tested (after cloning) was a Crucial SSD, 500 GB:


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

The last one was a Corsair MP510 Nvme Drive:


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

As you can see, the differences are tremendous.
Happy New Year!


----------



## user_12345a (Nov 23, 2014)

I'm betting 99% of users couldn't tell the difference between Nvme and a regular SATA SSD. Law of diminishing returns applies.


----------



## Mystriss (Dec 26, 2018)

I'd actually disagree. I've watched my mother try to copy their pictures into different folders - I guarantee she noticed the difference when I put her on an SSD. 

Similarly, Father was quite sure his router was broken because his ipad was opening pages "slower than at the Casino" - took me nearly an hour to explain wifi speed cause he thought it worked like analog TV "waves" heh


----------



## user_12345a (Nov 23, 2014)

regular ssd is already so fast - increase the speed by five times and the difference is fractions of a second for booting, copying most files and launching programs.


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

Well, Folks, I just wanted to show it in real Numbers. And....I was curious, obviously.:smile:

I did see a noticeable difference between the Samsung SSD compared to the new Samsung 970 EVO plus Nvme on my own System. Combine that with a nice Motherboard, an AMD Threadripper, tons of memory and everything flies.

Back in the early 90's, I was unhappy about the Hard Drive Speeds, back then we had 5200 or 4800 Rpm IDE Drives, if I remember.
I switched to Ultrawide SCSI Drives, running at 10.000 Rpm.
NT4 was ripping, lol.

The high Failure rate, high Temperatures and the noise they made
(not to mention the cost and power-consumption) scared me away finally. :crying:


----------



## ZZZZZ (Oct 1, 2014)

Deja-vue said:


> Well, Folks, I just wanted to show it in real Numbers. And....I was curious, obviously.:smile:
> 
> I did see a noticeable difference between the Samsung SSD compared to the new Samsung 970 EVO plus Nvme on my own System. Combine that with a nice Motherboard, an AMD Threadripper, tons of memory and everything flies.
> 
> ...


We used to say SCSI was scuzzy.

:vs_laugh:
.
.


----------



## user_12345a (Nov 23, 2014)

80 to 100mb per second from a regular 7200 rpm drive works fine for me.

It's super fast on xp and on 7, pretty tolerable.

I may upgrade to a regular sata ssd, beyond that there's not much of a point. The adapter card for the newer connection is $50 canadian vs the $20 to 30 for a regular sata 3 add on card - needed to get full performance on older boards which support sata2. 

The drive itself costs more too.

How many seconds per day would a nvme drive save me? 5?

If the controller card for a nvme fails I can't just plug it into a port on the board for troubleshooting and access to data, since it's not backwards compatible with sata connections.

No thanks.


----------



## ktownskier (Aug 22, 2018)

user_12345a said:


> 80 to 100mb per second from a regular 7200 rpm drive works fine for me.
> 
> It's super fast on xp and on 7, pretty tolerable.
> 
> ...


Why are you dissing @Deja Vue on his review of the differences between the three types of drives and how much faster the new drives are?

Yes, the new drives are much faster, and much more expensive. 

And I get that it doesn't matter to do you. 

But, it may matter to others. 

I was fascinated by it. I am also fascinated that he was intrigued enough about it to actually go and measure the differences, make an understandable readout that most people were able to interpret and then publish it. 

Thanks @deja vue for taking the time for doing it. 

Then again, I am dumbfounded that you @user_12345 would take the time to Bah Humbug the effort and then go ahead and continue the nay saying about it not being worthwhile to upgrade to a new drive like the ones being discussed. 

Please, feel free to express that you don't personally see the need to spend the money to upgrade to save what you feel is minuscule time savings. But please don't denigrate others who feel that it is a worthwhile endeavor. 

They may have much more disk intensive software needs than you that this would make a considerable difference. 

Who knows? I sure as heck don't do that much anymore. But, I would take a look at one just for the heck of it. Being the geek I am.


----------



## user_12345a (Nov 23, 2014)

Nothing wrong with doing testing - just pointing out that the numbers are deceptive for the typical user who isn't dealing with huge files all the time. (the huge files which actually shorten the life of SSDs if constantly erased/ written)

If it takes 10 seconds to do a disk intensive task on a regular 7200 rpm drive, it will take 2 on a sata3 SSD and 0.28 seconds on a nvme drive. You get the majority of improvement spending less money.

So speed doesn't matter much after a certain point.

There's nothing wrong with pointing that out.


----------



## ktownskier (Aug 22, 2018)

Like anything else, do research before you spend your hard earned money. 

If you are using software that is disk intensive, chances are, you have already upgraded to an SS drive. Especially if you are on your own dime. And, you are already doing a cost benefit analysis of the new, even faster drive.

However, if you are working in a shop that is not your own, then it is up to the powers the be, to make that determination. 

I can see it making a big difference in a server farm, video editing, any kind of data analysis, accounting, the list goes on. 

Also, game playing could see a big improvement. 

You pays your monies and you takes your chances.


----------



## HDS (Jun 21, 2014)

Thanks for sharing. I used to build my own PCs and haven't kept up with all the new tech. Recently put a new SSD into my wife's laptop and it made a world of difference. 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## surferdude2 (Nov 21, 2019)

Those are impressive speed differences. Someday I'll probably need that kind of speed but for the time being I get by by having a large enough drive so I can use the MOVE command and not have to do the much slower COPY between drives. My current drive writes 8 times faster than my download speed from the cable so an SSD wouldn't help that.

Thanks for the posting... it tells me that when I get a new computer I'll go for one with an SSD if only for bragging rights. ‹(•¿•)› I'm thinking it would be nice to be able to quickly copy some of my 40 gig drive image files to a secondary drive for redundancy in backups.

SD2


----------



## u3b3rg33k (Jul 17, 2018)

sequential read/write is nice and all, but real world cares far more about the 4k random/IOPS. show me that with at 10x multiplier and I'm game for an upgrade.


----------



## ktownskier (Aug 22, 2018)

ZZZZZ said:


> We used to say SCSI was scuzzy.
> 
> :vs_laugh:
> .
> .


Yeah, but they were quick and fast. And in the late 90's, they cost an arm and a leg for what we thought was a lot of space. 4.7 gigs or something like that. 

I had to keep my DBA up on managing my storage for my application. And if you had health insurance through UnitedHealth Care, every time you called in to ask a question about coverage, check on a claim, ask about a doc, etc.. your calls were being documented on the software that I supported.


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

Thanks for some of your positive posts. Of course I was ready for the negativity that is always thrown at me when I talk about Speed and newer Technology.
I always wanted the fastest machines, best possible computer (as much as my wallet allowed, of course).:wink2:

I used to upgrade my Computer every 2 years, now my new one here I built after retiring my old one after some 6-7 years. Don't play that upgrade Game anymore. Also, I don't play Games on my computer anymore, so these Monster Videocards costing $700 and up are no longer important for me.
4K is and I'm waiting patiently for those Ultra wide Screens in 4K to come down a bit on the pricing.

What some of you forget when it comes to these SSD's is you don't save 5 seconds per Day, you save the 5 seconds per click, and no more frustration during the day working on slow machines.
To me, there is nothing worse than a slow computer.
I charge my Customers $125/hour for troubleshooting, sometimes work on several computers at the same Time remotely from my machine, and just can't tolerate slow responses from my own Rig.
Time is money. My attitude may change when I finally retire.
:vs_cool:


----------



## user_12345a (Nov 23, 2014)

Since you have access to an SSD SATA drive and Nvme, it would be interesting to see if there's a noticeable difference using the machine.

Maybe even have someone else do the swap and do a "blind study".


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

u3b3rg33k said:


> sequential read/write is nice and all, but real world cares far more about the 4k random/IOPS. show me that with at 10x multiplier and I'm game for an upgrade.


Here you go, tested with my own Rig, got nothing to compare it with at the moment.


----------



## huesmann (Aug 18, 2011)

Deja, have there been any studies on how often an Nvme SSD needs replacing when used as a "daily driver?"


----------



## carmusic (Oct 11, 2011)

too bad that nmve is not supported on a lot of older motherboards, im stuck with sata with my i7-4770 on a h97m motherboard


----------



## u3b3rg33k (Jul 17, 2018)

carmusic said:


> too bad that nmve is not supported on a lot of older motherboards, im stuck with sata with my i7-4770 on a h97m motherboard


you can't boot off it but you can set it as your default drive for applications.


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

huesmann said:


> Deja, have there been any studies on how often an Nvme SSD needs replacing when used as a "daily driver?"


From TechRadar:They are having a guaranteed lifespan of at least 800TB, while the 2TB is even longer at 1.2PB (which is 1200TB). It has a mean time between failures (MTBF) of 1.5 million hours, while a warranty of 5 years also backs up the drive.


----------



## Deja-vue (Mar 24, 2013)

carmusic said:


> too bad that nmve is not supported on a lot of older motherboards, im stuck with sata with my i7-4770 on a h97m motherboard


Yes, you can with this controller card:
https://www.amazon.com/YATENG-Contr...t=&hvlocphy=9031093&hvtargid=pla-812122725109

All you need is a Pcie 3.0 Slot on your Computer.
Edit: The H97M has that Slot for the controller.


----------



## user_12345a (Nov 23, 2014)

You can get a card and with decent bios should be bootable.

I'm stuck with SATA 2 unless a card is added but it doesn't matter running a regular hard drive that tops out at 100mb/sec.


----------



## ktownskier (Aug 22, 2018)

The other end of the spectrum is getting the data to your computer. Which is getting faster all the time. 

My ex-wife is now on fiber, the house she lives in started out as dial-up in 1988. (I knew the people who lived there. ) It took 30 years to go from 3200 baud to light speed. 

Now if I could just get 7 of 9 to beam me up.... Or Uhura, Or....


----------



## JYL (Mar 1, 2020)

Deja-vue said:


> As you can see, the differences are tremendous.
> Happy New Year!


Actually, The last one you tested is very close to 1000 times faster than a Hard Disk.

Thanks for your test.


----------



## JYL (Mar 1, 2020)

ktownskier said:


> The other end of the spectrum is getting the data to your computer. Which is getting faster all the time.
> 
> My ex-wife is now on fiber, the house she lives in started out as dial-up in 1988. (I knew the people who lived there. ) It took 30 years to go from 3200 baud to light speed.
> 
> Now if I could just get 7 of 9 to beam me up.... Or Uhura, Or....


In Jan 1988, when I connected to the ARPANET, I received host #10111. By the end of that year, there were about 60000 computers on the network. No commercial service yet.

It was still an era we called a University or the NSF to have thing updated. That changed a little later (1991 to 1993).

We did offer 2400 Baud services to some researcher. 300 Baud was in compatibility mode only. 1200 Baud was pretty much the mainstream.

My host computer was indirectly crashed by the first "EMAIL" virus (Morris Worm) on November 2, *1988*. That was the first time any of my servers as been crashed by Computer virus... and the last one too.

Actually, that was the wakeup call, we started to build firewall in early 1989 and ARPANET Become the Internet at about that time. Commercial services started in early 1990... and hacker were the first online.


----------



## That Guy (Aug 19, 2017)

As someone who moves terabytes of data around, between my desktop and 2 different internal servers, There IS a definitive difference in speed between SSD and NVME's. Its not seconds, its minutes. My current computer has no internal mechanical drives, 6 SSDs 2 NVME's rounds out to 7TB of local storage. Actually, I havent used an actual hard drive for primary storage in almost 10 years. What I really need to do is upgrade from 1GB to 10GB at home... sigh.


----------

