-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
What is the point of a blazing fast m.2 drive?
- Thread starter jediman
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
I agree with that reasoning, but that isn't happening at your house unless you have a HUGE test homelab and you are doing a lot of VMs/etc.
I guess I should have specified in the previous reply, when I thought of a file server it was basically just hosting random files. If we are talking about a file server hosting VMs/workstations then I could see more benefit to the faster access times and top speeds.
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
Which this gets back to enterprise applications where they've had SSD's this fast for a few years.
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
Yep.. plenty of Enterprise level reasons... not so much on legitimate home uses outside of just how cool it would be to have one.
Unless you're Thideras
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2005
- Location
- Oregon
I think having the m.2 drive, or pci-e ssd in my case hard drive is absolutely worth it. It is not just the cool factor at all. I have been desiring to use vm's for a while now but haven't because of simple resources. Not to mention the fact I just came off a pentium 3. Dual booting is lame imo and I am considering esxi, more networking crons, htpc stuff, hardware fw's, you name it. I have seen ram drive 'hard drives', but they are elusive and I'm sure very expensive with ecc and all.
I know there are a very few very fast distros that run directly from memory, but exactly how would one configure, much less afford, tb sized ram drives?
I know there are a very few very fast distros that run directly from memory, but exactly how would one configure, much less afford, tb sized ram drives?
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2008
- Location
- East Coast
I was going to get the intel 750 NVME drive myself, but what stopped me is:
1) It has a prolonged initialization/enum boot process that adds 25 seconds to boot time. Samsungs nvme drive does not suffer same.
2) Much typical desktop use is QD1-2 random small file read and write. Intel 750 NVME/Samsung nvme has near same QD1 4k random read/write speed as Samsung 850 evo/pro, sandisk extreme pro, etc. While it will speed file transfer and installing OS a small amount by handling larger file transfers quicker, it simply wont be that much faster because there is only so much parallelism at small 4k size, hence bottlenecked like all other SSD by small file random read/write. Until you get into the server environment, ie higher QD. When tested for loading games, files, apps etc, it is no faster than high end sata III SSD's.
3) Since it isnt that expensive, I would buy it in the future if they resolved the long initialization/enum boot time, since I like intels reliability, and it is fastest SSD out, but still would realize it just isnt that much faster for desktop use, except for a few things.
1) It has a prolonged initialization/enum boot process that adds 25 seconds to boot time. Samsungs nvme drive does not suffer same.
2) Much typical desktop use is QD1-2 random small file read and write. Intel 750 NVME/Samsung nvme has near same QD1 4k random read/write speed as Samsung 850 evo/pro, sandisk extreme pro, etc. While it will speed file transfer and installing OS a small amount by handling larger file transfers quicker, it simply wont be that much faster because there is only so much parallelism at small 4k size, hence bottlenecked like all other SSD by small file random read/write. Until you get into the server environment, ie higher QD. When tested for loading games, files, apps etc, it is no faster than high end sata III SSD's.
3) Since it isnt that expensive, I would buy it in the future if they resolved the long initialization/enum boot time, since I like intels reliability, and it is fastest SSD out, but still would realize it just isnt that much faster for desktop use, except for a few things.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2002
i just wanted to say my HTPC still runs a OCZ vertex EX 120gig drive, used mostly for surfing the web and BD playback. the fast boot up time shocks people, they are like i wish my pc started up that fast. of course they are still using OEM pc's with HDD's and core 2's still.
- Joined
- May 15, 2006
I don't have a single delay with my Intel 750 when booting on X99. With my Samsung 830 Evo, I was having some pretty big delays when a lot of programs were running, and this Intel is insanely fast in comparison. Synthetic numbers are fast, but it doesn't show how much of an upgrade it actually is.
If you only use your computer for internet browsing and email, don't get it. But if you do tasks that require a lot of I/O (programming, virtual machines, etc), it is a big upgrade.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2008
- Location
- East Coast
What is your restart time, ie hit restart until desktop reappears? And time from off until desktop appears?
On my 4790k platform it was 22 seconds restart and about 15 seconds cold start. On the asrock x99 ext 6 it was 44 seconds restart, 25 cold start (sent back for bugs), on my msi x99A krait it is 38 seconds restart/ 22 seconds cold start.
When intel 750 first came out, all review sites were showing slow boot, and intel chimed in it was the initializ, maybe they improved it....if so, will get 400 gb version myself.
And thanks for the first hand experience, review sites dont really give much user experience info.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2008
- Location
- East Coast
no problem.....actually after reading your experience with it, I was reading back through boot issues and intel stated boot times would be improved on firmware upgrades, so decided to go ahead and get it. Been back and forth on it since it came out. Also just realized on forum/thread that people test boot times, 44 seconds on windows 10 is norm for restart, and half that 20 seconds is norm for win 7/8.
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2005
- Location
- Oregon
Boot times I really could gas about. The pc is either on and waiting for my command or it's off, waiting for my command. I am more concerned with it's longevity and that is how I configured asrock tuner. Impressing people with boot times means nothing to me. The ONLY reason I would run windows 8.1 is if I wanted to impress everyone with boot times. Since it comes with metro, I will do everything in my power to stay on 7.
- Joined
- May 15, 2006
Just did a few restarts for you. 45 seconds from the desktop, back to the login screen, most of which is shutdown and POST. When fully powered off to the login screen, 30 seconds. When in the BIOS and selecting the boot device, less than 15 seconds.
The drive did not add any time to the motherboard POSTing, it always takes that long. However, as habbajabba said, boot times aren't a concern, unless it is taking minutes to load. The drive is insanely fast.
