Currently I got a Samsung SM951 NVME 128GB as my boot drive and some games installed. And a 1TB sata HDD for storage.
My system is new but I am planning to install allot more games, so I need more space. My problem is my board got a 28-lane cpu, so 1 of my M2 slot cant function under NVME.
I figure something like 512GB would be more then enough dont see my self filling up a 1TB that quickly, I have been using samsung 840 256GB for years on my previous system and didnt lack much of space, of course as a gamer the only limiting factor is the amount of games I could install without overfilling it.
So I dont do video/photo editing or moving frequently large files. What would be the best for me?
Adding a 512GB sata SSD? and using my current NVME 128GB just for the OS? In this case is there any benefit picking a M2 SATA over a normal SATA SSD?
Or replace my current NVME SSD with something like a 512GB samsung 960 evo/pro? And using the OS and games on 1 drive.
Keeping in mind I just play games mostly on my rig, I just want the fastest loading times, is there a benefit for choosing for example the samsung 960 over my current NVME in that regard?
Recommend me a brand/model for a specific solution would be nice.
If you're spending any money, no great reason to not go NVME if your system supports it so I'd sell the SM951.
I would add an Intel 600P 512GB ($180USD) or Samsung 960 Evo 500GB ($250USD). I'd go with whichever one is cheaper in your country and available. Both should be here early November. If the other two aren't acceptable to you for some reason or you want keep your SM951 and add SATA, the Crucial MX300 drives are fast and cheap. $250USD for 1TB. All of the drives mentioned are 3D TLC NAND, which is good stuff, as opposed to planar TLC NAND which you don't want.
Personally I'd go with 1) 600P, 2) 960 EVO 3) MX300 in order of preference. I've liked my Intel SSDs a lot more than others, though most people will say go with the 960 EVO. I don't think the speed differences will make any difference for gaming and I think Intel has the best reliability record and in this case the best pricing.
If you're torn between the 600P and EVO, the deciding factor really depends on street prices and availability in your country.
I doubt you'd notice it. Hell, I've tried loading a few games on RAMDisks, and with a few exceptions, I couldn't notice a difference between that and my bottom barrel 120GB OCZ Agility.
In this case I might be better off with a SATA SSD for my games. We got the Crucial MX300 recommended here, any other non-planar TLC NAND? How is the EVO 850 still any good?
Any benefit going for a M2 SATA instead of the normal SATA version?
Check Samsung's utilities out to see if they offer a secure erase first. Being their custom controller and all.
No difference in P600 or 960EVO in all likelihood from your PM951. I'd take more space over more theoretical, niche-based speed myself. IMO, 90% of people are best off with something like those P600 drives, the other 10% needs the Intel 750 PCIE SSDs. Those are the top of the line if you seriously need storage performance. Everything inbetween is kind of a waste really. Not enough consistent performance (throttling, much slower random writes, inferior performance with a nearly full drive) for true professional usecases, but still overkill for consumer use.
In this case I might be better off with a SATA SSD for my games. We got the Crucial MX300 recommended here, any other non-planar TLC NAND? How is the EVO 850 still any good?
Any benefit going for a M2 SATA instead of the normal SATA version?
Assuming the price/gb is close, I would still go with an NVME drive like the Intel p600 just for the speed boost.
But no, there shouldn't be a difference between the m.2 and normal SATA versions.
The Reactor 1TB is a great MLC drive for the price, if that's a size you're looking for.
I'd pick up an OCZ Vector over an 850 EVO any day, seeing how they're the same price. It's one of the fastest SATA SSDs ever, but it doesn't have the price/GB drives like the MX300 or Reactor have.
Thank you for clearing that up. If there are not noticeable difference. I am actually leaning towards adding a SATA SSD, 500GB is plenty for me as I dont see myself filling up 1TB. Because I have to sell my current drive otherwise.
OCZ vector looks nice but in my country they cost about 299 euro for 480GB and the Crucial MX300 cost about 120 euro for 525 GB.
*edit I see there are 2 version vector 150 and vector 180, which 1 do you mean?
Thank you for clearing that up. If there are not noticeable difference. I am actually leaning towards adding a SATA SSD, 500GB is plenty for me as I dont see myself filling up 1TB. Because I have to sell my current drive otherwise.
OCZ vector looks nice but in my country they cost about 299 euro for 480GB and the Crucial MX300 cost about 120 euro for 525 GB.
*edit I see there are 2 version vector 150 and vector 180, which 1 do you mean?
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ask a question
Ask a question
Overclock.net
27.8M posts
541.2K members
Since 2004
A forum community dedicated to overclocking enthusiasts and testing the limits of computing. Come join the discussion about computing, builds, collections, displays, models, styles, scales, specifications, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!