[SOLVED] Can the Intel 660p M.2 NVME be used to replace the Intel 600P

[BakerTed]

A PCIE 3 x4, x8, x16 to M.2 daughter board lists the Intel 600P as one of the compatible SSDs. Wondering if the 660p would be an alternative.

 

[USAFRet]

A PCIE 3 x4, x8, x16 to M.2 daughter board lists the Intel 600P as one of the compatible SSDs. Wondering if the 660p would be an alternative.

Almost certainly, yes.

What specific component are you looking at?

 

[BakerTed]

The documentation of the MSI B450A-pro does not clearly state if the on-board M.2 uses SATA or NVME interface. It only states that it is M.2 Turbo PCIE 3.0 X4. and if you use the M.2 the SATA 5 and 6 are not available.

 

[BakerTed]

Almost certainly, yes.

What specific component are you looking at?

I want to use a 1TB version of it in a new 4K video editing pc I will be building in two weeks. THE MOTHERBOARD IS AN MSI B450A-Pro which presents anothe concern. The docs on the MB does not clearly state if the M.2 slot is a SATA or NVME interface just that it is Key M PCIe 3.0 x4 and that it is a Turbo M.2 which might be interpreted as NVME. So I ask the comunity.

 

[USAFRet]

https://us.msi.com/Motherboard/B450-A-PRO/Specification

1 x M.2 slot (Key M)1

• Supports PCIe 3.0 x4 and SATA 6Gb/s 2242/ 2260 /2280/ 22110 storage device

------------------------------
That board can use that drive at its native speed, in the M.2 port on the motherboard.

In an adapter in one of the PCIe slot, though....you will be limited.
There is only 1 slot that will support PCIe 3.0, and that would presumably be used for your GPU.

The other slots only support PCIe 2.0, which will limit the performance of that drive in an adapter in one of those slots.


What other drives are you planning for this system?

 

[BakerTed]

Planning an external usb 3.1 drive for backup and another Intel 660P in the onboard m.2 slot as the main SSD for the OS and programs etc.

 

[richiestang_78]

Off of https://us.msi.com/Motherboard/B450-A-PRO/Specification

AMD® CPU

• 2 x SATA 6Gb/s ports1
• 1 x M.2 slot (Key M)1
  • Supports PCIe 3.0 x4 and SATA 6Gb/s 2242/ 2260 /2280/ 22110 storage devices

1. SATA5 and SATA6 ports will be unavailable when installing a M.2 device in M.2 slot.

 

[USAFRet]

OK.
As above...that 660p in an adapter in that slot WILL run slower than the one on the motherboard.

As this is a system still in the planning stages, possibly choose another one that can support two of those at their native speed?

 

[BakerTed]

OK.
As above...that 660p in an adapter in that slot WILL run slower than the one on the motherboard.

As this is a system still in the planning stages, possibly choose another one that can support two of those at their native speed?

Unfortunately, all the kit has been ordered and is shipped. The idea of the PCIe adapter idea came up today because of a NewEgg email I received today. I suppose i could use the 2nd Intel 660P in the adapter for storing the raw videos and use the main for everything else.

I want to thank you very much for you replies which I consider to have been a great help.

 

[BakerTed]

Unfortunately, all the kit has been ordered and is shipped. The idea of the PCIe adapter idea came up today because of a NewEgg email I received today. I suppose i could use the 2nd Intel 660P in the adapter for storing the raw videos and use the main for everything else.

I want to thank you very much for you replies which I consider to have been a great help.

Perhaps, I could purchase a 2 TB drive and partition it for two drives. I already have the 1 TB Intel 660P in another PC.

 

[USAFRet]

I have that same 1TB 660p in a PCIe adapter and it works quite well.
But my second PCIe slot affords full PCIe x4 performance.

And no, don't partition a 2TB one of those in half.
Partitioning a drive like that used to be a good idea, when drive space was incredibly expensive.
Today, not so much.

 

[JBHapgood]

And no, don't partition a 2TB one of those in half.
Partitioning a drive like that used to be a good idea, when drive space was incredibly expensive.
Today, not so much.

I partition my SSD drive that way because a system partition needs a different backup approach from a data partition.

The system (C) partition gets backed up once a month to an external drive with a disk imaging program (Terabyte Image for Linux). The data (D) partition gets backed up every few days (or whenever I update something important) with a Take Command batch file that copies only to the changed files to an external drive.

Thus the system partition is backed up as an image file, from which individual files can be extracted as necessary. The data partition is backed up at the file level, with the files very easily accessible on the backup drive. I find that an advantage, but I don't see any disadvantages to this approach.