[SOLVED] Do any of the CPU can keep up on any nvme ssd with regards of their Read/Write performance?

Feb 11, 2021
10
0
10
0
I currently have doubts about my CPU if it can keep up on any fast nvme ssd available in the market nowadays, because if there are any issues regarding with their compatibility, I'm afraid that I'm just wasting my money on buying new nvme ssd. I would like some advice if there is a limit of how much ssd's read/write speed can my CPU handle.

Here's my specs btw,

CPU: Ryzen 5 3500
MoBo: Asus PRIME a320m-k
RAM: 16gb ddr4 2400mhz
PSU: 550W

Thanks in advance...
 

Colif

Win 10 Master
Moderator
Its not really a question of the CPU, its more the motherboard you have.

3rd/2nd/1st Gen AMD Ryzen™/ 2nd and 1st Gen AMD Ryzen™ with Radeon™ Vega Graphics :
1 x M.2 Socket 3, with M key, type 2242/2260/2280 storage devices support (SATA & PCIE 3.0 x 4 mode)

AMD Athlon™ with Radeon™ Vega Graphics/ 7th Generation A-Series/ Athlon™ X4 Processors :
1 x M.2 Socket 3, with M key, type 2242/2260/2280 storage devices support (SATA mode)


Since you have a Ryzen it supports pci 3. x4 mode, no point buying a PCI 4 card as it can only run at max PCI 3 on that board.
Only times I notice the speed difference between sata and NVME is at boot.
Only difference I can see between a 3500 and 3600 is hyperthreading so CPU isn't that under powered really. Just missing virtual cores.
 
I currently have doubts about my CPU if it can keep up on any fast nvme ssd available in the market nowadays, because if there are any issues regarding with their compatibility, I'm afraid that I'm just wasting my money on buying new nvme ssd. I would like some advice if there is a limit of how much ssd's read/write speed can my CPU handle.

Here's my specs btw,

CPU: Ryzen 5 3500
MoBo: Asus PRIME a320m-k
RAM: 16gb ddr4 2400mhz
PSU: 550W

Thanks in advance...
A nvme 3.0x4 should be fine.
If your looking to give the machine a perf bump look into some 3200 ram.
 

boju

Titan
Ambassador
Pcie3 x4 bandwidth is up to 3940MB/s, that's with either using m2 lanes from your cpu or chipset. Depending on ssd you get most likely won't be that high though.

Any pcie3 m2 (Samsung 980 for example 3500read/3000write) is good enough.

Transfer rate won't really matter though if not creating/ copying huge files but even then has some limits. Transfer rate, reading/writing on same drive simultaneously will never reach theoretical speeds but will be faster than sata ssds. In games, m2 might be a little faster, but most importantly, random access times, is nearly identical. So performance differences here will be hard to notice.

M2 is convenient though, no cables.
 
Reactions: Schereizer

Colif

Win 10 Master
Moderator
Its not really a question of the CPU, its more the motherboard you have.

3rd/2nd/1st Gen AMD Ryzen™/ 2nd and 1st Gen AMD Ryzen™ with Radeon™ Vega Graphics :
1 x M.2 Socket 3, with M key, type 2242/2260/2280 storage devices support (SATA & PCIE 3.0 x 4 mode)

AMD Athlon™ with Radeon™ Vega Graphics/ 7th Generation A-Series/ Athlon™ X4 Processors :
1 x M.2 Socket 3, with M key, type 2242/2260/2280 storage devices support (SATA mode)


Since you have a Ryzen it supports pci 3. x4 mode, no point buying a PCI 4 card as it can only run at max PCI 3 on that board.
Only times I notice the speed difference between sata and NVME is at boot.
Only difference I can see between a 3500 and 3600 is hyperthreading so CPU isn't that under powered really. Just missing virtual cores.
 
Feb 11, 2021
10
0
10
0
What are you using the drive for?
Well, I mainly use my computer for gaming and a bit of video editing and programming.

For what I would call average use including gaming you would not notice the difference between a good SATA drive and the best NVMe 4.0 drive.
If that is the case, then in what scenario can nvme and sata make difference? Should I give up on nvme and buy sata instead?
 
Feb 11, 2021
10
0
10
0
Transfer rate won't really matter though if not creating/ copying huge files but even then has some limits. Transfer rate, reading/writing on same drive simultaneously will never reach theoretical speeds but will be faster than sata ssds. In games, m2 might be a little faster, but most importantly, random access times, is nearly identical. So performance differences here will be hard to notice.
If I choose between 3500read/2000write and 2500read/1900write, should I choose 2500read/1900write because it will not make difference?(In terms of gaming)
 

USAFRet

Titan
Moderator
Mar 16, 2013
149,572
9,841
175,890
23,388
If I choose between 3500read/2000write and 2500read/1900write, should I choose 2500read/1900write because it will not make difference?(In terms of gaming)
The big number you see (3500/2500/whatever) is for large blocks of sequential data.
That is not what we use all the time, especially in games. That is all small 4k fragments.


The visible differences in the various SSD types and speeds is much less than you think:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YoRKQy-UO4

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DKLA7w9eeA
 
Reactions: Schereizer

boju

Titan
Ambassador
If I choose between 3500read/2000write and 2500read/1900write, should I choose 2500read/1900write because it will not make difference?(In terms of gaming)
Won't notice much in games but that's not to say m2 isn't of any benefit. There probably is but from my experience coming from sata ssd 550MB/s read to very recent m2 pcie3 ssd 3500 upgrade, sata drives perform just as well.

Game's rely on random access times, grabbing files willy nilly from drive, all forms of ssd are near instant in terms of this and 550MB/sec is more than enough for any game.

I chose m2 in new system for cable management. So there are some other benefits outside of gaming.
 
Reactions: Schereizer

Colif

Win 10 Master
Moderator
Transfer rate, reading/writing on same drive simultaneously will never reach theoretical speeds but will be faster than sata ssds.
true as you need the 2 cache to make it happen. Transfering on 1 drive means it has to buffer all the info somewhere while it does the movements, whereas if its betweeen 2 drives you may see the full speed. As its only the end receiving data that has to write it into a cache, and then your limits are size of cache itself. Some Samsung drives have a dynamic cache depending on amount of free space on drive..

I got it cause... um, I was getting a new PC and it seemed the logical choice. I originally wanted 2 NVME only in PC but price caused me to use a hdd as 2nd drive instead. Things I use PC for I probably wouldn't notice a difference. I don't have a blank ssd to test if boot times would be the same. Can't compare times on old PC to new really. 4 logical processors compared to 12? twice as much ram. On my last PC windows boot took about 45 seconds or so, on current one its almost instant, once bios gives control to windows its on the lock screen waiting for me.
 

boju

Titan
Ambassador
I got it cause... um, I was getting a new PC and it seemed the logical choice. I originally wanted 2 NVME only in PC but price caused me to use a hdd as 2nd drive instead. Things I use PC for I probably wouldn't notice a difference. I don't have a blank ssd to test if boot times would be the same. Can't compare times on old PC to new really. 4 logical processors compared to 12? twice as much ram. On my last PC windows boot took about 45 seconds or so, on current one its almost instant, once bios gives control to windows its on the lock screen waiting for me.
Yeah. My old system was pretty average prior windows but once there it's a breeze, everything is loaded and can get on with things. New system even with fast boot disabled is much quicker through boot process. Still elements of fast boot i guess, or maybe, if it's not something newer hardware is better at, it might be because i don't have any other sata/optical drives connected anymore. Still have use for optical so ill get an external one.
 

Colif

Win 10 Master
Moderator
fast boot where? bios or windows. Not same process. Windows one won't help ssd/NVME as they fast enough to not need stuff prelaoded into ram at boot up. BIOS one just does all the tests at once rather than one at a time, to speed up time it takes bios to hand control to windows.
 

boju

Titan
Ambassador
Haha sorry, it does read im referring to ssds pre windows but didn't word and paragraph it right.

My old system had an ssd as well. I meant post process with modern boards is much faster, few seconds from power on and Windows login is already there. I know different boards, different boot times, but still, it's not what im used to seeing.

New system even with fast boot disabled is much quicker through boot process. Still elements of fast boot i guess, or maybe, if it's not something newer hardware is better at, it might be because i don't have any other sata/optical drives connected anymore. Still have use for optical so ill get an external one.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY