Fastest SSD and best performance DDR4 RAM

[Rhaegyn]

Hi TH Community,

I just was gifted a new Alienware A-51 desktop with an i7-5820 and a GTX 980 in it, but I really need to replace the HDD that comes stock with it, thus my question is as follows:

- Since I will be installing a new SSD and installing the OS onto that as my primary drive and using the HDD as just a storage drive on my same system, I wanted to ask what is the newest, best performing, and absolute fastest SSD drive on the market that I should buy? I've used Samsung 950 SSD's before, and although they are good, their boot times aren't as fast as the thinner version of the SSD's that come in high end laptop/ultrabook devices.

In short, I want the fastest boot up time (equivalent to the SSD's that are in high end laptops) and best performance of the newest version of SSD possible.

The question is ram, which I will be replacing as its only stock 2133 speed samsung ram that came with the system. The bios on the Alienware system recommends only 2133 clock speed ram, but I've heard of people being able to get ~2400 speed ram to work.

- Regarding RAM, my last question is: what ist he best performing DDR4 RAM on the market that runs stock 2133 clock speed or is known to be compatible with Alienware A51 system?

 

[USAFRet]

Given an equal Startup software stack, and given equal hardware...I defy anyone to tell the difference in 'boot time' between a Samsung 840, 850, or 950.

"Boot time" is a badly flawed metric when looking for a drive. Far too many other factors impact that.
Sadly, too many glom on to that number.

 

[PeppermintFangs]

Samsung 850 Evo is a great option for both fast performance (at up to 540MB/s and 520MB/s read and write performance respectively) and reliability. It's currently the best selling SSD on Amazon right now, and at a great price. It comes in several different capacities, up to the insanely priced 2TB version.

Samsung 850 EVO: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-2-5-Inch-Internal-MZ-75E250B-AM/dp/B00OAJ412U/ref=sr_1_1?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1463786072&sr=1-1&keywords=samsung+ssd

As for the RAM, I wouldn't recommend getting a higher frequency ram unless you,

A): Are interested in the minuet performance increase in specialized tasks (which will arise few and far between)
or
B): Are in the business in throwing away money (In which case, can I have some?)

I don't mean to be rude, but I can't honestly recommend 2400Mhz ram if you're going to be gaming.
See here for why: http://anandtech.com/show/8959/ddr4-haswell-e-scaling-review-2133-to-3200-with-gskill-corsair-adata-and-crucial/6?_ga=1.202596888.808799298.1459690455

 

[Solandri]

What USAFRet said. The mistake most people make with SSDs is thinking that MB/s is what's important. It's not. We don't perceive speed in terms of how many MB are processed. We perceive it in terms of how long we have to wait. So wait times (sec/MB) is more relevant. Or seconds a given task takes.

When you benchmark SSDs that way, pretty much all of them are the same (scroll down to load times).

http://techreport.com/review/28050/intel-750-series-solid-state-drive-reviewed/5

 

[Gnuffi]

+1 to USAFRet

also:
"newest and fastest"
what are your needs?
an analogy could be: an "X Ferrari" could be technically the best and newest car, but if all your needs are only driving to get groceries, then it would be pointless to have/buy/use,
since any other car able to go the speed limit of those roads used, would complete the exact same task, the exact same way, in the exact same time, just cheaper, and not being "newest and best"
you could buy an industrial minded PCIe SSD if you so desired and had the money to blow, but it would be utterly pointless if your work/use doesnt benefit from it

for 99.9% of users an SSD like samsung EVO 850 does everything at the same speed as fast as possible in most cases, in most tasks.
http://techreport.com/review/29221/samsung-950-pro-512gb-ssd-reviewed/4

 

[littleleo]

The Samsung 950 Pro is the fastest and more expensive. Unless you want to go SAS and that is not needed for all the hassle for a boot drive. For the 950 Pro you can assign multiple PCI-E lanes to it to increase speed. You do have it set in the BIOS to NVMe and not AHCI. USAFR is right thou we're talking fractions of fractions of a second here. You could go with a 750 EVO, 850 EVO or a 850 Pro and all would seem pretty much just as fast.

 

[Rhaegyn]

Thanks for all the feedback! Regarding the SSD options, I know that the 850 Evo is really the popular and reliable buy but I have a few questions for people more knowledgeable than myself that maybe you can help me out with:

- Aren't PCIe or M.2 very SSD's (the small ram stick looking versions seen here: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-950-PRO-Internal-MZ-V5P512BW/dp/B01639694M/ref=sr_1_28?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1463792538&sr=1-28&keywords=ssd) faster and better performers than the normal SATA Samsung EVO SSD's are (the ones that are little black boxes at the link here: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-256GB-2-5-Inch-Internal-MZ-7KE256BW/dp/B00LMXBOP4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1463792720&sr=8-2&keywords=samsung+evo+pro)

- Moreover, can someone explain what the differences between the samsung Pro vs Samsung standard versions of the drives are?

- The two drives I'm looking at are at the links below, but I need to gather a bit more information on how their performances directly compare. As far as I know, the PCIe M.2 versions are the ones you usually would find in a high end laptop/ultrabook which seems why they boot so much faster than the mid 7 sec boot times I get with standard Samsung EVO desktop SSDs. Can someone compare the drives at the links below, or provide me a link to their recommended SSD given what I've mentioned here?

http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-950-PRO-Internal-MZ-V5P512BW/dp/B01639694M/ref=sr_1_28?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1463792538&sr=1-28&keywords=ssd

http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-256GB-2-5-Inch-Internal-MZ-7KE256BW/dp/B00LMXBOP4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1463792720&sr=8-2&keywords=samsung+evo+pro

Whats the difference between the bigger box and slender stick versions of these drives?

 

[DelroyMonjo]

The secret to fast boot times are contained in Windows sysconfig.exe. Don't load crap you don't need to boot!

 

[Gnuffi]

- Aren't PCIe or M.2 very SSD's (the small ram stick looking versions seen here: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-950-PRO-Internal-MZ-V5P512BW/dp/B01639694M/ref=sr_1_28?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1463792538&sr=1-28&keywords=ssd) faster and better performers than the normal SATA Samsung EVO SSD's are (the ones that are little black boxes at the link here: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-256GB-2-5-Inch-Internal-MZ-7KE256BW/dp/B00LMXBOP4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1463792720&sr=8-2&keywords=samsung+evo+pro)

in theory and synthetic benchmarks/tests yes, in practice no, only in very specific circumstances, which most people will never do, see, use
only if you use or create very large or complex files, which most people dont
think NASA/Data center lvl/amount of data crunching and file use, i.e professional use, more and "bigger" than just photoshop and sony vegas
doesnt matter for most people since their programs and files dont work that way,
and say you want to transfer a file to or from the M.2, then your speed is limited to teh slowest link in teh chain
grandma doesnt go any faster just because she is sitting in a Ferrari, needs to be able to use what she got

- Moreover, can someone explain what the differences between the samsung Pro vs Samsung standard versions of the drives are?

better quality, longer lifespan, slight size difference, and teeny tiny faster speed, (which again you wont and cant notice), and a longer warranty, all of which you pay teh premium for,
and you would find it hard work to even go through a normal EVO 850's lifespan even with massive read and write amounts, before something else gives, the extended warranty on teh Pro can be nice tho

- The two drives I'm looking at are at the links below, but I need to gather a bit more information on how their performances directly compare. As far as I know, the PCIe M.2 versions are the ones you usually would find in a high end laptop/ultrabook which seems why they boot so much faster than the mid 7 sec boot times I get with standard Samsung EVO desktop SSDs. Can someone compare the drives at the links below, or provide me a link to their recommended SSD given what I've mentioned here?

check the links earlier up in the post to see comparisons http://techreport.com/review/29221/samsung-950-pro-512gb-ssd-reviewed/4

also:
boot times got more going on that just what type of SSD
at best the M.2 would be like a milisecond faster, at worst it would be slower to boot because of increased amount of drives and drivers needing to be loaded
and even if it was a whole 1 second faster, you would pay like +2X the price for 1 second, (best case scenario very unlikely) which is very much not worth it price/performance

Whats the difference between the bigger box and slender stick versions of these drives?

Price, size, "speed", storage amount

reason they are so popular for notebooks is tehy are so small making even slimmer notebooks possible
and it was prophesied that they would get cheaper and thus be able to compete better with "normal" ssds price/performance/storage size wise, but still a bit far off for taht
other than that its just hype/brag "yay my notebook/desktop got a M.2" great, offers you 0 benefit and you just paid +2X the price

unless you are doing such datawork and professional loads that you "need" the PCI'e ssd, which i doubt, then there is no reason to get it
not even to "future proof", since they will just drop in price and get "better" the longer you wait, and maybe even be worth it some day, but not now

for now there is far from any good reason for most people to get anything other than a regular SSD
and for that i recommend wholeheartedly the Samsung 850 EVO,
you can get the 850 Pro if you wish, but dont do it for speed, do it for the increased reliability and extended warranty if that is worth teh price jump to you

most people that got an M.2 and claim insanely fast speed are
A: either suffering from placebo effect
B: had their regular SSD unoptimized so it basically didnt perform as should/could
C: jumped straight from HDD to M.2 or jumping from one OS/system, to another/new, which didnt take into account those other differences/improvements

what many people seem to think/look at is the incredible high read/write speeds of the M.2/PCIe ssds, and that it means equal faster load time/performance
BUT,
just because it has up to 4-5x the R/W (which is max best case scenario btw), then that still does NOT transfer/equal to 4-5x faster transfer, creation, load times, because thats not how things works
programs and games, and things wont even open/load half as fast, at most, and still unlikely, only 1second, most often we are talking 1-5miliseconds, which means something that took 15sec to load before, now takes 14.9secs most often
and the faster it was to load before, even less teh difference will be now,
and still it doesnt mean that if you got 1 millisecond from 15second load, that you would get 2 milliseconds on a 30sec load time, you would still in most likely cases still only get 1milisecond faster on a 30sec load time, and so on, so 29.9seconds

real world performance does not increase proportionally with increased read and write speeds

so any1 claiming 950 Pro vs "normal" ssd, cut boot times in half or that something like a game, Fallout 4, loads 2x faster, got sand in their head 😉

 

[drtweak]

This is taken from another post I made. Honestly you do NOT need anything past a normal SATAIII SSD. Unless you are working with like RAW Video/Pictures and need faster render times, service files to a LOT of people at the same exact time, or running some kind of high end SQL you don't really need a 950.

A HDD you can get around 100MB Read correct? and a SSD averages aroud 550MB and then then 950 is 2500 MB

So the SSD is about 5 times faster than the HDD and then NVMe is about 5 times faster than the SSD. But here is the thing. A lot of times you are loading small files when windows or programs loads. Games you don't see as huge of a difference past SSD.

So if a 1GB file takes 10 seconds to load on a HDD and it takes 2 seconds on a SSD that is a whole 8 seconds? that saves a lot of time right!

Now that same 1GB takes .2 seconds VS 2 Seconds. Now count to yourself. 1 Mississippi, 2 mississippi. 2 second is still not that long? and in most cases a lot of files are super small, few KB to MB. You aren't loading a whole lot of apps that have files greater than a few KB/MB which even with a SSD is too fast for us to really count. So in the end for basic every day stuff you will not see as big of a difference between a SSD and a NVMe. So unless you are moving Large files around no need for that speed.


Also Keep in mind M.2 is NOT just NVMe. They have SATA SSDs in M.2 Format.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxYGM-MlngU

that video shows (its not great) of the boot times of SSD's, HDD, NVMe, and a RAID.

 

[Rhaegyn]

- Aren't PCIe or M.2 very SSD's (the small ram stick looking versions seen here: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-950-PRO-Internal-MZ-V5P512BW/dp/B01639694M/ref=sr_1_28?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1463792538&sr=1-28&keywords=ssd) faster and better performers than the normal SATA Samsung EVO SSD's are (the ones that are little black boxes at the link here: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-256GB-2-5-Inch-Internal-MZ-7KE256BW/dp/B00LMXBOP4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1463792720&sr=8-2&keywords=samsung+evo+pro)

in theory and synthetic benchmarks/tests yes, in practice no, only in very specific circumstances, which most people will never do, see, use
only if you use or create very large or complex files, which most people dont
think NASA/Data center lvl/amount of data crunching and file use, i.e professional use, more and "bigger" than just photoshop and sony vegas
doesnt matter for most people since their programs and files dont work that way,
and say you want to transfer a file to or from the M.2, then your speed is limited to teh slowest link in teh chain
grandma doesnt go any faster just because she is sitting in a Ferrari, needs to be able to use what she got

- Moreover, can someone explain what the differences between the samsung Pro vs Samsung standard versions of the drives are?

better quality, longer lifespan, slight size difference, and teeny tiny faster speed, (which again you wont and cant notice), and a longer warranty, all of which you pay teh premium for,
and you would find it hard work to even go through a normal EVO 850's lifespan even with massive read and write amounts, before something else gives, the extended warranty on teh Pro can be nice tho

- The two drives I'm looking at are at the links below, but I need to gather a bit more information on how their performances directly compare. As far as I know, the PCIe M.2 versions are the ones you usually would find in a high end laptop/ultrabook which seems why they boot so much faster than the mid 7 sec boot times I get with standard Samsung EVO desktop SSDs. Can someone compare the drives at the links below, or provide me a link to their recommended SSD given what I've mentioned here?

check the links earlier up in the post to see comparisons http://techreport.com/review/29221/samsung-950-pro-512gb-ssd-reviewed/4

also:
boot times got more going on that just what type of SSD
at best the M.2 would be like a milisecond faster, at worst it would be slower to boot because of increased amount of drives and drivers needing to be loaded
and even if it was a whole 1 second faster, you would pay like +2X the price for 1 second, (best case scenario very unlikely) which is very much not worth it price/performance

Whats the difference between the bigger box and slender stick versions of these drives?

Price, size, "speed", storage amount

reason they are so popular for notebooks is tehy are so small making even slimmer notebooks possible
and it was prophesied that they would get cheaper and thus be able to compete better with "normal" ssds price/performance/storage size wise, but still a bit far off for taht
other than that its just hype/brag "yay my notebook/desktop got a M.2" great, offers you 0 benefit and you just paid +2X the price

unless you are doing such datawork and professional loads that you "need" the PCI'e ssd, which i doubt, then there is no reason to get it
not even to "future proof", since they will just drop in price and get "better" the longer you wait, and maybe even be worth it some day, but not now

for now there is far from any good reason for most people to get anything other than a regular SSD
and for that i recommend wholeheartedly the Samsung 850 EVO,
you can get the 850 Pro if you wish, but dont do it for speed, do it for the increased reliability and extended warranty if that is worth teh price jump to you

most people that got an M.2 and claim insanely fast speed are
A: either suffering from placebo effect
B: had their regular SSD unoptimized so it basically didnt perform as should/could
C: jumped straight from HDD to M.2 or jumping from one OS/system, to another/new, which didnt take into account those other differences/improvements

what many people seem to think/look at is the incredible high read/write speeds of the M.2/PCIe ssds, and that it means equal faster load time/performance
BUT,
just because it has up to 4-5x the R/W (which is max best case scenario btw), then that still does NOT transfer/equal to 4-5x faster transfer, creation, load times, because thats not how things works
programs and games, and things wont even open/load half as fast, at most, and still unlikely, only 1second, most often we are talking 1-5miliseconds, which means something that took 15sec to load before, now takes 14.9secs most often
and the faster it was to load before, even less teh difference will be now,
and still it doesnt mean that if you got 1 millisecond from 15second load, that you would get 2 milliseconds on a 30sec load time, you would still in most likely cases still only get 1milisecond faster on a 30sec load time, and so on, so 29.9seconds

real world performance does not increase proportionally with increased read and write speeds

so any1 claiming 950 Pro vs "normal" ssd, cut boot times in half or that something like a game, Fallout 4, loads 2x faster, got sand in their head 😉

Thx for your detailed reply Gnuffi, I really learned a lot. You mentioned that incorrectly calibrated SSDs could be responsible for slower load times/worse performance. So, given that the Samsung 850 EVO has (from what I gathered from the info you gave in your post) the same real world performance as the 950 pro M.2 version, if I install the 850 EVO pro as a SATA III 6.0Gb/s this should perform as fast as even the best SSD's out there in terms of speed?

Also, you mentioned that an improperly calibrated SSD could be responsible for slower speeds/worse performance, can you recommend what settings I should have checked in my bios/with samsung magician to be sure my SSD works at peak performance?

I have a i75870 CPU with a standard x99 motherboard with a GTX 980.

 

[littleleo]

Thanks for all the feedback! Regarding the SSD options, I know that the 850 Evo is really the popular and reliable buy but I have a few questions for people more knowledgeable than myself that maybe you can help me out with:

- Aren't PCIe or M.2 very SSD's (the small ram stick looking versions seen here: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-950-PRO-Internal-MZ-V5P512BW/dp/B01639694M/ref=sr_1_28?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1463792538&sr=1-28&keywords=ssd) faster and better performers than the normal SATA Samsung EVO SSD's are (the ones that are little black boxes at the link here: http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-256GB-2-5-Inch-Internal-MZ-7KE256BW/dp/B00LMXBOP4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1463792720&sr=8-2&keywords=samsung+evo+pro)

- Moreover, can someone explain what the differences between the samsung Pro vs Samsung standard versions of the drives are?

- The two drives I'm looking at are at the links below, but I need to gather a bit more information on how their performances directly compare. As far as I know, the PCIe M.2 versions are the ones you usually would find in a high end laptop/ultrabook which seems why they boot so much faster than the mid 7 sec boot times I get with standard Samsung EVO desktop SSDs. Can someone compare the drives at the links below, or provide me a link to their recommended SSD given what I've mentioned here?

http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-950-PRO-Internal-MZ-V5P512BW/dp/B01639694M/ref=sr_1_28?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1463792538&sr=1-28&keywords=ssd

http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-256GB-2-5-Inch-Internal-MZ-7KE256BW/dp/B00LMXBOP4/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1463792720&sr=8-2&keywords=samsung+evo+pro

Whats the difference between the bigger box and slender stick versions of these drives?

PCI-E SSDs use the PCI-E slots on your motherboard. M.2 look like thin Memory cards that have a special socket the connect into. What is probably confiusing you is the M.2 has some models that use the PCI-E bus, but not the slot. M.2s SSD can come in SATA3 and PCI-E versions. All SATA3 versions of SSDs have a max burst transfer rate of 6GB/s which is a theoretical max they don't really transfer that fast normally. The PCI-E versions use the faster PCI-E bus in which each lane has a theoretical max of 8GB/s. What is really interesting is depending on the motherboard's support you can assign multiple lanes to your M.2 PCI-E model. SO lets say you assign 2 lanes you then have a theoretical max of 16GB/s versus the SATA3 bus max of 6GB/s, so now you see what the big deal is. The Samsung 850 EVOs use SATA3 the 950 Pro are PCI-E. If you want fast get the EVO if you want the bragging rights to very fast get the 950 Pro. Will you be able to tell the difference? Perhaps but the difference will be little based on these speeds unless you're moving large files around all the time. The EVO will be easier to install and less hassle to configure. Compared to a hard drive either will be a huge improvement, huge. (okay Trump back in the box)