Out of curiosity in which tasks would NVMe SSD be worth the upgrade from a SATA III SSD
Moving large blocks of data between two internal NVMe drives. Movie production, maybe.
Not 30 second facebook clips, but rather building an actual movie, all day every day. Seconds count.
After installing my recent Intel 660p, I did an impromptu test.
Adobe Lightroom, Multiple edits to 5 RAW files, writing those out as .jpg to 3 different drives.
Samsung 840 EVO 250GB (SATA III), 5 years old
Samsung 860 EVO 1TB (SATAIII), 6 monhs old
Intel 660p 1TB (NVMe), 2 weeks old
This is something a typical user would do.
It took the same time between all 3 drives, 15 sec.
Now...if I had to move 500 of those RAW files from my work drive to the publish drive, and do that every day all day long...then NVMe would make a difference.
People get too wrapped up in the large sequential number for the NVMe and ignore the actual benefit of the SSD concept in general...the near zero access time.
Many people have reported here after changing from a SATA III SSD to an NVMe drive, with exactly the same workload...and...meh.
HDD -> SATA SSD = huge benefit
SATA III SSD -> NVMe = not so much
Building a new system, and having an NVMe drive at similar price perGB as a SATA III SDD? Sure. Go for the NVMe.
Changing an existing SATA III to NVMe? Maybe not.