running ssd on sata 2

[papi1248]

does running ssd on sata 2 worth it? Also is running a slower ssd on sata 2 compared to a faster ssd on sata 2, is there a difference? For example samsung 850 evo vs kingston ssd where samsung is supposedly much more faster than kingston.
Also is there a noticeable difference when used as a boot drive with other files.

I got my PC from HP.
My PC is called HP ENVY h8-1437c
This is my Computer Specs that I have right now in my PC:
Windows 10 Home (64bit)
GPU(graphic card): MSI Nvidia GTX 970 4G Gaming Edition
CPU: Intel core I5-3470 3.20 GHz 4 Cores
12GB of memory
Power Supply:Corsair cx 600
Resolution:1920x1080
2x 2TB hard drive sata 2

This is the link to my motherboard:
http://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c03517380
http://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c03132942
my motherboard seems to only have sata 2 sadly unless i am wrong which also seem to say sata 0-1 has sata 3, but i am not sure if that is what the motherboard specification is saying.

 

[Boogieman_WD]

Hey there, papi1248.

Well it says that SATA 0 and SATA 1 ports run at 6Gb/s which would mean that they are SATA III ports. So I'd connect the SSD to one of them if I were you.
Anyway, to get back to your original question - SSD's are still worth it even if they are used with SATA II ports. You won't get the maximum speed they can offer, because they'd be bottlenecked by the older SATA revision, however it would still be at least twice as fast compared to an HDD and you'll be able to fully benefit from the faster access time that the SSD offers.

As for slower and faster SSDs on SATA II, think of it like this - if SSD1 can reach speeds of up to 400MB/s and SSD2 can reach speeds of 500MB/s, there won't be any difference when connected to a SATA II port, since it's maximum speed is 300MB/s and that's what you can get from both of them. This is solely when talking about their read/write speeds.

Hope that helps. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Boogieman_WD

 

[Solandri]

Your motherboard has a standard 2 + 4 SATA port setup from that era. 2 SATA ports (usually an Intel controller) are SATA 3, 4 SATA ports are SATA 2 (usually a Marvell controller). The picture is kinda blurry, but I'm guessing the red and black connectors on the bottom right side are forward-facing SATA ports? Those are probably your SATA 3 ports then, since they're grouped as a pair, while the other grouping is 4 ports.

Even if all your ports were SATA 2, it wouldn't make that big a difference. Whether or not your SATA controller supports NCQ (AHCI mode) makes a bigger difference than SATA 2 vs SATA 3. It's actually the 4k read/write speeds which contribute most to the speediness of a SSD, and most SSDs are still stuck around 30-70 MB/s there. 200-300 MB/s with NCQ (which is why AHCI mode is so important).

The sequential speeds everyone obsesses over make very little difference outside of a few specialized tasks such as real-time video editing.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sata-6gbps-performance-sata-3gbps,3110.html

however it would still be at least twice as fast compared to an HDD

On the contrary, it'll be hundreds of times faster than a HDD at small file read/writes, which is the majority of the reason why SSDs feel so much faster than a HDD. The 4k read/write speeds of most HDDs are around 0.7-1.5 MB/s. vs. 30-70 MB/s for a SSD without NCQ, 200-300 MB/s for a SSD with NCQ.

A large part of the reason Windows Fast Startup works is that instead of having Windows read hundreds or thousands of small files as part of the boot process, Fast Startup saves the image of those files in the hibernate file where they can all be loaded in one quick sequential read. This is also why Fast Startup gives very little benefit on a SSD - a SSD can read those small files nearly as quickly as it can read the hibernate file.

 

[Boogieman_WD]

You are quite right about that, but I was talking in general about read/write speeds as advertised. E.g. most newer models HDDs have speeds of around 150MB/s (some even a bit more) and the SSD would be able to double that on a SATA II port. Real life speed is a completely different story and you are right.

On the other hand I'm not sure you are right about the SATA ports on the scheme. If we are to trust what's written on the website - "6x SATA 2.0 connectors (SATA 0 - 1 @ 6 Gb/s, SATA 2 -5 @ 3 Gb/s)", then from the layout those SATA III ports should be the bottom ones where it says SATA 0 and SATA 1. Which I agree is really weird if true.

 

[papi1248]

thanks for all your replies. So should I presume I have sata 3 connections? Also for me getting a ssd is important for faster launch in application and faster loading into windows. transferring files isn't too much of an issue even if its slow, i dont transfer files like that unless moving games but even that that dont matter cuz i can wait, presuming that's what transfer and read write speed means. Also on a sata 2 if I were to get a lets a kingston ssd which are cheaper and less faster than samsung or sandisk pro ssds on paper while samsung is faster, but on the real world would i notice any difference on a sata 2 or sata 3 and what would be the differences?

 

[papi1248]

Also someone in another thread told me to stay away from tlc drives like samsung 850 and 840 evo and get mlc drives. So I decided on getting the sandisk extreme pro. is this a good idea? Also is samsung 850 pro a mlc or tlc drive? My budget is around $400 to $450 cuz I want to get another 4tb hard drive, a ssd for os and other application and a good airflow case to replace my small hp case.