[SOLVED] Sata m.2 is faster than SSD Sata

[Satearn]

I read on the internet that M.2 Sata offers no benefit to SSD Sata.

But I just bought a plextor m.2 128 and it's faster than both the EVO120 and EVO250 SSD, and Samsungs are fast...

About %15-%20 with apptimer, much more responsive and faster by feel also.

Now I feel like ditching all Sata SSD's and going M.2 all the way, %15-%20 is like cpu upgrade...!

So is it a myth that SATA m.2 offers no benefit over Sata SSD?

 

[atomicWAR]

No it is not. You still limited to the SATA interface's limitations (ie 6gb/s) whereas NVMe has an upper limit of 3.94GB/s on a PCIe 4x link (not to be confused with gb/s which is 1,000,000,000 bits per second vs GB/s 8,000,000,000 bits per second)

 

[Satearn]

No it is not. You still limited to the SATA interface's limitations (ie 6gb/s) whereas NVMe has an upper limit of 3.94GB/s on a PCIe 4x link (not to be confused with gb/s which is 1,000,000,000 bits per second vs GB/s 8,000,000,000 bits per second)

Well. that might be nice in theory, but in real life the m.2 is faster here are the benchmark results, identical machine, OS, all of it both fresh from refomat:

Samsung EVO 860
C:\Program_Files_Portable\KomposerPortable\KompoZerPortable.exe - 10 executions
0.6556
0.6942
0.6720
0.6709
0.6734
0.6728
0.6845
0.6810
0.6832
0.6744

Plextor M.2 SG3
E:\01-Essential_Apps\10-Benchmarking\01-AppTimer\Komposer\KompoZerPortable.exe - 10 executions
0.5693
0.5709
0.5733
0.5542
0.5528
0.5616
0.5492
0.5658
0.5679

 

[SkyNetRising]

BTW - on OS drive you'll get lower performance ratings, because windows is reading/writing to the drive all the time.

 

[Satearn]

BTW - on OS drive you'll get lower performance ratings, because windows is reading/writing to the drive all the time.

Ran test both on and off OS, just did a plextor now on OS and same.

M.2 is faster

 

[Satearn]

If anybody wants to prove or disprove my point, I used this for testing:

The app is portable so no need to install on OS

https://portableapps.com/downloading/?a=KompoZerPortable&n=KompoZer%20Portable&s=s&p=&d=pa&f=KompoZerPortable_0.8_Beta_3_English.paf.exe

Benchmarking app:

https://www.passmark.com/products/apptimer.htm


I'm curious to see if you will come to the same results !

 

[atomicWAR]

If anybody wants to prove or disprove my point, I used this for testing:

The app is portable so no need to install on OS

https://portableapps.com/downloading/?a=KompoZerPortable&n=KompoZer%20Portable&s=s&p=&d=pa&f=KompoZerPortable_0.8_Beta_3_English.paf.exe

Benchmarking app:

https://www.passmark.com/products/apptimer.htm


I'm curious to see if you will come to the same results !

Your SSD is faster then the 860 evo (120-500GB drives) and it always was...but not because it is M.2 but because those lower capacity drives aren't as fast as their larger brethren due to not as many flash chips to pull from in parallel. There are SSDs out there both reg SATA and M.2 SATA that are faster then Samsung's drives. Your's is one and it should be considering it was released. That said i can't totally discount your feelings as the chart I am going to link does show the Samsung m.2 SATA equivalents do score ever so slightly better then there SATA 3 counterparts. And the older older s2 drive ties or beats Samsungs drives so the it would stand to reason the newer drive would be even faster. But one thing to notice is that the drives are still very much limited to 6gb/s or 600MB/s.

https://www.pcmag.com/review/360901/plextor-s2g-m-2-ssd-px-256s2g
https://theidealmobile.com/review-plextor-s3g-m-2-sata-ssd-performer-without-breaking-the-bank/