We are getting there. Price of sata was twice current 2-3 years ago. QLC & PLC are ways to lower costs while delivering enough for normal users.
IOPS is four times the speed in NVME ,and it is more fater than 2 seconds when you access thousands of tiny files .If SATA SSD was 40 dollars per TB...why would you use a NVMe that load your OS and load your games like 1-2 seconds faster instead of just using a normal SATA SSD?
You could have 3TB of SATA SSD for 120 dollars instead of paying 120 for a 1TB NVMe. If this was true I'd take the 3TB SSD any day of the week and there isn't even a down side. Loading times are almost identical.
1- Backuping , Higher IOPS helps alot in total time to backup your data ... reading tens of thousands tiny files .. here NVME is four times faster ...In your specific use case, show us the user facing difference between a SATA III SSD and a NVMe SSD.
Further, the diff between 3.0 and 4.0.
Not benchmark numbers....actual user facing difference.
So.....no actual "numbers", beyond benchmark things.1- Backuping , Higher IOPS helps alot in total time to backup your data ... reading tens of thousands tiny files .. here NVME is four times faster ...
2- Making image files or also alot faster ...
3- indexing and file search , and search within files .. like four times faster as well
4- Showing icons of files in folders , alot faster if there are hundreds of files.
5- Booting systems does not feel much faster ...
6- Updating systems feels alot faster when you calculate restarting many times and installing updates.
7- Games loading .. well depends on the game .. but not more than 4 seconds per level.
But between PCIE 3.0 and 4.0 there is not much difference because the random reading and writing files will never saturate PCIe 3.0 anyways ....
umm ..So.....no actual "numbers", beyond benchmark things.
Samsung 860 EVO vs Intel 660p
The 660p is 3x "faster" than the SATA III 860, right?
In my actual tested use case with Adobe Lightroom:
Taking 5 .RAF files directly from my Fuji X-T1.
Applying multiple random edits to those files.
Exporting that same batch of files, as jpg, out to each of those drives, with a full reboot in between (to alleviate any cache issues)
Takes the exact time, 15 secs, +/- 0.5.
Yes, the 660p is on the lower end of NVMe drives.umm ..
1 TB intel 660P Nvme is 150K/220K IOPS
1 TB Samsung 970 evo plus IOPS is 600K/550K
Get a better Nvme SSD and feel the difference .
The other movie you put is about booting and games loads which I said does not feel alot better ... but the other points I stated are still Valid.
Yes, the 660p is on the lower end of NVMe drives.
But still, you've not showed us any actual user facing numbers.
Yes, better drives such as a 970 EVO Plus are faster.
But that does NOT equate to "Sata drives need to disappear or sell like $40 per TB "
Delusional ? what ? to ask for an old Technology to be cheaper ? SATA can not go above 100k IOPS , nvme will reach 1 MILLION IOPS SOON .. TEN TIMES.So a SATA drive that offers no noticeable performance difference from NVME 95% of the time should only be worth 1/3 as much as a drive that is only noticeably faster in few circumstances?
You are delusional.
You've said there is a huge difference, and SATA drives need to die.How do you expect me to show you numbers in backups and other stuff I mentioned than games loading and OS booting ? I dnot have the tools to benchmark them but they really feel faster , try searching in your files for words or backup data , or compare large file icons appearing in both ... or lets say Full System Anti Virus scan .. image your NVME to SATA SSD and run Full (not smart) virus scan on both and put a timer.
well to disappear I withdraw it , but $40 for 1TB SATA ? NO WAY ... it is a very old technology alread with very low IOPS and should be priced as such in 2020 IMO.
I said in some areas there is upto 4 times difference , while in booting and game loading you wont see huge difference .. Actualy the clip you posted confirms what I said about booting time and game loading .. I cant find anyone online who tested backup , indexing , searching for words inside files on the SSD , or comparing Full Virus scans etc ..You've said there is a huge difference, and SATA drives need to die.
Presumably, you'd be able to post up some numbers and back that thought up.
It depends on which type of backup you are using , file to file , or image to image .. .. if you construct the huge image file on the NVME then backup it , it will be much faster than sending them file by file.In my realm, backups take the same amount of time, no matter which drive is being backed up.
They go across the LAN, to the NAS and its spinning hard drives.
The type of source drive, be it SATA III SSD or NVMe, makes no difference.
Also, that backup happens between the hours of midnight and 4AM. If it takes 1 minute or 4 minutes....that is irrelevant. To me, anyway, because I am asleep. Even if I weren't asleep, that happens in the background.
Hours?It depends on which type of backup you are using , file to file , or image to image .. .. if you construct the huge image file on the NVME then backup it , it will be much faster than sending them file by file.
I backup my files using external SSD drives not network , because as you said it takes hours on networks...