Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Fastest SSD port available?

Tags:
  • Computers
  • Storage
  • Gigabyte
  • SATA
  • SSD
  • Port
Last response: in Storage
Share
July 24, 2014 8:55:00 PM

Hello, I'm planning on building a new computer using the Gigabyte Z97X-UD5H-BK.
It has:
- M.2 PCIe connector
- SATA Express connector
- SATA 6Gb/s connectors
- Support for RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 5, and RAID 10

I'll only use 1 SSD with 1 HDD, so I would like to know which port provides the best performance for a SSD. I have ample of room in my computer case, so the SSD's dimensions don't matter.
If two ports offer the same speed, please tell me which provides the cheaper SSDs.
For now, I don't see any SATA Express SSD on the market, so I can't use it.

Thank you for your replies

More about : fastest ssd port

July 24, 2014 9:17:03 PM

SSD comes with SATA3 port. So you don't really have choice. Unless you buy a PCIE SSD which cost much more for getting 800 MB/s performance instead of 500 MB/s.
m
1
l
a c 180 G Storage
July 24, 2014 9:23:46 PM

In theory, a sata express or M.2 port might give higher sequential speeds compared to a 6gb sata port.
But there are currently no sata express devices and the few m.2 devices do not seem to be any faster.
Raid-0 has been over hyped as a performance enhancer.
Sequential benchmarks do look wonderful, but the real world does not seem to deliver the indicated performance benefits for most
desktop users. The reason is, that sequential benchmarks are coded for maximum overlapped I/O rates.
It depends on reading a stripe of data simultaneously from each raid-0 member, and that is rarely what we do.
The OS does mostly small random reads and writes, so raid-0 is of little use there.
There are some apps that will benefit. They are characterized by reading large files in a sequential overlapped manner.

My best advice is to buy the best current SSD out there, the Samsung 850 PRO and put it on a 6gb sata port.
What the os does mostly is small random I/o at low queue depths. The sequential performance is a nice marketing number, but it is the random latency that counts.
m
1
l
Related resources
July 24, 2014 10:06:00 PM

geofelt said:
In theory, a sata express or M.2 port might give higher sequential speeds compared to a 6gb sata port.
But there are currently no sata express devices and the few m.2 devices do not seem to be any faster.
Raid-0 has been over hyped as a performance enhancer.
Sequential benchmarks do look wonderful, but the real world does not seem to deliver the indicated performance benefits for most
desktop users. The reason is, that sequential benchmarks are coded for maximum overlapped I/O rates.
It depends on reading a stripe of data simultaneously from each raid-0 member, and that is rarely what we do.
The OS does mostly small random reads and writes, so raid-0 is of little use there.
There are some apps that will benefit. They are characterized by reading large files in a sequential overlapped manner.

My best advice is to buy the best current SSD out there, the Samsung 850 PRO and put it on a 6gb sata port.
What the os does mostly is small random I/o at low queue depths. The sequential performance is a nice marketing number, but it is the random latency that counts.


Good Idea. Is there any M.2 devices faster than the Samsung 850 PRO? If I choose SATA 6gb/s, is the Samsung 840 PRO better than the Samsung 840 EVO?
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 180 G Storage
July 25, 2014 6:43:37 AM

Define faster.
I think there are some M.2 devices out there that can achieve faster sequential speeds. But they may not have the lower latencies(for random I/O) that you really use.
Reviews I have read indicate that the 850 PRO is currently the best at any price.
But... in actual usage vs. synthetic server type benchmarks, you will likely not notice any difference.
I have a 840 pro, and cloned it to a 840 evo . In part for a motherboard change, and in part as a backup.
In actual usage, I noticed no difference.
MY opinion:
If budget is an issue, buy a 840 evo. Particularly if it lets you get a larger device.
If budget is no issue, buy a 850 PRO.
Share
July 25, 2014 12:47:03 PM

geofelt said:
Define faster.
I think there are some M.2 devices out there that can achieve faster sequential speeds. But they may not have the lower latencies(for random I/O) that you really use.
Reviews I have read indicate that the 850 PRO is currently the best at any price.
But... in actual usage vs. synthetic server type benchmarks, you will likely not notice any difference.
I have a 840 pro, and cloned it to a 840 evo . In part for a motherboard change, and in part as a backup.
In actual usage, I noticed no difference.
MY opinion:
If budget is an issue, buy a 840 evo. Particularly if it lets you get a larger device.
If budget is no issue, buy a 850 PRO.


Thank you for you reply!
Do you think that the Kingston Digital Ships M.2 SATA SSDs (http://www.kingston.com/us/company/press/article/7235) is better than the Samsung 840 PRO in terms of performance and durability?
I'm using a desktop, so size doesn't matter.
m
0
l
July 25, 2014 10:29:04 PM

Ordered my 850 Pro this week and can't wait till it gets here (hurry up Amazon!)

Chose the 850 because this is the last SSD I plan on buying, and don't know whether it will be 3 years or 7 years till I move up to whatever the next storage technology may be. So stability and top of the line speed were my #1 and 2 priorities.
m
0
l
July 30, 2014 8:15:10 PM

Brogan said:
Ordered my 850 Pro this week and can't wait till it gets here (hurry up Amazon!)

Chose the 850 because this is the last SSD I plan on buying, and don't know whether it will be 3 years or 7 years till I move up to whatever the next storage technology may be. So stability and top of the line speed were my #1 and 2 priorities.


Why not wait for SATA Express SSDs? SATA Express ports are already available, so the compatible SSDs should arrive soon.
m
0
l
!