NVMe vs. SATA Real World Performance

Your suspicion is correct. You can opt for SATA m.2 drive and get twice the capacity is for the money, so if your not using your computer for productivity work, transferring large files on a regular basis, SATA would be the wise choice.

read the 4x m.2 compare to just 1 m.2. look great on benchmark, but noting on real world
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/aplicata-m.2-nvme-ssd-adapter,5201-2.html

Very large file transfers and if it was a network drive and 20 people were accessing it at the same time, things like that. Very high queue depths.

What is the purpose of your PC ?

-If it's to run benchmarks, and perhaps get ya name on leaderboards, then the SSD is big

-If its to run storage intensive applications, like video editing 9with 2nd SSD as scratch drive) and rendering then SSDs will result in notable productivity improvements

-We have undertaken blind tests with 5 users on a desktop inwhich, via BIOS, we could switch whether system boots from SSD, SSHD or HD ... over 6 weeks no one noticed

-We repeated the blind tests with 5 users on a laptop in which users were randomly assigned two otherwise identical laptops... one with SSD + 7200 rpm HD and one with 7200 rpm SSHD ... over 6 weeks no one noticed

If you move 500 GB of files, open 100 tabs in Chrome or run a storage benchmark, you will see significant differences. If you run an office suite benchmark you will see significant differences. But if you break down those scripts which link dozens of keystrokes in succession, the fact that the user must react and press a key / keys between each function, negates any SSD advantage because the user is the bottleneck.

There are things you can do on a computer in which an SSD has an actual impact on the user, but 99% of those users simply don't do that on a regular basis. On that desktop, boot times were

SSD - 15.6 seconds
SSHD - 16.5 seconds
HD - 21.2 seconds

Now that is probably the biggest impact that anyone will see (outside of specialized apps as indicated above) ... but does 5.2 seconds impact your life in any way ? When i sit down to work, I start the PC and then spend 15 minutes listening to phone messages. When I sit down to game, I have the game on an SSD but long after it's loaded, I'm still busy:

-Taking dongle out of storage compartment on my wireless Headset, plugging it into USB port,
-Donning headphones, opening Discord, selecting channel
-Loading game associated web sites w/ maps etc.

The best analogy I can give ya is when i decide to go to work / meeting. Will the Porsche get me there any faster than the SUV ? It certainly is capable of doing so but 55 mph speed limits and bumper to bumper rush hour prevent that speed advantage from being relevant. On a PC, again, except in specialized instances, the user is that bottleneck.

Do you do data mining using a huge local database?

No it won't. Carry on with the current SSD.

A new PC, then maybe start with an NVMe drive. But no real reason to change from a current SSD in the existing system.

Seeing as the question was NVMe vs SATA SSD, the SSHD concept is irrelevant.
And "boot time" is not the only factor when considering what type of drive to use.

Do you even read the post before you post this off topic garbage here?