m.2 vs SATA SSD?

>>59177766
m.2 if you can afford it. Fast opening shit.
Raid 0 a couple 240gb SSD's if you need the space for price, while still being fast as fuck.

>>59177816

I was looking at https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01L80DH4G/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_img?_encoding=UTF8&colid=3RD5TMIG6U9DE&coliid=I29EXQ49R10319&psc=1


vs


https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01F9G46Q8/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=3RD5TMIG6U9DE&coliid=I2WX8X38QRMCLI&psc=1


...and the speeds look to be nearly identical. Plus, what's the lifespan of a M.2 vs a standard SSD?

>>59177766
When you see windows boot in a literal timed 1 second you won't know if you could settle for less then m.3

>>59178005
>m.3
what mate?

>>59177839

They're both very reliable, I can't say I've seen many of both fail, issues are always with the cheapest models

>>59177766
m.2. is just the connector and form factor.
There are m.2. SATA and m.2. NVME drives.
You only get performance boost with the NVME.
But the price difference is not worth the performance boost.
Just get m.2. SATA (if you want a cute little drive without cables) or a 2.5" SATA SSD. They perform at the same speed though.

allow me to interject for a moment. What you are referring to as "M.2" is in fact "M.2+NVMe"

File: 1488099406928.png (419KB, 630x675px) Image search: [Google]

419KB, 630x675px

>>59178059
>he thinks all m.2 drives are nvme.

>>59178051
While you're right, the intel 600p nvme based m.2 is a good deal faster than even stuff like the SATA based 850 EVO m.2. Don't get me wrong. Not by much but still a bit faster.

>>59178097
NVME drives have gotten cheaper since I last checked. Last time they were 2x the price.

File: Meh.png (473KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

473KB, 2560x1440px

>>59178116
yea it's not so bad now. I mean don't get me wrong, the intel 600p NVME series is still WAY slower than say the Samsung 950/960 series or even Intel's 750 series.

>>59178082
No I said what he's referring to
Learn to read instead of repost images

File: image.png (117KB, 997x454px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 997x454px

>>59178152
Yeah, if you get an m2 don't fuck around, get a Samsung 950/960 pro
600p is almost SATA-tier apart from seq reads

File: 1488100557722.jpg (311KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

311KB, 1280x720px

>>59178155
yea. nah. I don't care. I just like shitposting.

File: crystal dick mark.png (642KB, 803x682px) Image search: [Google]

642KB, 803x682px

>>59178168
Here's my raid 0 of two kingston u400's for scale.

>>59178168

ok but nobody has answered yet... would I have any issues installing Win 7?

>>59178168
that m2 on the left is pretty slow, the build i did yesterday with a samsung 960pro was 2400 i think on read.

File: 1488152849583.jpg (92KB, 630x624px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 630x624px

>>59178192
well that B150 board implies skylake. Which means Windows 10 might be your only option. Not because of the drive, but because of your motherboard's driver limitations. Many if not damned near all skylake builds don't agree at all with windows 7. My own included.

>>59178228
Asus support page does list win 7 drivers for the board. https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/B150-PRO-GAMING-AURA/HelpDesk_Download/

..but what I'm getting at is the actual install of win 7. I remember back in the day when XP couldn't recognize certain sata controllers during the install process, requiring you to download drivers that had to be installed via floppy. It was a pain in the ass. Just wondering if I'd run into the same kind of shit trying to install Win 7 on one of these M.2's.

File: 1488100658957.jpg (825KB, 1273x1411px) Image search: [Google]

825KB, 1273x1411px

>>59178255
There's a high chance yea. When I tried installing Windows 7 I kept getting an error saying missing drivers. My motherboard's USB ports were all controlled by the same USB driver so my keyboard and mouse didn't work during the install process.

If absolutely necessary you may need to slipstream the driver during the install process.

>>59178280

I think I'll just by both. I'll set up with the regular SSD and then clone it to the M.2 and see what happens.

>>59177839
>. Plus, what's the lifespan of a M.2 vs a standard SSD?


m.2 is sata, its the form factor and interconnect that differ (sata vs nvme)

>>59177766
grab a samsung pro evo 950

speedy as fuck

>>59178370
I see NVMe and my brain says 'nevermindy'. I'm reminded of scsi being supposed to be pronounced 'sexy' but everyone went with scuzzy instead.

>>59178255
>>59178280
>>59178289
You need NVMe drivers if you want Windows 7 to detect the drive. I had to do that when I tried out Windows 7 on my 950. Forgot where I got the driver, but I ended up just using Windows 8.1 myself though.

>>59178168
Don't bother with samsung, they cost significantly more but next to no applications take advantage of the faster read/write.

If you need the read right, you would already know

Only reason im looking at nvme drive is because 400-500mb read is about where the bottleneck for nearly every read process is, but nothing short of an nvme will read to that bottleneck at all times.

Will likely move to a samsung drive when the prices come down even more, or possibly just install the samsung drive and use it as a main read write and have a separate os install nvme.

>>59178203
It's not that the 600p is slow, it's that the Samsung drives are in a class of their own
>>59178910
>"software bottleneck" conveniently the upper end of SATA SSDs

>>59178539
>I'm reminded of scsi being supposed to be pronounced 'sexy'


no way, its always been scuzzi for as long as i can remember and i remember when ide vs scsi was a thing

not calling shit, but is that a true thing? cuz i can kinda see a kind of 'sec-zi' pronunciation