4 ms·
I second that. I have M.2 SSD on laptop and SATA SSD on desktop. There's no perceived difference on disk operations for me outside of corner cases like copying
by vbezhenar 5y ago
I second that. I have M.2 SSD on laptop and SATA SSD on desktop. There's no perceived difference on disk operations for me outside of corner cases like copying huge file. But there's very noticeable difference between prices.
- reader_mode 5y agoBuild times should be better no ? Unless you have enough ram to keep it all im cache ?
- programmer_dude 5y ago+1, I installed an M.2 SSD in my desktop looking at the quoted 10x difference in speed but I was taken aback at the lack of any perceivable improvement. Money down the drain I guess.
- staticassertion 5y agoThat may be due to the fact that your software (like your OS) was built for a world of slow spinning disks, or maybe semi-slow SSDs at best. Not a lot of code is written with the assumption that disks are actually fast, and it's not too common to see people organizing sequential read/writes in their programs (except for dbs).
- prutschman 5y agoDo you have an NVMe M.2 device specifically? The M.2 form factor supports both NVMe and SATA (though any given device or slot might not support one or the other). I've got a workstation that has both SATA 3 and M.2 NVMe SSDs installed. The SATA 3 device can do sustained reads of about 550 MB/sec, fairly close to the 600 MB/sec line rate of SATA 3. The NVMe device can do about 1.3 GB/sec, faster than physically possible for SATA 3.
- vbezhenar 5y agoYes, I have an NVMe M.2 device. Samsung 970 EVO Plus.