Samsung 970 EVO NVMe vs Intel SATA2 SSD disappointing performance

[AWPC]

I just upgraded from a 6 year old Intel 5 Series SSD on SATA 2 to Samsung 970 EVO on PCI-E gen 3.

On paper the Samsung is obviously way faster. Real world useage however is a massive letdown. Games are not noticeably faster loading times wise.

Win 10 OS (I did a fresh install with a new key I bought) is virtually no different. No faster to load. Apps do not install much faster either. I know in benchmarks the Samsung is way faster but not seeing any noticeable difference real world whatsoever!

I have a Gen 3 PCI-E interface on my X399 + 1920X Threadripper system. Double & triple checked everything the benchmarks are within spec for this drive.

With or without the Samsung NVMe drivers vs MS AHCI makes no noticeable difference either.

Just a massive letdown overall I expected a noticeable difference not seeing any really so buyer beware!!!

 

[tamzzy]

Games are not noticeably faster loading times wise.

Just a massive letdown overall I expected a noticeable difference not seeing any really

anyone could've told you that before you bought one

the only reason to get nvme ssd is because it is (practically) reaching price parity with sata 3 ssds...well...that is if you buy sensibly like the mp510, or sx8200 pro. and not the overpriced junk like sammy 970 evo or wd black
or for niche uses such as 4k video editing or anything usage that will hammer the storage subsystem hard.

 

[Radox-0]

Pretty much above. Not sure what actual benchmarks you looked at aside from paper based number, but given gaming and loading apps / the OS are hardly hammering the storage hard, the limit is elsewhere. Pretty much most real world benchmarks will show this:

Boot time: https://www.tomshardware.co.uk/fastest-windows-10-boot-time,review-34557.html literally fraction of seconds difference between NVME and SATA SSD.

some games:

Rest is covered above well by tamzzy, only going to see a benefit with anything hit storage hard. Aside that, the price has come down which makes them nice, but also I suppose in case of 2.5" SSD's mounting direct to motherboard with NVMe (granted few Sata based M.2 drives) cleans things up.

 

[AWPC]

I should clarify its the very latest M.2 NVMe model with latest firmware etc etc still a pile of junk vs a 6 year old SATA2!!

 

[tamzzy]

@AWPC mate we've already explained that you won't see much (if any) real world performance gain by going from sata ssd to nvme ssd, outside of a few niche uses.
it's not like going from hdd to (practically any) ssd, where the performance difference is like the second coming of the messiah.
i think a heavy dose of managed expectation is needed here.

by all means, have a rant. when you've calmed down...send the 970 evo back for a refund and get yourself a cheaper ssd, be it a sata 3 or nvme version

 

[Avalon]

I should clarify its the very latest M.2 NVMe model with latest firmware etc etc still a pile of junk vs a 6 year old SATA2!!

So you’re actually surprised that your non IO limited workload isn’t noticeably quicker when you upgraded IO performance? Sequential read speeds stopped being relevant years ago, unless you have a specific workload - that few home users do - the benefits are barely noticeable. Of course if you do have a heavy IO workload the benefits are significant.

 

[bledd]

Hard to tell the difference between the cheapest real SSD manufacturer (ie, not some Chinese el'cheapo SSD) and the latest NVME drive in most tasks / applications.

Which SSD do I have? of course, the latest NVME drive

HDD to SSD is the biggest leap you can do. SSD to NVME is neater in your case and faster for file copies, but general work.. it'll be a similar speed. Most things just don't stress an SSD that much.

 

[Steveocee]

@AWPC had you asked before buying, everyone would have told you there wouldn't be a noticeable difference.
Your expectation was far too high from some kind of incorrect assumption.

 

[FatRakoon]

My Mobo has opne of those NVMe slots and so I went ahead and bought an EVO 970 and I was absolutely blown away at just how quickly it installed Windows and I was so chuffed.

Then the settling down came into play, and I kind of realised that it was all placebo and it was no faster than a basic SSD after all.

Now, I see that it was all a waste of bloody time.

 

[edscdk]

same as everyone else, SSD to NVME = no noticeable difference unless you run benchmarks.. Despite saying that I will only use NVME ssd.. i dont know why i know its not faster (that i will notice)

 

[Wrinkly]

During Black Friday sales I grabbed a couple of WD BLUE 3D NAND 4TB SSDs (SATA) for this reason. As a bonus, they run cool and don't eat lanes. They were £280+VAT each.