Not in my experience. I posted screenshots and had people telling my my drive was faulty. Same drive on the intel platform delivers much more performance.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
CoffeeLake VS Ryzen - PCie lanes
- Thread starter shankly1985
- Start date
Not in my experience. I posted screenshots and had people telling my my drive was faulty. Same drive on the intel platform delivers much more performance.
Maybe it was overheating?
Not according to hwinfo.
I'm certainly not going to join humbug in suggesting the drive, your settings or anything was at fault (and clearly your new Z370 platform has disproven this). However, @Panos may have a point there. I can't for the life of me remember where I saw it, as I've watched so many YT videos this week my head is spinning. However one of them discussed throttling on NVMe drives and showed some monitoring software displaying a single low temp, and others displaying that same lower temp and a second - much higher - temp. Perhaps your drive was hotter than you thought, and it was indeed throttling on the other board? It would perhaps be a better explanation for the strange bench results you were getting. If my new board doesn't have a built in NVMe heatsink, I'll be buying an EKB one I think.
Hwinfo was reporting 60c and installed pretty much in the same location on another board. No idea but it's certainly faster.
Just have a fan blowing over it.
@Rainmaker In your use case you'll never hit the DMI bottleneck, and if anything Z370 is probably a better platform for your use case since according to the link I posted earlier the Intel platform has lower access times and reaches higher IOPS than Ryzen.
There's no realistic way in which you'll hit 0.125GB/s from the Gigabit Ethernet and also max out the sequential reads (important note here, because writes are much lower) on an NVMe and several other SATA SSDs.
There's no realistic way in which you'll hit 0.125GB/s from the Gigabit Ethernet and also max out the sequential reads (important note here, because writes are much lower) on an NVMe and several other SATA SSDs.
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Mar 2011
- Posts
- 695
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
Then you have nothing to worry about. None of those tasks are going to be bottlenecked the DMI link at all, not even close.
Ethernet can - at most use 4% of the link, the fastest M.2 SSD on the market (which the 960 Evo is not) can only hit 81% of it. So you could have a gigabit internet connection, download as fast as you can while benchmarking with a QD32 read into a ram drive and still not run out of bandwidth. I think you've really over-estimated your workloads there. Some of them are quite CPU heavy, but none of them are all that I/O intensive. Certainly not to the degree that the DMI link would be a concern.
If anything I'd be looking at more than 16GB of RAM honestly. A larger system cache is really going to some of those tasks, particularly parity work and running VM's.
Did you installed the latest Samsung drivers? If it is using the PCI-e lanes it needs them.
On the Z370, is not running over the PCIe lanes, and isn't needed. Had similar issue with the X99 Ultra gaming and CH6, but not the Z170 Formula. It was resolved by installing the drivers.
Thanks for that. Regarding overestimating the IO, I was concerned more for the fact that downloading at (currently) 380Mbps to NVMe, while simultaneously PAR checking and unpacking RARs to an 850 and moving files to a rust spinner would be enough to push things over the top. If that's not the case then happy days. I am certainly considering 32GB, but it isn't a priority for most of my workload. Thanks again.
Associate
- Joined
- 24 Mar 2011
- Posts
- 695
- Location
- Cambridgeshire
380Mbps is only about 45MB/s or so. An 850 tops out at ~520MB/s and a mech maybe 200MB/s. All that still isn't even 20% of the DMI link
You could install another 6 850's and still be OK
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 969
Does the data that you are downloading via Ethernet to disk even need to be transferred to the CPU?
In other words there's no need for it to be transferred via the chipset to the CPU via DMI as it goes straight to disk via the chipset.
Even if it did and you had a 10Gb/s Ethernet connection that you were somehow able to saturate that is still only 1.25GB/s which when doubled if it had to to use DMI and then be returned to disk would still only be 2.5GB/s.
Whatever the real world limit is, typically will only be an issue with serious workstation loads meaning that you'd want a HEDT/TR platform.
Yeah, did all that mate along with magician to see if it was running at x4. I couldn't get to the bottom of it. All I know is same software, same drive on the z370 works as it should.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,619
- Location
- Planet Earth
Rainmaker is using an FX8350 - before getting into stupid E-PEEN wars remember anything relatively new will be a huge improvement in both CPU and platform performance.
I would just get the cheapest upgrade TBH.
I would just get the cheapest upgrade TBH.
Your 4K speeds seem too low though:
^ that's on X99 http://www.legitreviews.com/samsung-ssd-960-evo-review-250gb-and-1tb-nvme-m-2-drives-tested_188027/5
^ that's on X99 http://www.legitreviews.com/samsung-ssd-960-evo-review-250gb-and-1tb-nvme-m-2-drives-tested_188027/5
Your 4K speeds seem too low though:
^ that's on X99 http://www.legitreviews.com/samsung-ssd-960-evo-review-250gb-and-1tb-nvme-m-2-drives-tested_188027/5
Yet seem fine in the other test. Possibly the because they are different versions of diskmark ehh.
