M.2 PCI expansion card query

[SkScotchegg]

Hi guys, please can you offer advice.

I'm wanting to increase my storage on my PC I currently have m.2 2TB as main C drive, but I need more space for games and my motherboard only has one m.2 slot.

I was thinking of buy this expansion card: https://www.overclockers.co.uk/axag...l-sata-6g-port-2x-internal-m.2-hs-003-ax.html

I just wondered, is there any downside to doing this? Or will the m.2 work exactly the same and get the full speed etc?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Meddling-Monk]

What drive you are thinking of using? Because that card is for m.2 SATA drive card, not a m.2 NVMe drive card.

If you're thinking of the former (SATA) then yes, that'll work. But I don't think that is what you are after because that's basically an abandoned thing now. A quick look around and I barely see any 1TB drives, so I can't see how you can expand storage further if every drive is only going to be 512GB in size only.

So I think you're after something like this instead:

AXAGON PCEM2-N PCIe 3.0 x4 Adapter, 1x M.2 NVMe SSD With Passive Cooling

Order AXAGON PCEM2-N PCIe 3.0 x4 Adapter, 1x M.2 NVMe SSD With Passive Cooling now online and benefit from fast delivery.

www.overclockers.co.uk

That will let you get the NVMe drives that go up (in theory) to 8TB in size. But most likely another 2TB or 4TB (available now) instead.

 

[SkScotchegg]

What drive you are thinking of using? Because that card is for m.2 SATA drive card, not a m.2 NVMe drive card.

If you're thinking of the former (SATA) then yes, that'll work. But I don't think that is what you are after because that's basically an abandoned thing now. A quick look around and I barely see any 1TB drives, so I can't see how you can expand storage further if every drive is only going to be 512GB in size only.

So I think you're after something like this instead:

AXAGON PCEM2-N PCIe 3.0 x4 Adapter, 1x M.2 NVMe SSD With Passive Cooling

Order AXAGON PCEM2-N PCIe 3.0 x4 Adapter, 1x M.2 NVMe SSD With Passive Cooling now online and benefit from fast delivery.

www.overclockers.co.uk

That will let you get the NVMe drives that go up (in theory) to 8TB in size. But most likely another 2TB or 4TB (available now) instead.

Thanks for the quick reply mate.

Yeah, I'm wanting to purchase a 4TB m.2 NVMe, thanks.

 

[Tetras]

I just wondered, is there any downside to doing this? Or will the m.2 work exactly the same and get the full speed etc?

In theory: no. If you have the PCIE lanes available then a PCIE card should be plug and play. (Don't get a SATA one, as already noted)

The main concern, is if your motherboard can actually supply the lanes for the card. It can be complicated to work that out due to the lane sharing a lot of boards have.

 

[alexp999]

Check your board manual, there is usually a table or explanation of what combinations are possible.

I’m getting a x1 3.0 adapter for my old nvme I’m replacing. It won’t run as fast as it should but still better than SATA. I’ve got a 4.0 x4 M.2 and 3.0 x4 M.2 for the games that can make use of it.

 

[hornetstinger]

I use a Akasa PCI-E adapter, used on a older X58 and Ryzen 7 system, no issues. Just means I have an extra nvme slot

Not sure how those dual, triple or quad versions differ, would they be slower, ie copying from one drive to another will it be slower than copying from internal nvme to internal nvme drive?

 

[alexp999]

I use a Akasa PCI-E adapter, used on a older X58 and Ryzen 7 system, no issues. Just means I have an extra nvme slot

Not sure how those dual, triple or quad versions differ, would they be slower, ie copying from one drive to another will it be slower than copying from internal nvme to internal nvme drive?

It would depend on the implementation on the card.
If it's a x16 card, it can give x4 lanes to 4 NVMEs and no performance impact if the motherboard is also electrically x16.
If it's sharing the lanes via a switch to the NVMEs then individually they'd be fine, or if transferring to a native M.2 NVME, but transferring between themselves probably necessitates a trip to the CPU and back so they'd be sharing lanes. Most of them would probably just be passive and split the lanes. So a x4 to 4 drives would only be x1 each, x8 to 4 would be x2 lanes each, etc.

 

[hornetstinger]

It would depend on the implementation on the card.
If it's a x16 card, it can give x4 lanes to 4 NVMEs and no performance impact if the motherboard is also electrically x16.
If it's sharing the lanes via a switch to the NVMEs then individually they'd be fine, or if transferring to a native M.2 NVME, but transferring between themselves probably necessitates a trip to the CPU and back so they'd be sharing lanes. Most of them would probably just be passive and split the lanes. So a x4 to 4 drives would only be x1 each, x8 to 4 would be x2 lanes each, etc.

ah right.

If more bays in the adapter are populated would that mean they drop in performance on every additional drive? Or only during I/O from one to the other?

Since typically just use one drive at a time, having a quad nvme adapter could be useful, also faster at fitting and removing as just remove PCI card and have access to all of the drives.

 

[alexp999]

ah right.

If more bays in the adapter are populated would that mean they drop in performance on every additional drive? Or only during I/O from one to the other?

Since typically just use one drive at a time, having a quad nvme adapter could be useful, also faster at fitting and removing as just remove PCI card and have access to all of the drives.

It really depends how it is wired/designed. PCI-E Lanes can either be actively switched or passively split up.

So an NVME is designed to use 4 lanes.

If it's a quad NVME card on a x4 connector, it may only be passive and wired to send a single lane to each NVME, this will massively impact performance. However if it has a switch built in and has wired all 4 drives as X4 via the switch then individually they can all run at max performance but there would be an impact if multiple drives are doing something at once.

You also need to factor in the speed of the slot you are fitting it to. What generation and how many lanes it has. Just because it is physically one size, doesn't mean it electrically has all those lanes available.

 

[hornetstinger]

Pretty damn confusing, probably easier and faster just to test a drive. I guess also depends if you change CPU, ie from 5000 to 7000 to 9000 as they also have more PCI-E lanes?

Will test mine later

 

[alexp999]

Pretty damn confusing, probably easier and faster just to test a drive. I guess also depends if you change CPU, ie from 5000 to 7000 to 9000 as they also have more PCI-E lanes?

Will test mine later

There isn't a great deal of difference in the lanes, but the later CPUs support newer generations.

For each increase in generation it doubles the bandwidth per lane.

So 4 PCI-E 3.0 lanes are the same as 2 PCI-E 4.0 lanes. That can also factor in.

But you need to pay attention to how your motherboard is also configured, because some of the slots come via the chipset and use a slower link or older gen.

 

[Bubo]

Does your mobo still have the old normal SATA ports for adding 2.5" sata SSD's? If so and you are just using them for games and storage then the real world performance is not going to be that much different, if you believe the many youtube videos which do these comparisons.

 

[Meddling-Monk]

Does your mobo still have the old normal SATA ports for adding 2.5" sata SSD's? If so and you are just using them for games and storage then the real world performance is not going to be that much different, if you believe the many youtube videos which do these comparisons.

I think the issue that OP (and myself) found, was that the "better" SATA SSD's (that do perform as described and whilst manufactured still means cost less, not more) are no longer being manufactured and appear to be migrating over to m.2 NVMe drives only (certainly the classic MX500 SSD from Crucial has stopped production now, but the replacement hasn't arrived yet and may not arrive). So there's a lot fewer to choose from and this looks like a trend that's going to continue (where DRAMless SSD's make up SATA drives for storage, but no longer the performance, whilst shifting performance to m.2 NVMe drives, etc)

So in order to keep the same performance (DRAM Cache SSD and good controller), a way to adding the non SATA drives (that slowly will continue to increase in capacity) is essential if you want to expand and not pay more for less (Like many of the MX500's now which have gone up in price, not down; also warranty and RMA makes it awkward because Crucial are offering their BX models as RMA instead which has performance hits).

Otherwise, I agree to go SATA for extra storage as well, as it's not bad, especially if you only really need to read from the (DRAMless) SSD drives and not write to them as much (which drops off quickly; each GB of DRAM caches nets you around 20-25GB transfer at full speed writing).

 

[hornetstinger]

Does your mobo still have the old normal SATA ports for adding 2.5" sata SSD's? If so and you are just using them for games and storage then the real world performance is not going to be that much different, if you believe the many youtube videos which do these comparisons.

Depends on the game size

With games being 100gb + SSD is recommended

Another option is spinning HDD use that for small power end games or a game you're not playing ATM.

I'm considering getting a 8tb for mass storage leaving the more expensive SSD/nvme for big games

Dcs 100% needs solid state I had it on a spinning HDD and I needed a haircut by the time the flight sim loaded into the cockpit