NVME v Sata SSD for Editing

jonnypb

jonnypb

jonnypb

Associate
Joined
8 Jan 2019
Posts
101
I know for day to day operations you won't notice any speed enhancement on a NVME SSD over a 2.5" Sata SSD. But for tasks such as video editing is it a worthwhile upgrade and something that you would notice?

Read 2400 MB/s and Write 1750 MB/s on the NVME as opposed to Read 560 MB/s Write 530MB/s on the Sata SSD?

My basket at Overclockers UK:
Total: £131.64 (includes shipping: £8.70)​
​

Thanks
 
I think that it would be a noticeable upgrade, having an NVME drive for video editing. But just make sure you make backups, especially after you have used it for a while as dead SSD's (both NVME and normal SATA) tend to not be recoverable.
 
Pretty much what psycho said. If you want to have a scratch disk for adobe you need to make sure that drive has lots of wrote cycles ie good quality SLC or MLC. TLC or QLC will not cut it.

going to NVMe definitely will improve the editing experience.
 
If the data on the nvme is being sent from a sata ssd
Then can't see how it can be faster
As it will only get data at sata speed?
And that's mediocre speed for a nvme
Good ones are at over 3000 read/write
On pci~e 3.0
 
Mcnumpty2323 said:
If the data on the nvme is being sent from a sata ssd
Then can't see how it can be faster
As it will only get data at sata speed?
And that's mediocre speed for a nvme
Good ones are at over 3000 read/write
On pci~e 3.0
Click to expand...
Adobe needs a temp drive to store temp files. Video temp files can be large for instance when you load in multiple sources to edit etc. And also while editing, if you preview it creates a large video file at the background. The initial video can be from camera or SSD or even HDD but once loaded in adobe will create a temp file on that scratch disk. That file will be worked on until the project is finalised and exported etc.
 
pc-guy said:
Adobe needs a temp drive to store temp files. Video temp files can be large for instance when you load in multiple sources to edit etc. And also while editing, if you preview it creates a large video file at the background. The initial video can be from camera or SSD or even HDD but once loaded in adobe will create a temp file on that scratch disk. That file will be worked on until the project is finalised and exported etc.
Click to expand...
Is the data imported directly to the nvme? /temp file?
Or through Adobe /sata drive first?
And when finished with temp file does it then import it to Adobe on the SATA?
So wouldn't 2 x nvme be a faster option?
As at some point large amount of data going to/from sata~nvme will be bottlenecked by sata speed
 
It will probably come from HDD and SSD first then a very large project file will be created as a temp on NVMe. The initial read will be off say SSD then the subsequent writes and reads will be off NVMe.

the bottleneck is only during initial opening of the source material. When you scrubbing the video file that is very heavy amount of reading so NMVe definitely will help

you can technically import the source file onto NMVe from the camera before opening adobe and let adobe create another temp file on the same drive but that obviously will shortening the life span on that drive even quicker.

the final export will take time to encode etc so it is not an issue if it is written to a slower SSD. The writes of SSD is often not saturated during this process.
 
pc-guy said:
It will probably come from HDD and SSD first then a very large project file will be created as a temp on NVMe. The initial read will be off say SSD then the writes and reads will be off NVMe.
Click to expand...
Then my comment is valid
At some point a large amount of data will be moved to/from sata to nvme
Which will be limited to sata speed
It may be faster than using 2 x sata drives as once on the nvme you get faster read/writes
But 2 x nvme must be faster
And not like there's a big price difference from sata drives to nvme
Going by the 2 drives listed
 
In things involving actual data processing NVMe brings likely very little, because of very heavy computational demands of processing video.
https://www.4kshooters.net/2018/03/25/can-an-nvme-drive-really-enhance-your-video-editing-workflow/

For write endurance Phison E12 drives are among the best:
Corsair MP510, PNY CS3030, TeamGroup MP34...

pc-guy said:
TLC or QLC will not cut it.
Click to expand...
Endurance is also about write amplification of SSD's controller
Many Phison E12 drives are rated for higher TBW than even Samsung's 970 Pro.
 
EsaT said:
In things involving actual data processing NVMe brings likely very little, because of very heavy computational demands of processing video.
https://www.4kshooters.net/2018/03/25/can-an-nvme-drive-really-enhance-your-video-editing-workflow/

For write endurance Phison E12 drives are among the best:
Corsair MP510, PNY CS3030, TeamGroup MP34...

Endurance is also about write amplification of SSD's controller
Many Phison E12 drives are rated for higher TBW than even Samsung's 970 Pro.
Click to expand...
Have to agree
And the mp510 960gb were at a great price too when on sale
First time I chose a drive not from Samsung
I grabbed 2 of them :)
 
To be fair I have not been kept up to date with NAND tech over the last couple of year. Always thought the Samsung pro was the best. But clearly it is not. The Corsair MP510 looks really good economical option! Half price of the 970 pro of same capacity but out ranks on endurance.
 
pc-guy said:
To be fair I have not been kept up to date with NAND tech over the last couple of year. Always thought the Samsung pro was the best.
Click to expand...
MLC is the best if you need to write like whole drive full at once and at highest possible speed.
TLC drives can't sustain such write speeds and drop to 1-1½ GB/s after running out of SLC cache.
(and QLC garbages drop slower than 10 year old HDD)

Phison E12 controller based drives actually use relatively small static cache. (little short of 25GB for 1TB drive)
But that also helps to increase endurance during constant heavy use:
Data written into SLC cache needs writing tripled amount of cells as in TLC (vs. write of just one cell in direct TLC mode) and then eventual flushing of that cache causes write of fourth cell.

Silicon Motion controllers like in in Adata SX8200 Pro/Gammix S11 Pro and HP EX950 and newer Kingstons again uses empty space agressively as dynamic SLC cache.
Apparently up to around 50% of empty space and hence emptyish 1TB drive can write at full speed for nearly 150GB before starting direct TLC writing.
 
What I am more concerned about the MP510 which uses TLC is how they are managing the massive write duty.

say someone use it for system boot drive as well as a scratch disk. So 250GB dedicated to windows and programmes while another 600GB left for scratch disk and the drives are partitioned in such way. Leaving some space left for provision. (Not sure if this is still necessary on the latest controller. But say that is done).

now the windows partition data is more or less static ie not changing significantly or being overwritten. Where the scratch disk data is constantly being written to and destroyed ie wiped and so on. So how is there anything in the controller that is able to recognise this and start shifting data from windows partition onto the ones allocated to scratch disk to even out the writes done to individual cells.

if there is such algorithm built into the controller. Then that process will take a lot of system resources and need time to sort out. I don’t recall anything from any manufacturers that says you need to leave you system running for x amount of time for x and y happening.

I don’t know if the above is part of trim. I always understood trim applies to new data writing to cells and doesn’t manage data that is already stored on the drive and moving them about
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom