Understanding data transfer speeds

[FBi7]

Hi folks,

I've well and truly entered an area I'm not completely au fait with and your feedback would be appreciated. Rig in sig, I appreciate it's old now, think the CPU is now at 4.4 GHz.

I've been toying with the idea of buying one of these which boasts 2400/1900 MB/s read/write speeds, with the hope of speeding up loading times in MSFS2020 and P3D (will move the OS to another SSD). I know this isn't the fastest drive on the market, but it's cheap. Is this a realistic expectation/option given the following:

My C: drive is a 240GB WD Green M.2 drive (which I've only just realised is SATA). Top line of the 4 CrystalDiskMark speeds is 535/434 MB/s read/write.

I have two identical 1TB SSDs with MSFS2020 on one and P3D on the other. Top line of the 4 CrystalDiskMark speeds is 561/523 MB/s read/write.

And just for reference, I have a 2TB HDD (7200 rpm). Top line of the 4 CrystalDiskMark speeds is 187/181 MB/s read/write.

My main questions are:
1 - Do these figures seem right to you?
2 - Can I expect a significant improvement in sim load times/expect to see the 2400/1900 MB/s advertised?
3 - Am I limited by my older motherboard/cpu?
4 - Will having the sims on NVMe be a detriment to in-sim smoothness/fps?

Comments/feedback much appreciated.

FB..

 

[MrRockliffe]

Can I expect a significant improvement in sim load times/expect to see the 2400/1900 MB/s advertised?

Depends on the size of the simulations. Typically, it’s only large files which benefit from the faster read/write speeds. It’s likely that the more important figure is IOPS (input/output operations per second)


Nevertheless, there’s minimal difference between a sata SSD and an NVME SSD, compared to an HDD and SSD.


As long as your motherboard has a spare M.2 slot, it’s PCIe based (and not SATA) and you have available PCIe lanes, you’ll be good to go.


I’d then just get whichever NVME drive suits your needs.


If you’re doing a lot of read/writing, you may prefer to go with something higher quality, with a better controller, TBW rating and DRAM cache.


I’m a little out of touch with the latest stuff but Samsung’s EVO lineup we’re always decent, as were Corsairs MP 600.


Edit: I’m on mobile and can’t see signatures

 

[FBi7]

Hi, thanks for a quick reply.

It’s likely that the more important figure is IOPS (input/output operations per second)

Here's a screenshot of IOPS. Top set is my M2 drive, bottom is a standard SSD. I have no idea what SEQ1M Q8T1, etc, mean

As long as your motherboard has a spare M.2 slot, it’s PCIe based (and not SATA) and you have available PCIe lanes, you’ll be good to go.

Only a single M2 slot on my board. Suspect it's SATA based as if I use the M2 slot, I lose the use of SATA ports 5&6. Re PCIe lanes, again, not a clue. Have 2 x PCIe slots on the mobo, only using one for the GFX card at the min.

Edit: I’m on mobile and can’t see signatures

Asus Z97-K | Intel i5 4690K @ 4.4GHz | Asus GTX1060 OC 6GB

 

[MrRockliffe]

Here's a screenshot of IOPS. Top set is my M2 drive, bottom is a standard SSD. I have no idea what SEQ1M Q8T1, etc, mean

SEQ = Sequential = data taken in order (quicker transfer rates as it’s making use of the algorithm which stores the data on the flash)
RND = Random = data taken randomly from different parts of the flash (this is where the quality of the controller is demonstrated, in how quick it can locate the information)

128K = 128 KB file snippets = more taxing as it’s like having to pick up lots of smaller objects
1MB = 1 MB file snippets = faster transfer speeds for the opposite reason


Using the info, RND4K is the most taking on the IOPS - lots of small bits of info randomly stored/accessed.

A higher number for IOPS is better. Notice how your 1TB SSD achieves higher IOPS.




Whether or not these represent typical usage of a PC is another matter.


If you’re a video editor, you’re likely transferring larger files in sequential order.


If you’re loading a game/simulation, it’s more likely you’re loading smaller bits of information, in a more random order (relative to how it’s stored).

Only a single M2 slot on my board. Suspect it's SATA based as if I use the M2 slot, I lose the use of SATA ports 5&6. Re PCIe lanes, again, not a clue. Have 2 x PCIe slots on the mobo, only using one for the GFX card at the min.

You could argue then that an NVME SSD wouldn’t be worth it - unless you have an M.2 slot with PCIe x4 speeds, you won’t have access to the sequential transfer speeds the NVME technology affords. But it shouldn’t have any significant impact on IOPS, or how quickly data can be accessed (not transferred) for smaller snippets.



Given your situation, I’d be very tempted to go for a SATA based SSD if you’re not planning to upgrade your CPU and motherboard

 

[FBi7]

@MrRockliffe - That's extremely informative, thank you.

If you’re loading a game/simulation, it’s more likely you’re loading smaller bits of information, in a more random order

Yeah, Flight Sims are 10s/100s of 1000s of smaller files, scattered all over the place.

Given your situation, I’d be very tempted to go for a SATA based SSD if you’re not planning to upgrade your CPU and motherboard

No plans to upgrade CPU/motherboard at the moment. My next proper upgrade would be a better GFX card, when they're more readily available and sensibly priced I'll dig out the mobo manual and see what that says re NVMe/PCIe. I'll also look into the feasibility of combining an M2 NVMe with a PCI adapter.

Thanks again for all your help,

FB..

 

[MrRockliffe]

I'll also look into the feasibility of combining an M2 NVMe with a PCI adapter.

It’s very feasible if you have sufficient PCIe lanes to spare

 

[darael]

My motherboard supports M.2 NVME drives and a few years ago I moved from a SATA Samsung 840 Pro drive to my current M.2 Samsung EVO Plus drive.

Quite honestly, I don't notice any difference in everyday use. The only times that I do benefit from the NVME speeds is when I am moving large files around, in particular to and from my external USB-C NVME enclosure.

You could say that a SATA drive is all you need. But you could also say that buying an NVME drive now, you could move this to a future system which could maximise it's full potential. It's upto you. Personally, I'd go for a drive with a decent TBW figure to ensure longevity.

 

[EsaT]

Yeah, Flight Sims are 10s/100s of 1000s of smaller files, scattered all over the place.

Terrain models and textures should be big files.
Those are the reason why flight sims can use more memory than most games.


Stupidly Asus has removed specification page of that board from their website, but manual has something.
Though not very precise.
M.2 slot is M-keyed, which can support either PCIe or SATA, or both.

But PCIe x16_2 slot offers four PCIe lanes from chipset and could take NVMe using cheap mechanical adapter.
Akasa M.2 SSD to PCIe Adapter Card= £13.99
SATA drives aren't even cheaper for their lot lower performance capability.

 

[FBi7]

^Thanks both.

Not got around to doing anything yet, too busy procrastinating