Even hard drives will get to use the super-fast NVMe 2.0 interface

Ludak021

Posts: 472   +352
To everyone asking "why do this?":

This lets you delete the SATA controllers from the motherboards, reducing the complexity and cost of the boards, and freeing up both real estate and PCIe bandwidth for other uses.

Rust spinners aren't going anywhere anytime soon, so we might as well get everything onto the same standard. Even if that newer standard is overkill in this case.

All 4 Sata controllers take 0 pcie lanes and can support 4 hdd's. Using nvme to do the same thing you will use PCIe lanes.
So either way, you are loosing and not gaining anything.
If we started with pcie conections for HDDs instead of IDE/PATA/SATA, we would be looking at someone inventing SATA and aplauding them for it for we can finaly free up pcie lanes.
 

DaveBG

Posts: 560   +249
All 4 Sata controllers take 0 pcie lanes and can support 4 hdd's. Using nvme to do the same thing you will use PCIe lanes.
So either way, you are loosing and not gaining anything.
If we started with pcie conections for HDDs instead of IDE/PATA/SATA, we would be looking at someone inventing SATA and aplauding them for it for we can finaly free up pcie lanes.
SATA drives do not use CPU PCIe lanes but use chipset PCIe lanes which in turn are connected to CPU PCIe lanes... In the end everything connects to the PCIe lanes.
The only benefit would be that in this case you can have more SATA ports since the chipset agregates several SATA ports to share the same bandwidth.
This is the reason why on some boards when you populate all PCIe ports some of the SATA ports are disabled automatically.
With future CPUs that have more PCIe lanes I do not see a problem that boards have both some SATA and many M.2 ports for both HDDs and NVME HDDs.
 

captaincranky

Posts: 16,979   +5,753
This is the reason why on some boards when you populate all PCIe ports some of the SATA ports are disabled automatically.
With future CPUs that have more PCIe lanes I do not see a problem that boards have both some SATA and many M.2 ports for both HDDs and NVME HDDs.
Sorry, but this entire concept brings back ugly memories of the "Super SATA", farce / abomination / atrocity / useless sales gimmick, that was the ultimate "solution looking for a problem"..

You could get 1200 MBs a sec throughput by strapping 2 SATA ports together, in a period when all that were available were HDDs pushing 150 MBs a sec.

IIRC, they were blasting that nonsense all over the mobo boxes. At the end of the day, there was no gain, and you could lose up to 3 SATA ports in the process..

We may need to get a grip on our "aspirations of world computer dominance", and realize this home built trash isn't "Watson".
 

ZedRM

Posts: 534   +326
This seems like a bad idea. For one, there is nothing wrong with the SATA interface(physical). It just needs and upgrade to faster speeds. For two, the NVMe interface isn't the best or easiest to work with. SATA is better in that respect. Just not liking this idea..
 

terzaerian

Posts: 960   +1,399
Sorry, but this entire concept brings back ugly memories of the "Super SATA", farce / abomination / atrocity / useless sales gimmick, that was the ultimate "solution looking for a problem"..

You could get 1200 MBs a sec throughput by strapping 2 SATA ports together, in a period when all that were available were HDDs pushing 150 MBs a sec.

IIRC, they were blasting that nonsense all over the mobo boxes. At the end of the day, there was no gain, and you could lose up to 3 SATA ports in the process..

We may need to get a grip on our "aspirations of world computer dominance", and realize this home built trash isn't "Watson".
Yes, the most benefit the vast majority of consumers would get is boot times in a fraction of a second rather than several seconds.

However, there are plenty of use cases that do benefit from higher storage bandwidth: games with megatextures, video editing, home servers, etc, to name only a couple.

I'm wary of abandoning standards because of a misplaced notion that "old = obsolete," but at the same time it's equally destructive to hold back technological development because consumers don't allegedly "need" it.
 

Ludak021

Posts: 472   +352
Yes, the most benefit the vast majority of consumers would get is boot times in a fraction of a second rather than several seconds.

However, there are plenty of use cases that do benefit from higher storage bandwidth: games with megatextures, video editing, home servers, etc, to name only a couple.

I'm wary of abandoning standards because of a misplaced notion that "old = obsolete," but at the same time it's equally destructive to hold back technological development because consumers don't allegedly "need" it.

windows loading times are very very similar between SATA SSD and NVME. No one is going to see ~3000MB/s while anything is loading. Just like we don't see even SATA 600 speeds while loading things. Sequential reads are usually useless points of data for most users.

edit: I am with you about the rest of your post. My thoughts exactly.
 
I'd be curious to know if this would offer any advantages to a typical SAS with an array of drives. I'd be nice to not maintain separate connectors but I am guessing that to move drives away from SAS they would have to be some key advantage to this? Or maybe I legit missed it on the article idk.
NVMe HDD is for Cloud and OEM applications to simplify interfaces and software as well as reduce TCO. It is not designed for consumer/client market.
 

Athlonite

Posts: 244   +85
Finally, this SATA crap is getting on my nerves.

Really how so is there something SATA III doesn't do for you HDD's or is it that you think HDD Manufacturers are just going to make faster HDD's because they're connected to the NVMe bus
 

DaveBG

Posts: 560   +249
Sorry, but this entire concept brings back ugly memories of the "Super SATA", farce / abomination / atrocity / useless sales gimmick, that was the ultimate "solution looking for a problem"..

You could get 1200 MBs a sec throughput by strapping 2 SATA ports together, in a period when all that were available were HDDs pushing 150 MBs a sec.

IIRC, they were blasting that nonsense all over the mobo boxes. At the end of the day, there was no gain, and you could lose up to 3 SATA ports in the process..

We may need to get a grip on our "aspirations of world computer dominance", and realize this home built trash isn't "Watson".
I have no idea how a post where I have not talked about bandwidth brigs such memories for you but ok...
Speaking of that check what exactly NVME does. The benefits are not only about bandwidth. HDDs will not get magically faster and I am sure most people realize that without need to comment on it...
Also mobos with only M.2 ports will be better (simpler , cheaper) than ones that have both M.2 and SATA. I am sure even you will agree M.2 is not going away.
 
Last edited:

captaincranky

Posts: 16,979   +5,753
Finally, this SATA crap is getting on my nerves.
A sound scientific argument if I've ever heard one.

But just think, (and according to you), the Chinese will save trillions.if they don't have to put these on their mobos;

main-qimg-303904be0469df876e6f9d79d42abd50
 

captaincranky

Posts: 16,979   +5,753
Now I understand why the older disks were so expensive. My cheap HDD came without a flight attendant.
She's not a "flight attendant". You can plainly tell that by the fact she isn't sporting a tacky, pseudo military cap.

She's a, "point to the product and show them what they've won girl", on the, "Price is Right". This is obviously only a rehearsal. since the studio is likely as cold as a witch's t*t, hence the necessity of the long coat to cover up the "pokies" she would likely be displaying as well, in the solid gold Spandex leotard she's wearing under the coat.

Once upon a time, shows like this had to be viewed by network censors before airtime. I'm sure her "twin peaks" would be plainly visible, as she has likely not yet donned the cast iron brassiere required for the show to maintain its, "G rated status"...This is likely also a part of the reason why Farah. Fawcett was replaced by Cheryl Ladd on "Charlie's Angles".

Well here, see for yourself;
a8e4c028-hot-then-farrah-fawcett-ap.jpg
 
Last edited:

Markoni35

Posts: 1,129   +456
She's not a "flight attendant". You can plainly tell that by the fact she isn't sporting a tacky, pseudo military cap.

She's a, "point to the product and show them what they've won girl", on the, "Price is Right". This is obviously only a rehearsal. since the studio is likely as cold as a witch's t*t, hence the necessity of the long coat to cover up the "pokies" she would likely be displaying as well, in the solid gold Spandex leotard she's wearing under the coat.

Once upon a time, shows like this had to be viewed by network censors before airtime. I'm sure her "twin peaks" would be plainly visible, as she has likely not yet donned the cast iron brassiere required for the show to maintain its, "G rated status"...This is likely also a part of the reason why Farah. Fawcett was replaced by Cheryl Ladd on "Charlie's Angles".

Thank you for a very detailed and picturesque "Playboy" style explanation. I have easily found the twin peaks on the map above.