It would also be nice to see a budget SATA drive (eg, 860 EVO / MX500) included for reference for obvious reasons (they make up the bulk of SSD sales and it's more likely that someone who's outgrown an old 850 EVO will be looking to upgrade than someone who bought a 970 PRO 6 months ago).
When you can get an NVMe SSD for often $15 to $25 more than the SATA equivalent SSD here in the states, it doesn't make much sense to get the SATA version of the SSD. A year or two ago you were paying a premium for NVMe SSDs. Today? Not so much.
Why pay for speed you dont need?
I have a first gen NVMe drive, a samsung 950 pro. I also have a 2TB crucial MX500 and a 512 GB MX 300. According to synthetic benchmarks, the 950 pro is substantially faster then either crucial drive in reads, writes, and IOPS.
IRL, you cant tell any difference. Games took just as long to load with NVMe as they did with the crucials. Windows booted a whole 1 secod faster (yippee). File transfers were all limited by external media; most USB 3 flash drives cant keep up with a good sata III drive, external HDDs obviously are much slower, and external NASs are limited by either the gbE interface or USB 3, or their internal drive speed.
NVMe has amazing transfer speeds to another NVMe drive, and is useful for apps like photoshop and video editing sotware where RAW files get larger by the day. For most consumers, there is 0 advantage, even today, for going NVMe over Sata, so why spend $25 more for pointless bragging rights? That $25 can buy faster RAM, a better CPU cooler, or a AIB version of a GPU, all of which would provide tangible results, OR could be used to get a larger capacity drive instead.