Go Back   Soundsonline-Forums > Topics > Hardware
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-29-2017, 12:15 PM
action9000 action9000 is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 221
action9000 is on a distinguished road
Send a message via MSN to action9000
Default Significant difference in load time between cheap and high-end SSDs?

I'm beginning to plan out a new build and I was just curious on the real-world differences between my 2012 SSDs and a modern high-end m.2 SSD.


People with M.2 drives containing libraries, is there a tangible benefit to using M.2 over a SATA SSD when loading/streaming samples? Is it worth investing in enough M.2 storage for some libraries or should I stick with SATA and call it a day?


What about the difference between older SSDs (Crucial M4 and such) to the current-gen SATA SSDs like the 850 Evo? Is there something tangible here when it comes to load times or streaming?

Thanks!
__________________
Intel i7 3930k
64GB RAM
M-Audio FastTrack C600
Samples on SSDs

FL Studio 64-bit / Cubase 8.5 Pro
Windows 10 Professional
HW Orchestra Diamond, EWQLSO Platinum, MoR, Colossus, Solo Violin, variety of 3rd-party libraries
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-30-2017, 03:35 PM
tommyrack13 tommyrack13 is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 111
tommyrack13 is on a distinguished road
Default

I recently built a new PC slave computer that has two main internal sample drives - one of which is a Samsung EVO 850 and the other is an M.2 Samsung SM961. The whole system is pretty quick and I wouldn't say that there is a particularly noticeable speed differential. Having said this, I do have different libraries on the different drives and there might be a difference in how quickly the libraries themselves would load that isn't accounted for on this. I arranged the libraries so that the M.2 is working with the more resource hungry libraries, so perhaps the difference would be tangible! It's definitely not hugely obvious though.

T
__________________
Tom Rackham - www.tomrackham.com
DAW - iMac 27" (late 2012) - 3.4GHz i7 - 32GB
Samples - eight core 3.4GHz i7 PC/Windows 10 - SSDs - 128GB
Various EWQL & other libraries - Cubase Pro 9.5 - Logic Pro X - Sibelius 7
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-31-2017, 09:56 AM
jspencer jspencer is offline
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada, Eh!
Posts: 3,727
jspencer is on a distinguished road
Default

I don't notice any performance difference between my old cheap Kingston and the newer Samsung Evo that I installed a few months ago. That Kingston has been chugging along since 2011.
__________________
http://www.jeremyspencer.ca
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-09-2017, 07:32 AM
Patanjali's Avatar
Patanjali Patanjali is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,236
Patanjali is on a distinguished road
Default

All SSDs have plenty of bandwidth for audio samples. What makes SSDs shine is the low latency. SSDs have really taken storage off the critical path, making the CPU the main limiting factor.
__________________
Patanjali
Half of DevaKnighT at devaknight.com. All recordings done in Cubase at 192k.
Comp: i7-4930K : Asus P9X79-E WS : Geil 32GB : GV-N750OC-2GI : 55" 4K TV + 23" touchx2 : SSDx6 : UAD-2Q.
HW: Nmn U87Ai : JA-251x2 : Korg padKontrol+nanoKEY2 : No audio for now : M-Patch2 : Tannoy Reveal Active+TS-12.
SW: Win8.1P64 : Cubase 8.0.20 : Goliath : SO PP : Pianos : Gypsy : SV : Sup/Drum 2.0 : AT7 : Ozone 6Ad : RX3Ad.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.