[rarecoil]

> I'm not sure if you dropped a part in there that maxed out at 512MB/s that I could even notice.

I've done exactly this. I tried to run an NVMe drive and a SATA drive back-to-back in the same laptop to see if I could notice any difference in my day to day workload. I couldn't, and because of that I bought a 2TB SATA SSD instead of 2TB NVMe. SATA usually still has better power consumption than most NVMe drives, and they're cheaper too.

[VibrantClarity]

Which OS did you test this on? Every time I have used a Windows device with an NVMe drive the difference is immediately obvious, but on my Hackintosh and Linux boxes I haven't noticed any difference at all.

[rarecoil]

Arch Linux and Windows 10 Enterprise LTSC. While it may be slower to use Windows, the difference hasn't been immediately obvious. I use Windows for gaming and browsing only and stay in Arch most of the time.

[jotm]

Yeah, NVMe is so fast, few people will ever need the speed. You'd have to, what, record raw video to fill it that fast? What other uses are there? Do OSes have optimisations to better use swap space?

[tylerhou]

I bought one as an upgrade disk because IMO they are easier to install. I don't need to worry about mounting, routing a cable, etc.

[rarecoil]

SATA SSDs also come in M.2 format.