Hard drives: 1 NVme SSD + SATA SSD + 2 HHD

[kiquenet2]

Hello,

My idea is to buy a new PC and I am looking at the storage options.

I see that there are now more modern SSDs with more advanced connections: M.2, PCI-Express and mSATA.

Are NVMe drives worth it?

What I have in mind, from what I have read, and probably with great ignorance, is to have

1 NVme SSD for Windows 10 and essential programs: CCleaner, Anti-Malware,...

It could be Samsung 970 EVO Plus 500GB, or Samsung 970 PRO NVMe 512GB

1 SATA SSD, Crucial MX500, or Samsung 860 EVO SSD 1TB, for perhaps installing other applications or application cache topics (video editing, code editors, etcetera)

2 HHD for storage

Seagate Barracuda PRO 4TB or cheaper options from Western Digital.

I see this one, WD RED NAS 6 TB, but would it only apply to NAS?

https://www.pccomponentes.com/wd-nas-red-6tb-sata3

Also, what motherboard would support NVme, SATA SSD, and 2 HHD?

I would appreciate any recommendations.

[Fassou]

First of all, an HDD is a traditional hard drive, but an HHD is a hybrid between a traditional hard drive and an SSD in one component (I personally don't like them).

For storage, an HDD is the best option, and it will be SATA and will need the same connections as the SATA SSD you plan to put in.

NVme, however, connect to an M.2 type connector on the motherboard, and you must make sure that both are compatible (there are several versions).

In the corridors of the Internet, they talk about a shorter lifespan of professional-grade HDDs (for video, NAS, etc...) when used in conventional boards, but if the price difference is small and we back up properly, I don't see why there should be problems.

Cheers!

[whoololon]

+1
I don't know if you've made a mistake and meant HDD instead of HHD (I prefer to call them SSHD and that way there are no problems), because a hybrid disk is, quite simply, throwing money away.

An NVMe, a normal user isn't going to see the point, simply because they're not going to take advantage of the transfer rate it allows; with a SATA III, whether in M.2 or SATA format, we're more than enough... and in my personal opinion, better SLC or MLC than later ones, but it already depends on whether what one prioritizes is durability or the wallet.

Regarding distribution, the OS, usual applications and virtual memory can go on the same drive without any problem, and thus leave an SSD exclusively for games that benefit from it (which are not all), and the library of "My documents" (be careful with that, because it benefits us a lot to have it in a different place from the OS drive, but not a mechanical disk since the games usually save and load from there.)

In the mechanical ones, multimedia, restore points, and other junk.

At least, that's what I would do.

[kiquenet2]

Thanks for the replies. Yes, I meant HDD.

I compiled this to take into account:

Read the specifications of your motherboard in Storage, since the m.2. connection usually disables some sata or pci-e.
The m.2. nvme ssd is worth it if you are going to work with very heavy files, many gigas, or for constant reads and writes. If not, you won't get the most out of it, you won't notice it in performance.

If you are going to make good use of it, it will need a heat sink since they get pretty hot, causing throttling or in other words, low speed to keep working but with a loss of performance.

Other cheaper SSDs: offers of the WD Black SN750 at 80-90€ for 500gb.
The Sabrent Rocket are also a good option, except the Q (QLC) which is worse...