New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Is NVMe more superior than SSD to you?
Hello, I hope everyone is well.
Personally I like all my servers to run NVMe as the cost is almost identical to older SSD hardware.
The question is, would it influence the average Joe with their decision on choosing an NVMe or SSD provider for VPS?
Best Regards,
Iain
What's your preference?
- What disk?118 votes
- NVMe59.32%
- SSD28.81%
- Standard HDD11.86%
Comments
NVMe all the way!
No matter what disk hdd, ssd, nvme. If you run dedicated server than yes, if you are on vps - you will not sense any difference except price
Always NVMe. Performance different is huge and Customers like performance.
Since when was the cost for an old SATA SSD identical/close to the cost of a NVMe drive? Lol
At this time, a decent NVMe is about 2x as expensive as an SSD with the same capacity. Considering that NVMe's perform much better than SSDs it may be a good investment to some people. On personal desktops, I don't think it's worth it, as there are many real life benchmarks showing that it doesn't have many benefits. But for VPS/Shared servers it may be worth it.
For benchmark junkies, NVMe all the way.
For everyone else, whatever works within their budget.
My personal approach is: a relatively small NVMe for the OS and programms and hot data, and cheap raided spindles for the rest.
Reason: very few really have hundreds of GB or even TBs of hot data, say a database. So why waste money on having /usr/share/doc, backups, rarely used ("cold") data, and whatnot being insanely fast?
That said for a cheap VPS I don't care at all.
If my shared/VPS provider is offering NVMe with better I/O than SSD at same price of SSD then only I'll go for NVMe, or else SSDs are good for VPS/shared sites.
I have one m.2 nvme and one m.2 sata on my laptop. Both of them good models. The performance difference in not only noticable, it is huge. NVMe all the way.
In benchmarks my XPS 13 is much faster than any SATA SSD at 2.4GB/s read 1.7GB/s write, but in real world usage there is no difference unless reading/writing large files, which for me is never and even so, the difference is only a few seconds even then.
NVMe at a similar or the same cost as SSD is a no-brainer. I would expect a lot of customers would actually pay ~10% uplift to use NVMe over SSD.
Most definitely NVMe. The performance is so much better, and you can actually feel the difference on heavy load servers.
NVMe is very expensive. I think 300% extra price comparing to SSD.
Wrong question. NVMe is interface specification, SSD is type of storage.
Too little storage for NVMe. SSD should be the norm now.
Standard HDD all day!!!!
Specially for the storage servers.
I think when raid on cpu becomes more mature it would be a nonsense to run anything but NVMe (unless big storage is your goal) R10 NVMe can do some 8GB/s + all day
Another attempt, short version: RAM. Get more RAM. That's almost always more relevant than NVMe vs SSD (or even vs. spindles).
Longer version: We are in a $7 max. community, so even if NVMes were just 10% more expensive than SSD OPs question wouldn't make a lot of sense. Last time I looked NVMe was about 150% to 250% the price of SSD ...
And then speed isn't the only and sometimes not even the most important factor. NVMes can for example (usually) not be plugin replaced from the outside which means that if one needs to be replaced downtime will be longer which for quite some use cases is a big NoGo.
Next, what are you actually doing? If the database behind your web server is 500 GB, say 10 GB of which are indexes then - as quite often - "get more RAM and get fast RAM" is almost certainly the most reasonable answer.
So, how many of you do have tens of TB of data which ALL must be as quickly available as possible? And before you answer think well about how your OS deals with disks and many other factors.
And btw if you happen to run anything based on a script language or multithreading or mysql - which probably is about 90+% of you - this whole thing is just absurd.
(Dear providers: Not only do I understand you but I even commend those of you who are publicly favouring NVMe due to its speed (minus high-reliability use cases) but as a customer my perspective is naturally different from yours. Plus I'm not stupid enough to seriously expect a newest gen. high end Xeon, 3 GHz DDR4 and NVMe for max. 7$/month).
I think when you factor in SSD usually comes with raid 10 ( that means a minimum of 4 SSD) while NVMe are mostly offered without any redundancy. So, if NVMe cost 2x of SSD you still end up cheaper. That's my understanding. I could be wrong though
No. You are badly mistaken. An NVMe IS a SSD; it's just usually faster (chips/controller) and more importantly it's linked differently (not SATA but typically via PCIe). Oh and at least in most system you can't have more than 2.
Neither "comes with Raid 10" and both can be put into a Raid. NVMe is more expensive because of the faster chips & controller, because the smaller form factor & because it's the big trend (and many people are very easy prey for marketing and will happily repeat the wisdom of the marketing people ...)
You missed the context of my post.
Most LET host provide SSD with Raid 10.
NVMe packages on the other hand usually doesn't come with that sort of redundancy when offered here.
@jsg Was that meant for me? I stated that they were both SSDs, just one being SATA and the other being a NVMe drive.
Because NVMe is more expensive.
No, not for you. You were right.
I sincerely wish dat were tru.
A propos Raid 10: The 0 in that 10 simply speaking just means speed (roughly doubling) and only the 1 means redundancy.
Considering that NVMe is typically about 4 (3 to 6) times faster than SSD one could calculate like this: 2 NVMe with Raid 1 cost about the same as 4 SSD with Raid 10 but still are much faster. Looking at it that way going NVMe might indeed be a reasonable solution for the kind of providers who formertimes offered SSD Raid 10 - same redundancy, same price, about double the speed.
The excption is high redundancy+high availability because to switch a broken NVMe one typically has to shut down the server and to open the case. But probably for cheap VPS that's acceptable.
On a dedi though I'd stick with SSD (just Raid 1) and add plenty RAM. More bang for the buck.
Could we store data on SSD, and use the whole NVMe as swap? Who needs RAM anyway?
If you care about clients, you'd better look for issues in your network, than reading let and wht. It is addictive, but customers should not suffer from your addictions
Which location? I haven't had any network issue on tele.
They've been blocking 2525 port (and probably others) for 12+ hours (used for sendgrid and other esp)
Unable to send any email.
Anyway sorry for offtop, lets discuss nvme.