In looking at two m.2 drive specs they seem the same but cost difference is large
Clearly, I am missing something.....
They are not the same specs. You are confusing the fact that they are the same form factor (m.2) but need to undersand that that slot can use multiple specifications. The samsung drive is a Nvme drive where the Cruicial one is a SATA3 drive.
The Crucial is a SATA drive that fits in a M.2 slot. The Samsung is a "real" NVMe job that transfers data over all 4 PCIe lanes.
In practice you will have trouble telling them apart (unless you have non-standard needs, like you are pummeling a database all day). I'd recommend getting a normal Crucial SATA, but I don't worry so much about cable management. If/when things like the Samsung drop in price, I'd like to have my M.2 slot open (although some motherboards have both a "SATA only" slot along with a "PCIe slot" for just this issue).
ADATA had some interesting NVMe cards that split the difference, but they seem to have fallen off pcpartpicker (and newegg). I'm guessing their XPG6000 line is close enough to crucial to not bother with DRAMless anymore.
Yeah i read online NVME is a new technology that is much faster than Sata BUT i also read the NVME needs a compatible motherboard in order to access that tech fully. though that was just what i read in an article. so make sure your mobo can take full advantage of the nvme technology.
Ah....thanks guys; didn't pick up that difference.
Yes, I agree that for my uses (gaming and photo editing) the NVMe is a waste of money.
My plan is, during a system upgrade, is to do a clean W10 install on a 500GB SSD (I've seen differing opinions on whether 2.5" or M.2) with all the applications. A seperate drive will contain data.
Appreciate straightening me out.
If that is the case, maybe my plan does not make sense - a bit more detail: I currently have W10 and apps on an older Samsung 830 EVO 256GB SSD. My thinking was - why not upgrade to a newer SSD with more storage (and headroom) for W10 and apps. I assumed that the newer SSDs were faster than the 830 series...perhaps not?