M.2 SSD for OS or MFS2020

[Sabre57 46]

I'm adding a gen4 m.2 ssd to my system.  I already have mfs2020 and the OS on a separate SATA SSDs. 

What would be the better option; use the m.2 for the OS or for the simulator?  

I'm not concerned about initial load times.

Would mfs2020 performance increase due to faster loading of scenery during flight if it was on the m.2?   

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,798]

I think this is one of those test it both ways and see what happens scenarios.

[Nedo68 533]

22 minutes ago, Sabre57 said:

I'm adding a gen4 m.2 ssd to my system.  I already have mfs2020 and the OS on a separate SATA SSDs. 

What would be the better option; use the m.2 for the OS or for the simulator?  

I'm not concerned about initial load times.

Would mfs2020 performance increase due to faster loading of scenery during flight if it was on the m.2?   

With my experience the OS loading time is the same as with a conventional SSD.

The full advantage of a m.2 only starts when you have to process huge amounts of data quickly,

editing photos or movies as an example. I have no experience running games on it, but i doubt it

will work better then a standard ssd.

[devgrp 1,233]

I haven't done any testing but I have msfs installed on a 1tb nvme ssd and windows on a 500gb nvme. Both runs great. If you can install msfs on the nvme 

[Tinribs 52]

I got this as a 2nd M2 connected to my motherboard. Purchased just to install MSFS2020 to, with room for any extras.

Addlink S70 2TB SSD NVMe PCIe Gen3x4 M.2 2280 Solid State Drive with Read 3500 MB/s Write 3000 MB/s

This M2 drive has very good reviews across the net. Amazon UK £263

[ChaoticBeauty 6,692]

M.2 SSDs can use either the SATA or NVME interface, I guess in this case you'll want to take advantage of the NVME speeds.

If your SSD has good flash, a capable controller and ample capacity, then install both the OS and the simulator on it. Good SSDs are very consistent until they are nearly full.

Also if you want a PCIe 4.0 SSD, I would wait a little more as better models will be released in the next few months. Western Digital will be unveiling a new Black drive in two days, and E18 models have already started making their appearance. The current crop of PCIe 4.0 drives use repurposed controllers made for the PCIe 3.0 generation and will not give you the full advantage of the interface. They are not bad, but somewhat overpriced.

[RaptyrOne 1,402]

I recently purchased an nvme to add to my system. I have set it up with Windows on the Nvme and MSFS on its own dedicated SSD (which was previously my Windows boot drive). Although m.2 / nvme are way faster on paper and in benchmark tests, in reality, you will be hard pressed to notice the difference in speed. I would put Windows on the M.2 and MSFS on the SSD though. Load times are nearly identical but Windows is what is ultimately managing your PC - give it the power. Don't expect to be wowed though.

[G-RFRY 1,710]

If you run full streaming mode i don`t you will any difference. 

[Sabre57 46]

Thanks for the feedback!

[CJ1045 469]

I have both Windows 10 and MSFS install on my single 1TB NVME SSD and they both fly. Much faster than conventional SSD. Load times of both much faster. It really makes a difference when loading up new flights in MSFS.

CJ

[Bob Scott 7,719]

3 hours ago, Sabre57 said:

Would mfs2020 performance increase due to faster loading of scenery during flight if it was on the m.2?   

I've tried it with both a 1TB Samsung 860 Pro SATA III SSD and a 1 TB Samsung 970 Pro NVME SSD, and there was no discernible difference in loading time or performance, despite the fact that the NVME drive has something like 14x faster throughput on paper.  Sims use lookahead caching for scenery, which means that scenery data is read from storage into RAM long before it's needed, so SSD throughput is a non-issue for frame rate.  Loading the sim does not just involve reading the data from storage; it entails a lot of processing of the scenery data, so faster storage throughput beyond the speed at which the CPU can process it does not translate into faster loading time.

[RJC68 823]

I initially started with MSFS on a 4TB 7,200 rpm WD Black drive (This is the drive I use for my Ortho scenery for X-Plane 11) Load times were long but the sim did generally run well. There were some stutters when new scenery loaded which I expected. On Sunday I installed a 1TB WD Blue NVME and moved the installation of MSFS to this drive. Loading is obviously way faster and I do also find there are less scenery loading stutters, I am though trying with the rolling cache disabled.

All in all I am very happy with the sim and the way it is now running. 

[Phantoms 800]

I have two NVMe M.2 drives, a 500GB (with the OS) and a 2TB (with the games/programs) in addition to a 500GB SATA drive (docs/downloads/pictures/videos/etc.).

If I had to choose between a single NVMe for either the OS or  the Simulator, I think I'd just go bigger and get one for both. Then you could use your current SATA drive for docs/pics/video/downloads/etc.

Edited October 6, 2020 by Phantoms

[stubbornswiss 38]

Running a 2TB Samsung 970 Evo Plus NVMe M.2 with both the OS and MSFS installed on it.

Sim load times are pretty good, and this arrangement works for me.

[wthomas33065 994]

At this point, your bottleneck will be your internet connection.