• doodledup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Nvme is terrible value for storage density. There is no reason to use it except when you need the speed and low latency.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 hours ago

      There’s a cost associated with making that determination and managing the storage tiering. When the NVME is only 3x more expensive per amount of data compared to HDD at scale, and “enough” storage for OS volume at the chepaest end where you can either have a good enough HDD or a good enough SDD at the same price, then OS volume just makes sense to be SSD.

      In terms of “but 3x is pretty big gap”, that’s true and does drive storage subsystems, but as the saying has long been, disks are cheap, storage is expensive. So managing HDD/SDD is generally more expensive than the disk cost difference anyway.

      BTW, NVME vs. non-NVME isn’t the thing, it’s NAND v. platter. You could have an NVME interfaced platters and it would be about the same as SAS interfaced platters or even SATA interfaced. NVME carried a price premium for a while mainly because of marketing stuff rather than technical costs. Nowadays NVME isn’t too expensive. One could make an argument that number of PCIe lanes from the system seems expensive, but PCIe switches aren’t really more expensive than SAS controllers, and CPUs have just so many innate PCIe lanes now.