Worth to buy SATA 6 Gbps PCI Express SATA Controller Card

[prasad9920]

Hi,

I am having Asus M2N68-AM plus mother with expansion slots

1 x PCIe x16
1 x PCIe x1
2 x PCI

I want to install SSD but installing SSD over 3 Gbps SATA not worth therefore I am thinking to buy 6 Gbps SATA controller card but I do not know that SATA controller will support above expansion slot or not and is it worth to do that or go for higher motherboard.:hmm:

 

[JM Popaleetus]

A controller card to support the speed you're looking for will likely cost more than a new motherboard... And unless you put it on the x16 slot, you're not going to see any improvement in throughput versus just using the 3Gbps ports.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

A controller card to support the speed you're looking for will likely cost more than a new motherboard... And unless you put it on the x16 slot, you're not going to see any improvement in throughput versus just using the 3Gbps ports.

I think you need at least x4 slot capability for any decent SATA-III controller.

I have two such controllers installed for my server on a card that needs x4, but I even think PCI-E version 1.0 still clips the SSD performance.

The OP doesn't seem to have any slots of opportunity for the contemplated controller upgrade. And two SATA (-II ??) ports on the motherboard doesn't exactly look promising either. He'll either settle for ~300 MB/s, or update his whole system -- whether to Intel or with AMD.

The only thing I can think of requires him to take advantage of any onboard video, which I can't tell is there from the spec sheet. [I'll only wade through so much in searches to get insight here]. If he had onboard video and he wanted to do that, he might be able to use the x16 slot.

It's not something I ever tried to do, but I'm contemplating it for a server I have. And in no hurry to try -- just to be disappointed.

 

[OlyAR15]

Installing an SSD on a SATA 2 is still going to be faster than a mechanical hard drive.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Installing an SSD on a SATA 2 is still going to be faster than a mechanical hard drive.

Way faster. You loose a bit of burst speed with SATA2, but nothing anybody will ever notice outside of benchmarks.

I once had a netbook (Pentium SU4100 + 3GB RAM) to which I added a cheap 40GB X25-V SSD. That's about the slowest SSD ever produced, and it was still leaps and bounds beyond the factory 5400RPM HDD.

 

[Charlie98]

Installing an SSD on a SATA 2 is still going to be faster than a mechanical hard drive.

^^^This. I wouldn't complicate things with an add-on card and possible problems with drivers. I speak from experience.

 

[you2]

It depends how you use the ssd; for small files/random access the ssd is wickedly fast compared to the traditional hard drive (usually 20x to 100x). For 'bulk' transfer only the very fastest ssd are as fast or faster than hard drives.
-
The problem with pcie sata controller is finding a 'fast' one that does not include hardware raid. You don't want hardware raid because it adds a lot to the cost. However, if such a beast can be found it will be cheaper than a new mother board. I found one that has good reviews but haven't used it myself for $20 but do not want to list it here since I ahve not tested it myself (my need is that I need 2 addiitonal sata ports).
-
Btw this is a good time of year to buy ssd as high-end consumer ssds are going for .55 to .50 cent a gig - models that have very long warranty and generally recommended are sandisk extreme pro, samsung 850 pro and samsung 840 pro - the first two have 10 years warranty - all of them have a maximum number of write cycles. If you want something cheaper you can find reliable models but a bit slower for .40 cent or .30 cent a gig such as m550 and sandisk extreme ii. I personally have a dislike for 840 evo but a lot of folks like them.

 

[PingSpike]

Here's a good article on this subject:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/storage-controller-performance-ssd,3540.html

 

[Railgun]

And unless you put it on the x16 slot, you're not going to see any improvement in throughput versus just using the 3Gbps ports.

Absolutely incorrect. All you need is a x2 slot at the 2.0 spec to beat a SATA3 port. Most higher end cards are x8 at most, with the newer ones running at 3.0 as opposed to 2.0 pci-e spec.

This for example...and hardly the cost of a new mobo...

 

[JM Popaleetus]

Absolutely incorrect. All you need is a x2 slot at the 2.0 spec to beat a SATA3 port. Most higher end cards are x8 at most, with the newer ones running at 3.0 as opposed to 2.0 pci-e spec.

This for example...and hardly the cost of a new mobo...

And what x4 slot is the threadstarter going to put that in? Moreover, the card you linked is limited to x1 bandwidth.

I suggest you actually read everything before you mark claims as "absolutely incorrect".

 

[you2]

I have not used this card but it is pci-2 and $40 with decent reviews:
(specific model is PEXESAT322I since there are several of them)

http://www.amazon.com/StarTech-PEXES...ds=PEXESAT322I
-
One guy with an evo 840 claims to obtain sustained read/write rate of 400+MB/s which if true is pretty decent.

 

[Railgun]

And what x4 slot is the threadstarter going to put that in? Moreover, the card you linked is limited to x1 bandwidth.

I suggest you actually read everything before you mark claims as "absolutely incorrect".

I went out of context. Fair enough. :thumbsup:

 

[mikeymikec]

I have not used this card but it is pci-2 and $40 with decent reviews:
(specific model is PEXESAT322I since there are several of them)

http://www.amazon.com/StarTech-PEXES...ds=PEXESAT322I
-
One guy with an evo 840 claims to obtain sustained read/write rate of 400+MB/s which if true is pretty decent.

I've used a similar (new, 6Gbps) Startech PCIE AHCI SATA card, however a board like the OP's is only going to support PCIE v1.x, which means the performance will be way lower than 400MB/sec.

I've just used said card in a Core 2 Duo era PC to give it AHCI support, and the speeds that ATTO tops out at are something like 220MB/sec read and 120MB/sec write, using a 850 Pro 256GB SSD (so there's no chance that it's the SSD slowing things down). I'm using the msahci driver as I didn't find any improvement with the Marvell drivers that card comes with (as well as those drivers occasionally BSOD'ing, the msahci one is fine).

I find it weird that these cards aren't made with say x4 connectors at least to make the most of the bandwidth in as many scenarios as possible. I can understand that PCIE era boards are likely to have a spare x1 slot available, but they're also pretty likely to have a larger slot available. The only time that card is even vaguely likely to make use of >3Gbps bandwidth would be if it's installed with a board (probably) new enough to already have its own 6Gbps ports.

 

[WT]

Any PCIe SATA III controller card will also add significantly to your boot times, so if you like how fast your PC boots with an SSD, don't add a controller card to get faster SATA III speeds !
I was eying up the Syba Hyperduo PCIe x4 card just like OP for my old MSI 790x-G45 board, but deemed it to not be worth it due to the hassle.