SSD comparison for gaming in 2025: PCIe 5.0 vs 4.0 vs 3.0 vs SATA vs HDD

What type of drive are you using to run your games from?

  • SSD PCIe Gen3

    Votes: 9 13.8%
  • SSD PCIe Gen4

    Votes: 42 64.6%
  • SSD PCIe Gen5

    Votes: 8 12.3%
  • SATA SSD

    Votes: 1 1.5%
  • HDD

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Floppy disks

    Votes: 5 7.7%

  • Total voters
    65

winjer

Member
TLDR, as long as you are using a PCIe SSD, it doesn't really matter.



NSTTgNzmOBN7exJP.png
 
Wasn't this supposed to change with direct storage or whatever it's called?

I have 2 Gen 4 M.2s in my pc, but I probably won't upgrade for a really long time since there's never really any noticeable benefits. Same reason why I still have 16GB of RAM. Unless I upgrade my CPU and therefor motherboard I don't see the benefit.
 
Wasn't this supposed to change with direct storage or whatever it's called?

I have 2 Gen 4 M.2s in my pc, but I probably won't upgrade for a really long time since there's never really any noticeable benefits. Same reason why I still have 16GB of RAM. Unless I upgrade my CPU and therefor motherboard I don't see the benefit.
Games are probably still CPU limited. You need to resolve game logic before loading to SSD, so the bottle neck is the CPU rather than the asset streaming.
 
Wasn't this supposed to change with direct storage or whatever it's called?

I have 2 Gen 4 M.2s in my pc, but I probably won't upgrade for a really long time since there's never really any noticeable benefits. Same reason why I still have 16GB of RAM. Unless I upgrade my CPU and therefor motherboard I don't see the benefit.
DirectStorage is trash. We should have all known not to trust a gaming software technology powered by Microsoft.
 
Mix of Gen3, Gen4, and SATA drives. I never notice any difference except for the occasional game needing a few extra seconds on SATA.

It's never mattered ingame.
 
My X470 board is only Gen 3 so my Gen4 SSD is limited to that, still seems plenty fast when needed for games. Also got a big SATA SSD for most games and a 5TB HDD for old games and general storage for other stuff. It's usually only big releases or UE5 games where I notice much of a difference between the M2 & SATA SSD.
 
Both of my M.2 slots are Gen 4. got a 1TB and a 2TB. (The Lenovo motherboard book says the slots take up to 2TB? Is that a thing? A size requirement? I can't put anything bigger in those slots? Wha?)
 
On PCs, this has always been a reality...

I think it's a problem with the "IBM-PC" standard, because if it were real software, they could have already created at least a Tech demo on Linux to demonstrate the superiority of NVEm (~7 Gbps) compared to a SATA SSD (500 Mbps).

Again, in my opinion, Microsoft is to blame.

They spent ~100 billion to keep the Xbox getting the same games, but they haven't invested in a solution similar to the PS5 for PC in partnership with AMD and Intel.

Something like Apple, which integrated the SSD controller directly into the CPU, something along those lines.

Microsoft, Intel, and AMD got together and created a standard for this. Microsoft fixed Windows to work well with it, while AMD and Intel integrated "SSD" accelerators into the CPUs.
 
I've always wondered if it would be worth upgrading my M.2, considering that there will come a point where, even with the new technology being twice or three times as fast, you won't really notice the difference between a Windows that takes 0.5 seconds to load compared to one that loads in 0.2.

Well, if the game has a 0.2s stutter with a 500mbps sata sdd and no stutters with a 7gbps nvem, you will notice.
The point of SSD should be streaming data while you play and not so much loading.
 
I have a 512gig Gen4 for Windows, because it was cheap (Crucial P5 Plus, it was like 40€). Games go on my 2TB Gen3 drive (SN750) which I shucked out of a WD Black P50. Lol

I have been thinking about upgrading to a 2 or 4TB SN850x and use the SN750 as an OS drive, but I don't see any games stuttering, so I just don't feel like upgrading. Lol
 
Just upgraded my PC towards pci-e 5.0 motherboard. i sticked with a pci-e 4 drive i already had because honestly there is no difference and the price for a new 2tb 5.0 would cost me 240 euro's. So no thanks.
 
Last edited:
I have 2 x 2TB, 1 x 4TB, all GEN4, and a 4TB SATA SSD.

Actually, I think one of 2TB is Gen3 but I can't tell any difference.
 
Last edited:
There's no actual game on the market that takes truly advantage of what Sony was selling at the start of the gen. Some games load faster on ps5, but marginally so.

You're fine even with a normal SSD. Hell, I remember that even old HDD still managed to load modern games just fine.
 
There's no actual game on the market that takes truly advantage of what Sony was selling at the start of the gen. Some games load faster on ps5, but marginally so.

You're fine even with a normal SSD. Hell, I remember that even old HDD still managed to load modern games just fine.

Yep. I fell for Cerny's marketing. I mean....that voice and those eyes, who wouldn't?

mark_cerny.png
 
gen3 and sata

didn't fall for the gen4 meme I'd have to upgrade my CPU to Rocket Lake to use that slot and no way in hell am I using any Intel platform after Comet Lake
 
There are games where this does matter. For example, in Star Wars: Outlaws on an SSD, it takes a couple of seconds to stream high-resolution textures.

However, I think anything above NVMe 3.0 is uncessary for gaming. My motherboard has PCIe 5.0, but I still bought an NVMe 4.0 drive. A read speed of 7000 MB/s is more than enough for games.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom