Latitude E5470 M.2 Question

I have an E5470 with a stock 240gb Intel m.2 drive currently (not NVMe). I'm looking at a 500gb WD blue m.2 drive as an upgrade in space but I also see they have the WD Black NVMe drive in the same size for quite a bit more, but maybe worth it for the speed. Is my e5470 NVMe compatible? It has the i7 6820hq processor and Intel graphics. If it doesn't support NVMe and runs at the same speed I already have, I'll just get the WD blue.

 

The difference would be a matter of milli-seconds, so just go with the WD Blue anways (also 100th comment!)

 

Well, no, not necessarily. NVMe is quite a lot faster than the SATA 3 m.2 drive that is in there now. I know the NVMe drive will physically fit, but if the machine isn't going to support NVMe and run the drive still at SATA 3 speeds it's definitely not worth paying more for something it can't utilize. However, if it is capable of supporting NVMe, now would be the time to pay a bit more and put an NVMe drive in since I'm upgrading anyways.

 

The 5470 supports NVME -- I've recently put an 512GB Intel 760p in mine (same processor and graphics) and it runs great; seems to actually run a bit cooler than the 1TB Sandisk X400 SATA drive.

If you don't have an existing NVMe drive, it's advisable to get the heat sink and pad (about $9 on ebay if you're in the US - Dell part number is DPN: 01X2MT and here is the seller I bought from: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Dell-Latit...-Heat-Sink-bracket-1X2MT-SCREWS-/253032880489 ) I don't know if it's a 4-lane PCI-e or 2-lane, but it's much faster and the latency difference vs. SATA will be the same.

It's perfectly safe to run it without the heat sink but with some drives you can see thermal throttling so it's not recommended.

The newer version of the WD Black gets very good reviews. Keep in mind there is a older version which may be out there, which was not especially well regarded.

For a lot of things, the difference between SATA and NVMe won't be noticeable, but if you're a programmer, the search/indexing and build times going through a lot of small files are dramatically faster on NVMe.

 

I never said NVME is slower than SATA, I just said the difference in the real world would be the matter or milliseconds.

 

I know one of the lists someone had online says the 5470 with an H processor only has 2 lanes, so I’m assuming NVMe wouldn’t be that much faster in this machine vs one with 4 lanes. For the most part it’s double the cost from 512gb sata to 512gb NVMe.

I’m thinking maybe just the WD Blue then as Grant suggested. I don’t do anything too file intensive and I have no issues with the speeds of the Sata 3 right now, just looking for more space.

Newegg lists a 500gb Black that looks newer and a 512gb Black that looks a little older for cheaper, I’m assuming the cheaper Black drive is the one you mentioned being not very well regarded. Amazon has the same Blue drive as Newegg for the same price, I think I might order from Amazon since I have Prime still.

Ahh, I see what you are saying now. Sorry.

 

I was able to get a much better price locally on the 760p than on Amazon, so it was more like 50% higher, but yeah, the Amazon prices on NVMe are pretty steep.

If so, you're probably better off saving the money and/or spending the extra on a 1TB drive rather than NVMe.

I haven't followed SATA ssds in a while as all the name brand ones are pretty good at this point. The 1st-generation WD Blue was a rebranded Sandisk X400 and was a very good drive for 2016 (I ran the X400 for about 2 years until I just go the 760p) and the new one with 3D flash should be a better performer.

 

I got the WD Blue 2TB a couple of months ago as I wanted more storage space and willing to accept that it might not be quite as fast as the only alternative (Samsung) but was more affordable. Here's the CrystalDiskMark test result.


Any performance difference between current SATA SSDs is small. However, given that higher capacity drive with more empty space will be better with the garbage management then it could well prove the better choice in the long term even if its performance is slightly worse.

John

 

Here's the stock Intel SSDSCKGF240A5 240gb results:

I'll order the 500gb WD Blue drive later this week and try to post the same test on that drive if I remember. Thanks for the help guys.

 

Got the WD m.2 500gb drive installed. Here are the benchmark results: