Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > uk.comp.os.linux > #23717

Re: Here we go again

From Davey <davey@example.invalid>
Newsgroups uk.comp.os.linux
Subject Re: Here we go again
Date 2025-09-05 23:49 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <109fpea$2n103$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (3 earlier) <lRh*hRHlA@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> <1099rhn$18ptm$1@dont-email.me> <lRh*94HlA@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk> <109bq2b$1lg6g$2@dont-email.me> <109ces1$1sb4s$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 17:30:57 +0100
Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> wrote:

> On 04/09/2025 11:35, Davey wrote:
> > I am not familiar with all this, but I have identified the
> > following:
> > https://cpc.farnell.com/kingston/snv3s-2000g/ssd-nv3-m-2-2280-pcie4-0-
> > nvme/dp/CS37703?st=pcie%20to%20pci for the new SSD.
> > Then a choice:
> > For the SATA-USB adapter, possibly, at £9.78:
> > https://cpc.farnell.com/startech/usb3s2sat3cb/lead-sata-to-usb-with- 
> > uasp/dp/CS34473?st=ssd%20to%20usb%20adapters
> > or at £28.48:
> > https://cpc.farnell.com/startech/usb312sat3/adapter-usb3-1-10gb-s-sata- 
> > ssd/dp/CS30219?st=ssd%20to%20usb%20adapters
> > I do not see why there is such a price difference, unless one gets
> > what one pays for.  
> 
> It's probably that the more expensive adaptor works with 3.5" drives, 
> and they have different power requirements. The page you linked to
> does say that a power adaptor is included.
> 
> 2.5" drives (whether SSD or spinning rust) need only 5V.
> 
> > Looking for an M2-USB adapter, I found, for £42.38:
> > https://cpc.farnell.com/startech/m2-usb-c-nvme-sata/enclosure-usb-c-to-m-2-nvme-sata/dp/CS35447?st=m2%20to%20usb%20adapters
> > which looks as though it would do both jobs (not at the same time,
> > of course).  
> 
> Both jobs? It'll house your M.2 NVMe drive (and would work with an
> M.2 SATA drive) but won't work with a 2.5" SATA drive. Different
> interface.
> 
> Nice that it comes with both USB-A and USB-C cables ... but I'm
> guessing you only need the former?
> 
> It looks a little expensive, too. Have a look at:
> 
> https://www.scan.co.uk/products/sabrent-ec-snve-usb32-type-c-enclosure-m2-pcie-nvme-sata-ssd-tool-free-10gbps-speeds-plug-and-play-a
> 
> or for that matter:
> 
> https://business.currys.co.uk/catalogue/computing/P219238P
> 
> which is perhaps an older version of the one you found?
> 

Ok. So I can go for the
https://www.scan.co.uk/products/sabrent-ec-snve-usb32-type-c-enclosure-m2-pcie-nvme-sata-ssd-tool-free-10gbps-speeds-plug-and-play-a
for the nvme SSD.

And the
https://cpc.farnell.com/startech/usb3s2sat3cb/lead-sata-to-usb-with-uasp/dp/CS34473?st=ssd%20to%20usb%20adapters
for the 2.5" SSD SATA drive.

The manufacturer, PCSpecialists, offers a replacement for the primary
drive of 2TB HDD, for £70, or a 4TB SSD for £324! Or a straight
replacement 1TB SSD for £48. I am not keen on going back to a physical
HDD, but if that the 2TB HDD the best solution, so be it. I prefer to
use something provided by them, as that removes a big uncertainty, as I
am not comfortable in this world!

If it all works, then once the new HDD is installed, then I can use the
two original SSDs in their new external homes and, assuming I can
actually mount them to the PC, I can then grab what I need, item  by
item, from them and transfer to the new 2TB HDD onboard, and process
the data in there
Correct?

All help much appreciated.

--
Davey.

Back to uk.comp.os.linux | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-02 11:03 +0100
  Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-03 08:57 +0100
    Re: Here we go again Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-03 16:49 +0100
      Re: Here we go again Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-09-03 17:21 +0100
        Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-03 17:48 +0100
          Re: Here we go again Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-09-03 18:20 +0100
            Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-03 20:10 +0100
            Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-03 20:50 +0100
            Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-04 11:35 +0100
              Re: Here we go again Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-04 17:30 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-04 19:52 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-05 23:49 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-08 11:50 +0100
                Re: Here we go again "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2025-09-08 16:11 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-08 17:28 +0100
                TRIM (Was: Here we go again) Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-15 16:00 +0100
                Re: TRIM (Was: Here we go again) Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-15 17:30 +0100
                Re: TRIM Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2025-09-17 08:43 +0100
                Re: TRIM Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-17 10:30 +0100
                Re: TRIM Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-17 11:05 +0100
                Re: TRIM Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-17 15:12 +0100
                Re: TRIM Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-17 15:54 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-09 09:04 +0100
                Re: Here we go again "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2025-09-09 12:19 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-09 18:03 +0100
                Re: Here we go again "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2025-09-09 22:02 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-10 00:14 +0100
                Re: Here we go again -Update Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-11 17:12 +0100
                Re: Here we go again -Update Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-21 16:10 +0100
                Re: Here we go again -Update "Vincent Coen" <VBCoen@gmail.com> - 2025-09-22 01:41 +0100
                Re: Here we go again -Update Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-22 09:29 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-10 12:43 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2025-09-08 21:33 +0100
              Re: Here we go again Daniel James <daniel@me.invalid> - 2025-09-04 20:07 +0100
                Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-05 02:47 +0100
          Re: Here we go again Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> - 2025-09-03 23:46 +0000
            Re: Here we go again Davey <davey@example.invalid> - 2025-09-04 09:36 +0100
        Re: Here we go again Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> - 2025-09-03 23:31 +0000

csiph-web