the guy building the PC for my son is a very knowledgeable guy and i originally had a 256gb SSD for the OS and Apps, but he told me to spend the extra $30 on the NVMe drive, which to be hones i was not sure why, but i did it anyway, as he built his own 1800X PC recently and also has an NVMe drive for the OS and Apps.... most applications default their cache and other misc files to the os drive. so it can be simpler to keep them there and avoid changing multiple settings in several programs. using the super fast m.2 drive as the os drive in that situation can sometimes give a small performance boost in some programs to help with running os/apps/cache etc on one drive. the motherboard you picked only supports one superfast m.2 ssd, so you need to be using it in a way to get the most out of that drive, which again is media and cache. those samsung 960's are so fast that its even possible to use one drive for everything, as long as it all fits. I also read Matt Bach's comment about not needing an SSD for Exports, and that a normal Hdd will be fine, and the Source/Project files should be on at least a 500gb SSD. exports are typically limited by the cpu and or gpu having to process data. so a dedicated export drive typically isn't needed unless exporting out to very high bitrate formats like picture sequences or uncompressed. in some of those rare situations even a sata ssd isn't enough, but most people don't export to those formats. i'm not sure why he recommended at least a 500gb, other than capacity and possibly for speed. ssd's are typically faster as they increase in size, and 500gb ssd's are usually near the upper speeds. I also read somewhere to move Page files off the OS drive, and put that elsewhere, like on a 256gb SSD along with the Media Cache ??? so i am a bit confused. setting up the pagefile on another drive is something carried over from using hdd's and i wouldn't worry about it with an ssd. one of the regulars here, bill, has done some testing and found that os/apps/pagefile/cache on a sata ssd typically has very little impact on performance with premiere. Also, what is a "Scratch Disk" as a lot of people use this term ??? i think its a broad term and used in different programs for different meanings, but in general i would associate a scratch disk to a cache and/or preview disk. in premiere, the project settings actually has a tab named scratch disks. in that scratch disks tab it lists several locations for multiple functions, including captured video/audio, rendered previews, autosaves, and cc library downloads. I don't want him ringing me to tell me he is having issues and it turns out to be that 1060 6gb GPU, especially given the poor results in that Pugets Systems link i posted earlier, so i figure i may as well spend the extra $250 and get the 1070 8gb card. as i mentioned in your other post, its having less than 4gb of ram that could be a major show stopper. so the gtx 1060 gb is ok there as it has 6gb of ram. past that the gtx 1070 will handle more gpu based fx and color grading than the gtx 1060 before realtime playback suffers. if playback performance is bad enough, then rendering previews in premiere or cache in resolve can help, or with denoise fx its often best to disable them till ready to export. the puget article tests show the gtx 1060 performing ok in some results and poor in others, but you also have to remember that its paired with a 10-core intel cpu so the results will differ from the system you are building. if you are fine with spending the extra, i think the gtx 1070 is a good option for your build.
... View more