@ sparx:
Hello Martin,
welcome at Win-RAID Forum!
The BIOS of my ASRock Z97 Exreme6 doesn’t show the Intel 750 PCIe SSD either. Nevertheless it worked flawlessly and was bootable.
I don’t know, but - as I have written above - the BIOS may not show the PCIe connected Storage Devices.
Regards
Dieter (alias Fernando)
follow Fernando’s instruction …i’m able to boot intel 750 on GRYPHON Z87
Since I cannot see the pictures gtishtar wanted to post, here they are:
hi to all of you.
finally i get an intel 750
here is my first thoughts…
My system
Asus Sabertooth X79 + 3930k.
Samsung 830 x2 Raid 0
Intel 750 SSD
I use a second win install to clone C: from Raid0 to Intel 750 SSD
with Acronsi True 2015.
i have to said that after finissh 100 % acronis report some strange errors : Unable to some sectors.
after saying acrons to ingnore errors, i reboot and found in Boot List into bios
Window boot Manager (Intel 750)
and boot from there
here my bench
what do you think?
whats wrong about poor 4k QD32 write?
It was not a good idea to clone a system partition, which has been within a RAID array, into a "clean" SSD, which is not running in RAID mode at all.
It is fine.
I don’t know.
By the way: Anvils Storage Utiity and AS_SSD are better benchmark tools for SSDs than CrystalDiskMark.
that’s my finally test with x79
i think the main problem of this SSD is very low endurance and HIGH written data.
2 TB written in one day of tests and vmware working.
with my 830 raid 0 only 14TB in 2 years!
something is strange with internal written data of intel firmware.
so i think i will return to amazon… with only 127 TB endurance i will lost it in about 2 months!
bah… very bad intel …
it’s crazy only 70GB /day with 1,5 Gb/s you wll be out of day in 60 sec…
@ imsims:
Thanks for your interesting report.
Is there any proof for this statement?
I have read a lot of reviews about the Intel 750 Series SSD, but I have not yet seen any criticism about its missing endurance. The only negative point was always the extremely long boot time, but this issue seems to be caused by the NVMe initialization.
By the way: It is hard to believe, that Intel has thrown such bad SSD with such high price on the consumer market.
i read the whole thread, so if i undersand, no one can confirm that Intel 750 series SSD could be bootable on all X79 chipsets? I’m right or not?
I would like to buy one for my GA-X79-UD3, but if it does not work, i’ve lost lot’s of $$$$.
I’ve read that 13.x OROM can support these Intel 750???
How i can manage to be sure before buying??
Thanks for help
Ghostearth.
You are right, there is no guarantee, but imsims’s report verifies, that it is possible to boot off the Intel 750 SSD with an Intel X79 Chipset system.
Where did you read that? According to my knowledge the Intel RAID ROM resp. Intel EFI RaidDriver BIOS modules have nothing to do with the support of Intel’s 750 Series SSDs.
Thanks Fernando.
Here without proof :
http://forums.tweaktown.com/gigabyte/480…html#post497301
Ghostearth.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/s…-750-brief.html
70GB /day for 5 year = 127 TB.
moreover it seems that written data increase fastwe than my sam 830 raid 0.
as i said 2xRaid0 830 have 14TB data written from march 2012 more than 3 years (7TB each)
my new intel 750 as already 2 TB written in 2 days.
if i substract first 400gb of True Image disc clone
it takes about 1.5 TB data written win fresh win8.1 install , visual studio 2015 install, about 150gb /400 busy
and som benchk.
i think is too much fast data written grou up, and low endurance in datasheet 70GB /DAYS.
moreover intel is not saying the true as datasheet report same endurance for 400gb vers and 1.2TB version.
instead intel P3x00 datasheet report different endurance for different size version, as expected!
i will return to amazon next week, becouse at this speed i will get 127TB written in 6 months!
i think intel as get very poor nand to get comsumer low price.
last think intel P3600 400gb version cost about 650 euros so not much more,
but have 2.19 PB data written endurance! over 20 TIMES!
intel P3700 400gb about 900euros have 8 PBW endurance 40 times!
No, there is someone, who believes something, but doesn’t offer any proof for it.
There is no relationship between the Intel RST RAID ROM and/or the Intel RST driver version and the NVMe support.
It seems, that you misunderstood the Intel paper. How do you come to 5 years? That may be the warrenty given by Intel, but not the life time.
According to the paper Intel calculates the "Life Expectancy" to 1.200.000 hours (5 years have only 43.800 hours) on an average of 70 GB per day.
Look here:
Ok Fernando i believe you, thanks. i think i’ll be more patient and searching for a true statement for this compatibility, for now i’ll will buy a samsung 850 pro in replacement of my 840 pro.
Ghostearth.
sorry fernando, but you have confused ideas.
MBTF is not related to NAND !
Nand Endurence is the estimated Re-Write clycle Nand support before begin to replace sector as UN-WRITEBLE.
You must read Datasheet.
the 750 ones. :
p3600 ones 
bye!
As far as i am concerned there will be no official NVMe support in 8-Series chipsets cause their inner workings differ from those of the 9-Series.
The 9-Series natively supports M.2 whereas the 8-Series only supports mSATA/AHCI over PCIe. So it will never work to just simply insert the NVMe module. We have to wait for a board vendor to implement this into a old 8-Series, rip it out and hope that it could be inserted into a other vendors BIOS.
And as @ mr_nuub pointed out already: Maybe Haswell has PCIe Gen3 but the 8-Series chipset has "only" PCIe Gen2 which maybe could be a big headache if you have a NVMe monster SSD that floats the lanes. Also all available NVMe drives out there require at least PCIe Gen3.
But… hope never dies! 
It seems nowadays no one is bothering to read. Well, in this case it could be forgiven, as there is no link in the first post. But Fernando already tested on a 6 series board with success. CodeRush provided the backbone support, I only added a few details, Fernando did the test. In the meantime, user comes, user asks, user goes. Some had luck to have an OEM solution that kind of works, but I don’t see others stepping with feedback. Everyone wants it on a silver plate and to be safer than pushing a button, if possible.
This is not directed in any way to you, of course, but I’m tired of seeing users asking everything that comes to their mind without researching first or assuming the risks before asking. On top of that, there are some who come here for taking BIOS modules from UBU, take solutions related to BIOS/UEFI and add it to their work without a single credit, work which is monetized by donations or other methods. Sonix and CodeRush are valuable members and their work is a gold mine for any UEFI modder. There is a mutual agreement between this forum and Station-Drivers and credits are still written out, even if the sites are partnered. There are mentions between this site and MDL or bios-mods. But apparently this line of mutual sharing is not for everyone, some just like to keep all the credits for themselves.
I read all of it. (You also answered me in the VAIO thread and i read everything you linked there before 
… I spend most of my time on reading and research)
At the end Fernando states:
I also asked Fernando to put up a Wiki to collect all information at a central point so that someone doesn’t have to read through hundreds of threads (but it is very limited and the formatting gets cluttered). I really understand what you are saying and i am completely with you that most users just don’t spend any energy on reading. (like most aren’t interested in having a own opinion on this bullshit politics… but thats another topic…). If i have knowledge I share it just like i did with the modded BIOS for my Maximus II Formula on the Luxx Forum. I really understand what you are saying since i was once the head of a big site (god damn… we had a lot of god modders…) that was non-profit but there was another big player that just ripped our work without any credit (fuck you ingame!).
Give credit to those who deserve it. And i think everyone who’s contributing on this forum deserves it!
— Back To Topic —
You have to understand that i am a bit skeptical in the first place…
This is why I added “it could be forgiven”. I think Fernando should add links to reports (successful or not) to the main post, so users could just read and decide for themselves. I don’t remember if anyone else except Fernando tested with inserting the NVMe modules or if it “lived to tell the tale”, which is another good reason to have the feedback in first post.
As for NVMe support, there is no other way but to test with the same method. If it would be easy to decide before modding, then the information would definitely be in the first post. But since it is not, all we can do is guide the users on the process, to at least reduce the risk.
Done!
Thanks for the suggestion - you are absolutely right!