Hacking Question Is there any difference in performance between sysNAND vs. emuMMC?

[Gabriel2Silva]

This is just out of curiosity. There's a random dude saying there's more benefit in using a sysNAND CFW setup vs. using an emuMMC setup (which is obviously what I use today, keeping my sysNAND clean and my backup safe). His main points is that the sysNAND is faster (in terms of performance) and more stable when compared to the emuMMC. Not only that, he states there's a 40MB/s vs. 250MB/s difference between both (and I have no idea where he got such info) and that a sysNAND CFW setup is better for the longevity of his microSD card. I'm no specialist, but I know my way around Switch modding and I never heard any of these things being pointed out anywhere. Is there ANY performance difference between sysNAND vs. emuMMC?

 

[fvig2001]

I feel emummc is slightly slower but you barely notice it unless you swap between both often. emuMMC becomes terrible for games if the card isn't fast enough like I had an issue with some video heavy games skipping that isn't encountered on the nand for that switch.

 

[Rahkeesh]

On emummc I noticed slower wakeup from sleep and stuff like Octopath would freeze a bit on the save screen, so yeah it can matter. Also my SD card died (locked due to not being able to write) while failing to install things with DZfoil while using emummc. So I've since sworn off emummc, but then I didn't find Nintendo online to be worthwhile to me...

 

[tabzer]

This is just out of curiosity. There's a random dude saying there's more benefit in using a sysNAND CFW setup vs. using an emuMMC setup (which is obviously what I use today, keeping my sysNAND clean and my backup safe). His main points is that the sysNAND is faster (in terms of performance) and more stable when compared to the emuMMC. Not only that, he states there's a 40MB/s vs. 250MB/s difference between both (and I have no idea where he got such info) and that a sysNAND CFW setup is better for the longevity of his microSD card. I'm no specialist, but I know my way around Switch modding and I never heard any of these things being pointed out anywhere. Is there ANY performance difference between sysNAND vs. emuMMC?

I use sysNAND and emuMMC both very heavily and there is no noticeable difference. I use this Samsung card.

 

[thesjaakspoiler]

Those 250MB/s and 40MB/s are only theoretical speeds.
The eMMC (where the sysNAND is stored) isn't that fast.
And if you have make sure you get a good SanDisk or Samsung card then those speeds will be about the same.
With a non brand SD card the emuMMC can be a horrible experience though.
When buying an SD card, check all the markings to see how fast it really is :
https://www.sdcard.org/developers/sd-standard-overview/speed-class/

 

[ZachyCatGames]

The eMMC is around 200MB/s with sequential reads in HOS, partition based emuMMC seems to max out at around 70-80MB/s with a good sd card.
Random reads on my Samsung eMMC are around 20MB/s iirc, emuMMC will vary between sd cards.
You likely wouldn’t notice much of a difference in practice though, unless you have a super shitty sd card.

Using sysMMC will result in less writes to your sd card, so yes, it is better for the card’s longevity.

 

[Draxzelex]

This is just out of curiosity. There's a random dude saying there's more benefit in using a sysNAND CFW setup vs. using an emuMMC setup (which is obviously what I use today, keeping my sysNAND clean and my backup safe). His main points is that the sysNAND is faster (in terms of performance) and more stable when compared to the emuMMC. Not only that, he states there's a 40MB/s vs. 250MB/s difference between both (and I have no idea where he got such info) and that a sysNAND CFW setup is better for the longevity of his microSD card. I'm no specialist, but I know my way around Switch modding and I never heard any of these things being pointed out anywhere. Is there ANY performance difference between sysNAND vs. emuMMC?

Theoretically, sysMMC is faster than emuMMC because the eMMC has a faster speed than most SD cards which is where he is probably getting the numbers from. While in practice, you may encounter such differences, it is better for the SD card to use sysMMC than emuMMC for obvious reasons.

 

[pwjpssdfvqyuhweuxx]

Wouldn't running HOS from the SD Card theoretically slow down the whole reading performence? As HOS is constantly reading files?

 

[tabzer]

Wouldn't running HOS from the SD Card theoretically slow down the whole reading performence? As HOS is constantly reading files?

A lot of processes are localized to RAM, so once it's loaded, it makes no difference. The biggest difference I ever noticed was in the loading of an actual game SDCard vs eMMC. But it was not a big difference. It can be measured though.

 

[Zkajavier]

In emunand if your sd card is too slow or not formatted correctly you will find areas where Save actions occur to sometimes cause slowdowns or temporary freezes, as well as the time needed to load some games which can be made even longer if you're using mods or specific sysmodules. Other than that it's quite the same in terms of performance. Once a game is loaded it runs perfectly fine.

 

[pwjpssdfvqyuhweuxx]

weird. I have a Samsung Evo+ SD Card, partition based emummc and have formated the SD Card using Hekate, yet I get texture loading and sound not playing or atleast being heavingly delayed (1 sec at most) in Dying light sometimes
I thought that that maybe switching over to SysMMC would help here...