The Samsung 750 EVO (120GB & 250GB) SSD Review: A Return To Planar NAND
by Billy Tallis on April 22, 2016 8:00 AM ESTMixed Random Read/Write Performance
The mixed random I/O benchmark starts with a pure read test and gradually increases the proportion of writes, finishing with pure writes. The queue depth is 3 for the entire test and each subtest lasts for 3 minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. As with the pure random write test, this test is restricted to a 16GB span of the drive, which is empty save for the 16GB test file.
The 750 EVO outperforms any non-Samsung drive of similar capacity on the mixed random I/O test, and the 120GB 750 EVO even beats a few MLC drives with twice the capacity.
The 750 EVO has above-average power efficiency during the mixed random I/O test.
 |
|||||||||
Most drives lose performance during the middle phases of the mixed random I/O test. High performance scores on this test rely on performance bouncing back during the final phase of the test when the workload shifts to pure writes. The 750 EVO's spike at the end is noticeable though not huge, but it also benefits from comparatively good performance in the first two sub-tests.
Mixed Sequential Read/Write Performance
The mixed sequential access test covers the entire span of the drive and uses a queue depth of one. It starts with a pure read test and gradually increases the proportion of writes, finishing with pure writes. Each subtest lasts for 3 minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The drive is filled before the test starts.
Unlike for the mixed random I/O test, most MLC drives are able to maintain a clear performance lead over the planar TLC drives—including the 750 EVO.
The 750 EVO's power consumption is low enough that it is clearly the most efficient planar TLC drive, but its efficiency doesn't beat a typical MLC drive.
 |
|||||||||
The 750 EVO has great read speed, but it bottoms out at a relatively low level during the middle of the test and doesn't bounce back at the end as much as most MLC drives and the 850 EVO.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
109 Comments
View All Comments
jabber - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Yeah must admit I don't have the need or want to hoard masses of ripped off content. That is a psychosis I can do without. It just junk.Deelron - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
My wife has 200 GB of Life Event Photos/Videos going back 20+ years (and I'd imagine people with much better cameras then we had could have significantly more, particularly if they have a larger family) and there's not a bit of media on the machine. After OS and regular applications the minimum suitable single drive would be 480 GB, without a lick of pirated media.jabber - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Would that 200GB+ be better backed up safely somewhere than sitting on the main drive? Keeping masses of mainly dead/unused data on a day to day machine seems odd nowadays. There are systems better suited for that kind of data.Deelron - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
It's backed up locally (two he's that switch every month) and via cloud. It's not just "sitting" there any more then a physical photo album would be.Margalus - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
It has nothing to do with piracy.. My Steam folder alone is over 1GB.erple2 - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
I think that I have save games that are larger than 1GB.Eden-K121D - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
You mean 1TBMargalus - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
lol, yes. that is what I meant...
Lolimaster - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
It's simply because you didn't embrace internet. That kind of low storage needs is more of the pre-2000's.Between movies, tv series, some cartoons, anime, manga it's easy to need more than 1 6TB drive. I have 4x 6TB's right now.
jabber - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Yes but you appear to be 16 years aold. Some of us are over 30. If you are over 30 I see that as a cry for help.