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
Sn3akr - Monday, April 25, 2016 - link
8$ is just too little of a difference and will not make a difference in a build as such.. I only see this as being implemented in finished machines from manufacturers, so that they can pop another 8$ in their pocket. Aftermarket.. Doubt it will sell a lot.Maybe i would use it in a HTPC, since it's not something that requires a lot of R/W operations once it's booted up
slowdemon21 - Thursday, April 28, 2016 - link
I noticed PNY & OCZ BENCHED IN THE MIDDLE, Sammy on the bottom [loser]Ahmad kassem - Sunday, May 1, 2016 - link
Is it ok to make more than one partition on this ssd or any other ssd?wayneclaassen - Thursday, May 5, 2016 - link
Well I needless to say I found the Samsung EVO 250GIG extremely reliable although it is a bit expensive, but for anyone that mostly run high performance graphics this price tag shouldn't be a big problem.Bulat Ziganshin - Saturday, May 7, 2016 - link
1. 750 may be a hit for developing markets. in particular i've seen 750 reviews on russian sites much earlier than here:fcenter/online/hardarticles/hdd/38770-Samsung_SSD_zadeshevo_obzor_Samsung_650_i_Samsung_750_EVO
2. Can you please add to your reviews checks of gc/trim effect and slc cache size as in the section
3dnews/931062/page-2.html#Деградация%20и%20восстановление%20производительности
eduard.fisic - Sunday, June 5, 2016 - link
Billy, when you guys run the benchmarks, are the Samsung Evo drives run with RAPID Mode on or off? Just out of curiosity, as I am looking to buy the 850 Evo and I'd like to know if I can expect this sort of performance without having to turn on RAPID Mode. Thanks!jason_brody - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link
Can anyone help if I should go with this SSD or 850 series for my Dell E6500?elzafir - Tuesday, April 11, 2017 - link
The 250GB 840 EVO is $15 cheaper where I live compared to the 750 EVO of the same size. Which one should I get?Manisthisunreal - Friday, October 13, 2017 - link
Notice because of all the fatmouths saying they'll "wait until it is cheaper" the industry has now colluded to up the prices and make up some bs excuses of "low demand" "commodity trader speculation on minerals". Yes we can blame stock traders for a lot of things like high oil prices, high wheat and other food goods prices but come on I smell something fishy. I was about to buy a 250gb Samsung SSD on black Friday for $60 almost two years ago when some idiot shopper woman decided to merge into me when I was on my way home from work leading to a 15 month nightmare. I never did make it out to get my ssd. Fast forward almost 2 years later and they've doubled in price. I really wanted that.