PCMark 7

PCMark 7's secondary storage benchmark does little to show us differences between modern, high-performance SSDs as everything here scores within 5% of one another - but that's the point. For most mainstream client uses you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between two good 6Gbps SSDs. Worry more about cost and reliability than outright performance if you're considering an SSD for a normal machine. Anything you see here will be much faster than a mechanical drive.

PCMark 7 Secondary Storage Score

Performance Over Time & TRIM

Over time SSDs can get into a fairly fragmented state, with pages distributed randomly all over the LBA range. TRIM and the naturally sequential nature of much client IO can help clean this up by forcing blocks to be recycled and as a result become less fragmented. Leaving as much free space as possible on your drive helps keep performance high (20% is a good number to shoot for), but it's always good to see how bad things can get before the GC/TRIM routines have a chance to operate. As always I filled all user addressible LBAs with data, wrote enough random data to the drive to fill the spare area and then some, then ran a single HD Tach pass to visualize how slow things got:

The 840 Pro is really no different than the 830 when it comes to how low performance can get in the worst case scenario. Client users will want to keep some free space on the drive to avoid getting backed into this type of a performance corner. TRIM will obviously help and looks to be fully functional on the 840 Pro:

AnandTech Storage Bench 2011 - Light Workload Power Consumption
POST A COMMENT

96 Comments

View All Comments

  • iwod - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - link

    True but i think there will be a bottleneck somewhere else once we hit certain number of Random Read. Anand already has results that any more then 40~50MB/s random wrote give us any more benefits. I think it would be similar for Random Read as well although we have so far not reach that point yet.

    Of coz these results are with today's software. Things could be different again when we reach that limit.
    Reply
  • leboon - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link

    Thanks for the review. I must say that the random comments interspersed throughout the article about the regular 840--which isn't even being reviewed-- seemed rather strange and out of place.

    On topic though, this new Samsung drive looks very promising and I'm looking forward to grabbing one of them when they're released, to breathe new life into an aging laptop.
    Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link

    That's because we didn't get any information about the regular 840 until a few hours before the NDA was lifted, but at least I feel like it was still important to note that such drive exists.

    There will be a review ASAP though. I just came back to my hotel room and found a gift box with a 250GB 840 in it :-)
    Reply
  • nathanddrews - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link

    "Joy!"

    -Stimpy
    Reply
  • Grok42 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link

    Quit yammering and get to testing and writing! I'm guessing that is the 840 non-pro? Never mind, don't answer that, just focus. Reply
  • dishayu - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link

    Active power : 0.068W

    Surely this has to be a mistake? I can't imagine any drive today with such low active power today.
    Reply
  • DanNeely - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link

    I'd like to know what Samsung's measuring for that number too; Anand measured the 840 pro an order of magnitude higher during write operations. Unless that number is just for the controller and not for the flash too there's something not right about the gap between that number and what AT's measuring. Reply
  • iwod - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link

    I think that is only the controller. You have to include the LP-DDR2 as well.

    Its Working power is still higher then Intel. Although i dont like sammy, i hope the final product will be even better then this.
    Reply
  • LGrill - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link

    I was thinking the same thing. Reply
  • ssj3gohan - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link

    This is completely correct. Anandtech and basically every other review site out there measures power consumption wrong: they measure it while *not* booted into an OS that supports SATA power management. With DIPM (device initiated power management) enabled, the drive should hit this power consumption easily.

    Same goes for pretty much every other SATA SSD these days. They're all well below 0.3W idle except for Sandforce drives. For instance, all Intel drives (intel- and marvell-based) are about 75 to 100mW idle.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now