SanDisk Extreme Pro SSD (240GB, 480GB & 960GB) Review: The Fastest Just Got Faster
by Kristian Vättö on June 16, 2014 4:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Storage
- SSDs
- SanDisk
- Extreme Pro
Performance Consistency
Performance consistency tells us a lot about the architecture of these SSDs and how they handle internal defragmentation. The reason we don’t have consistent IO latency with SSD is because inevitably all controllers have to do some amount of defragmentation or garbage collection in order to continue operating at high speeds. When and how an SSD decides to run its defrag or cleanup routines directly impacts the user experience as inconsistent performance results in application slowdowns.
To test IO consistency, we fill a secure erased SSD with sequential data to ensure that all user accessible LBAs have data associated with them. Next we kick off a 4KB random write workload across all LBAs at a queue depth of 32 using incompressible data. The test is run for just over half an hour and we record instantaneous IOPS every second.
We are also testing drives with added over-provisioning by limiting the LBA range. This gives us a look into the drive’s behavior with varying levels of empty space, which is frankly a more realistic approach for client workloads.
Each of the three graphs has its own purpose. The first one is of the whole duration of the test in log scale. The second and third one zoom into the beginning of steady-state operation (t=1400s) but on different scales: the second one uses log scale for easy comparison whereas the third one uses linear scale for better visualization of differences between drives. Click the buttons below each graph to switch the source data.
For more detailed description of the test and why performance consistency matters, read our original Intel SSD DC S3700 article.
 |
|||||||||
| SanDisk Extreme Pro | SanDisk Extreme II | Intel SSD 730 | Intel SSD 530 | OCZ Vector 150 | |||||
| Default | |||||||||
| 25% Spare Area | |||||||||
Similar to the Extreme II, the IO consistency is just awesome. SanDisk's firmware design is unique in the sense that instead of pushing high IOPS at the beginning, the performance drops close to 10K IOPS at first and then rises to over 50K and stays there for a period of time. The higher the capacity, the longer the high IOPS period: the 960GB Extreme Pro takes ~800 seconds before the IOPS drops to 10K (i.e. the drive reaches steady-state). I do not know why SanDisk's behavior is so different (maybe it has something to do with nCache?) but it definitely works well. Furthermore, SanDisk seems to be the only manufacturer that has really nailed IO consistency with a Marvell controller because Crucial/Micron and Plextor have had some difficulties and their performance is not even close to SanDisk.
However, I would not say that the Extreme Pro is unique. Both Intel SSD 730 and OCZ Vector 150 provide the same or even better performance at steady-state, and with added over-provisioning the difference is even more significant. That is not to say that the Extreme Pro is inconsistent, not at all, but for a pure 4KB random write workload there are drives that offer (slightly) better performance.
 |
|||||||||
| SanDisk Extreme Pro | SanDisk Extreme II | Intel SSD 730 | Intel SSD 530 | OCZ Vector 150 | |||||
| Default | |||||||||
| 25% Spare Area | |||||||||
 |
|||||||||
| SanDisk Extreme Pro | SanDisk Extreme II | Intel SSD 730 | Intel SSD 530 | OCZ Vector 150 | |||||
| Default | |||||||||
| 25% Spare Area | |||||||||
TRIM Validation
To test TRIM, I filled the drive with sequential data and proceeded with 60 minutes of 4KB random writes at queue depth of 32. I measured performance with HD Tach after issuing a single TRIM pass to the drive.
TRIM works for sure as the write speed is at steady 400MB/s.
.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
85 Comments
View All Comments
Highlanderix - Thursday, June 26, 2014 - link
Well, I don't understand very well how or why the SanDisk Extreme Pro and SanDisk Extreme II finish in front in AnandTech Storage Bench 2013 when it seemed to me that Samsung 840 Pro outperforms the SanDisk Extreme II by some distance (according to other websites) in terms of 4K write I/O operations. I saw 90K against 30K for the SanDisk in one test and 90K against 60K in another.Is it the mix of both types of operation (read/write) that makes the difference or is the AnandTech Storage Bench 2013 using more intensively non-4K read/write operations where perhaps the SanDisk SSDs perform better ? And would it be possible to have some results for the Samsung 840 Pro 256Gb in AnandTech Storage Bench 2013 please if the SSD is still available for testing ? :) Thanks :)
Highlanderix - Thursday, June 26, 2014 - link
And finally, I hesitate between the SanDisk Extreme Pro 256Gb (150€ here in France) and the Samsung 840 Pro 256Gb (165€). 10 year warranty sound really good but which one is better in terms of pure performance ? Which one should I take ?Phreedom1 - Sunday, June 29, 2014 - link
I don't understand. In this review it says that the Sandisk Extreme Pro is the fastest SSD available yet when you go to the "Bench" area of this website, pick the Extreme Pro and put it up against something like the Samsung 840 Pro, the Samsung wins in many of the benchmarks. Even when put up against the Sandisk Extreme II the newer Extremem Pro loses out in many of the marks. I'm just looking for the all around fastest 240/256GB SSD but it seems every site I go to has a different opinion.himem.sys - Monday, June 30, 2014 - link
Some people complain about real-world difference between ssd drives (because drives are fast enough). Nah, thay arent :). I can tell that my 240GB hyperx is better than most 7k rpm drives, but its a turtle wgen compared to ramdrive. I cutted off 25GB partition from 32Gb of total memory to do some special things and i see huge difference. Installation a windows 2012 r2 with sql 2012 on hyper-v? Its a matter of minutes (i7 3770 @ 4.1). Benchmarks? Who needs them when you have powershell [get-counter -Counter '\process(_total)\io data operations/sec']. I used ramdrives on dell r820 filled with ram and can tell this: the slowest part of pc/server is and will be cpu :).Tornadotuan - Friday, July 8, 2016 - link
Hi Hardware Community,I know this article is quite outdated right now, nevertheless the actual topic of the authors "Final Words" bug me right now. Especially now that enough time for longtime-endurance tests has passed.
Anyway, I can´t choose between the Samsung EVO 850 1TB v2 (289€) and die SanDisk Extreme 960GB (281€).
So pricewise the "Pro" is even cheaper right now compared to the Samsung. But there are some obvious differences:
- TLC 3D V-NAND vs. MLC Planar
- 5 years vs. 10 years warranty
- 150 TBW vs. 80 TBW
- higher Peak vs. consistency
- Samsung Bugging vs. sudden death drives
My usage:
- Client for everything: gaming, programming, office, multimedia - averything
- gonna split it in system and data-partition
- gonne be in laptop that´s used as desktop
- battery is wasted, so no concern about power consumption
So, usually I use hardware until it´s broken so meaning about 8-10 years.
Still I want steady performance without sudden decline in speed like with the EVO 840 :C
I´d be really glad, if you could tell me your opinion on this :)