ATTO - Transfer Size vs Performance

I'm keeping our ATTO test around because it's a tool that can easily be run by anyone and it provides a quick look into performance scaling across multiple transfer sizes. I'm providing the results in a slightly different format because the line graphs didn't work well with multiple drives and creating the graphs was rather painful since the results had to be manually inserted cell be cell as ATTO doesn't provide a 'save as CSV' functionality.

Intel SSD 750 1.2TB (PCIe 3.0 x4 - NVMe)

 

AS-SSD Incompressible Sequential Performance

I'm also keeping AS-SSD around as it's freeware like ATTO and can be used by our readers to confirm that their drives operate properly. AS-SSD uses incompressible data for all of its transfers, so it's also a valuable tool when testing SandForce based drives that perform worse with incompressible data.

Incompressible Sequential Read Performance

Incompressible Sequential Write Performance

TRIM Validation

The move from Windows 7 to 8.1 introduced some problems with the methodology we have previously used to test TRIM functionality, so I had to come up with a new way to test. I tested a couple of different methods, but ultimately I decided to go with the easiest one that can actually be used by anyone. The software is simply called trimcheck and it was made by a developer that goes by the name CyberShadow in GitHub. 

Trimcheck tests TRIM by creating a small, unique file and then deleting it. Next the program will check whether the data is still accessible by reading the raw LBA locations. If the data that is returned by the drive is all zeros, it has received the TRIM command and TRIM is functional. 

And as expected TRIM appears to be working.

Mixed Read/Write Performance Final Words
Comments Locked

132 Comments

View All Comments

  • knweiss - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link

    Kristian, you wrote "for up to 4GB/s of bandwidth with PCIe 3.0 (although in real world the maximum bandwidth is about 3.2GB/s due to PCIe inefficiency)". Is this really true? PCIe 2.0 uses 8b/10b encoding with 20% bandwidth overhead which would match your numbers. However, PCIe 3.0 uses 128b/130b encoding with only 1.54% bandwidth overhead. Could you please explain the inefficiency you mentioned? Thanks in advance!
  • DanNeely - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link

    The real world number includes the bandwidth consumed by PCIe packet headers, NVME packet headers, NVME command messages, etc. Those are over and above the penalty from the encoding scheme on the bus itself.
  • IntelUser2000 - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link

    The 4GB bandwidth takes into account the encoding scheme.

    Each lane of v1 PCI-Express had 2.5GT/s so with 8b/10b encoding you end up with 2.5G/10 = 250MB/s. Quadruple that for four lanes and you end up with 1GB/s.

    v2 of PCI-Express is double that and v3 of PCI-Express is further double that and there is the 4GB number.
  • aggrokalle - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link

    i'm interrested in this as well...so how many nand-channels got the 1.2tb and 400gb version Kristian?
  • tspacie - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link

    Was there an approximate release date?
  • gforce007 - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link

    When will these be available for purchase? Also I have a m.2 slot on my motherboard (z10PE-D8 WS) Id rather utilize the 2.5 15mm form factor. I am a bit confused. I dont think that board has SFF-8639. Is there an adapter. Will that affect performance? I assume so and by how much?
  • knweiss - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link

    The motherboard (host) end of the cable has a square-shaped SFF-8643(!) connector. E.g. ASUS ships an M.2 adapter card for the X99 Sabertooth that offers a suitable port. SFF-8639 is on the drive's end.
  • emn13 - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link

    That endurance number is scarily low for a 1.2TB drive. 70GB a day for 5 years - thats about 128 TB of writes total, and that's just 100 drive writes! Put another way, at around 1GB/sec (which this drive can easily do), you'd reach those 100 drive writes in just 36 hours.

    Of course, that's an extremely intensive workload, but I sure hope this is just intel trying to avoid giving any warrantee rather than an every remotely realistic assessment of the drives capabilities.
  • p1esk - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link

    This is a consumer drive. What's your use case where you write more than 70GB a day?
  • juhatus - Friday, April 3, 2015 - link

    Raw 4k video and its not even close to being enough.

    At 4K (4096 x 2160) it registers 1697 Mbps which equals 764 GB/hour of 4K video footage. A single camera large Hollywood production can often shoot 100 hours of footage. That’s 76 TB of 4K ProRes 4444 XQ footage.

    The upcoming David Fincher film GONE GIRL crept up on 500 hours of raw footage during its multi camera 6K RED Dragon production. That equates to roughly 315 TB of RED 6K (4:1) footage. Shit just got real for data management and post production workflows.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now