The Samsung 750 EVO (120GB & 250GB) SSD Review: A Return To Planar NAND
by Billy Tallis on April 22, 2016 8:00 AM ESTRandom Read Performance
The random read test requests 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test spans the entire drive, which is filled before the test starts. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.
All the Samsung drives are crowding the top of the chart for low queue depth random read speeds, and the 750 EVO is way ahead of any other planar TLC drive here.
With power usage in the middle of the pack, the 750 EVO and 850 EVO are some of the most power-efficient drives on this test, but drives like the Plextor M6V are still at the top of the efficiency ranking.
 |
|||||||||
In addition to offering great performance at low queue depths, the 750 EVO scales up to reach higher speeds at QD32 than any non-Samsung drive, without power consumption getting out of hand.
Random Write Performance
The random write test writes 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test is limited to a 16GB portion of the drive, and the drive is empty save for the 16GB test file. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.
Taking capacity into account, the 750 EVO provides much better random write speeds than any other planar TLC drive, and the 250GB model is competitive against many MLC drives.
The 750 EVO is high-performing for a TLC drive but at the cost of requiring more power than most planar TLC drives and much more than the 850 EVO.
 |
|||||||||
The 120GB 750 EVO shows almost no scaling with queue depth, while the 250GB needs a queue depth of at least two to reach full performance. By contrast, the 120GB 850 EVO shows a little bit of performance scaling from QD1 to QD2 and the 250GB 850 EVO doesn't hit full performance until QD4.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
109 Comments
View All Comments
DanNeely - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
The cheap SSD will still blow the spinning rust in the other crappy TN 720p laptop out of the water.jabber - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Yeah amazing how limited people's imaginations are when it comes to hardware and other peoples usage needs. Unless it's pushing 2GBps it's junk. Tedious people. If every laptop in the world with a cheap 5400rpm HDD in it swapped to one of these 'bottom of the barrel' Samsung SSDs, it would be a revelation. Make my job of support a lot easier and faster.Movieman420 - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
Keep in mind, launch prices are always a bit high. Sammy could sell em for less at retail...but they're really not after retail with the 750...they wanna move em in bulk minus retail packaging costs. As far as performace, they're just right...for the intended market. As a budget OEM part, the vast majority of end users (80% maybe?) will fall in Anands light bench metric where this drive makes a pretty good showing. Any better would risk cannibalizing EVO sales. Overall, this product and placement was well thought out by Samsung...as usual....and from a performance standpoint a lil over-provisioning goes a long way. I'm assuming it's not compatible with magician's RAPID mode...unless say your a huge oem customer who'd pay a tad extra and make it a performance offering in more expensive lappys with enuff ram.
iwod - Friday, April 22, 2016 - link
What we need to know is final street price, not launch price.Because as it stand i have Zero reason to buy them. It needs at least a 50% price cost.versesuvius - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
As long as Samsung is clearing unused chips from its stock, it could just offer these drives for $25 each to make a gesture of good will towards its existing customers and make some new ones too.The_Assimilator - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Good to see you're "revieiwng" this drive. Could you maybe consider reviewing a spellchecker and/or editor in future?zodiacfml - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
Cheapest option but purchased separately, $10 difference is not worth it.The perrformance of the 850 is useful for most people savvy enough to replace drtives.
serendip - Saturday, April 23, 2016 - link
$10 may be a big BOM savings for large system builders but it's pocket change for consumers looking to upgrade from a hard drive. This drive probably isn't aimed at you :)I wouldn't trade $10 for half the write longevity and potentially other issues from using planar TLC. The 850 Evo is still the king and the Sandisk Ultra II is also a good deal when it goes on sale.
Peroxyde - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
How is the Corsair LE compared to 850 EVO, 750 EVO? In terms of reliability?odedia - Sunday, April 24, 2016 - link
According to Amazon.com, this drive is currently more expensive then the 250gb 850 Evo. Makes zero sense to buy this today. maybe in a year it will be priced accordingly.