Sequential Read Performance

The sequential read test requests 128kB 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, and the drive is filled before the test begins. 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.

Iometer - 128KB Sequential Read

The 2TB 960 Pro's low queue depth sequential read speed is about 300MB/s faster than the 950 Pro, once again giving Samsung the clear lead in performance and showing that the 960 Pro is significantly better than the 950 Pro where thermal limits are a factor.

Iometer - 128KB Sequential Read (Power)

The 960 Pro consumes more power than its predecessors, but given the high performance it is the most efficient drive for this workload.

The slight drop in performance beyond QD1 indicates that the 960 Pro is still thermally limited for most of this test, and that like the 950 Pro it may perform much better with a heatsink.

Sequential Write Performance

The sequential write test writes 128kB 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, and the drive is filled before the test begins. 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.

Iometer - 128KB Sequential Write

Thermals are an even bigger factor for the sequential write test than for sequential reads. The 960 Pro is 60% faster than the next fastest M.2 SSD and almost catches up to the RD400A with its thermal pad behind the controller allowing it to use its adapter card as a heatsink.

Iometer - 128KB Sequential Write (Power)

The 960 Pro's power consumption is only slightly higher than its M.2 competitors and far less than the RD400A. Given the performance, this makes the 960 Pro by far the most efficient SSD on this test, with about 30% higher performance per watt than the next most efficient drive.

The QD1 performance of the 960 Pro is substantially higher than during the rest of the test where the drive is continuously thermally limited. The power consumption is only slightly higher at QD1 as the drive is able to spend a bit more power before its temperature gets up to the limit, then the drive reaches equilibrium at around 4.4W.

Random Performance Mixed Read/Write Performance
Comments Locked

72 Comments

View All Comments

  • hansmuff - Wednesday, March 15, 2017 - link

    I have to try the 2.0 driver; thanks for your comment! I only installed the 2.1 driver for my 960 pro and it was faster, but DPC went to all shit.
  • WarVance - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link

    "...a more thorough comparison of how NVMe drivers and operating system versions affect performance will be coming in the future."

    Has this been published? I'm very interested in just such an analysis. I recently obtained an Intel 750 400GB card and want to know all about the ideal driver setup under Windows 10 and possibly 7.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now