Random Read Performance

Our first test of random read performance uses very short bursts of operations issued one at a time with no queuing. The drives are given enough idle time between bursts to yield an overall duty cycle of 20%, so thermal throttling is impossible. Each burst consists of a total of 32MB of 4kB random reads, from a 16GB span of the disk. The total data read is 1GB.

Burst 4kB Random Read (Queue Depth 1)

The Optane SSD 900P doesn't break the record for QD1 random reads, but only because we've also tested the 32GB Optane Memory M.2, which is about two microseconds faster on average for each 4kB read. The Optane SSD 900P is still about 7 times faster than any flash-based SSD.

Our sustained random read performance is similar to the random read test from our 2015 test suite: queue depths from 1 to 32 are tested, and the average performance and power efficiency across QD1, QD2 and QD4 are reported as the primary scores. Each queue depth is tested for one minute or 32GB of data transferred, whichever is shorter. After each queue depth is tested, the drive is given up to one minute to cool off so that the higher queue depths are unlikely to be affected by accumulated heat build-up. The individual read operations are again 4kB, and cover a 64GB span of the drive.

Sustained 4kB Random Read

When longer transfers and higher queue depths come into play, the Optane SSD 900P passes the Optane Memory M.2 and remains more than 6 times faster for random reads than any flash-based SSD.

Both Optane devices more or less level off at queue depths of 8 or higher. The Optane SSD 900P saturates at about 1800 MB/s while the Optane Memory tops out around 1300 MB/s. The Samsung 960 PRO 2TB hasn't caught up by QD32, and doesn't surpass the QD1 random read performance of the Optane SSD until the Samsung reaches a queue depth of about 8.

Random Write Performance

Our test of random write burst performance is structured similarly to the random read burst test, but each burst is only 4MB and the total test length is 128MB. The 4kB random write operations are distributed over a 16GB span of the drive, and the operations are issued one at a time with no queuing.

Burst 4kB Random Write (Queue Depth 1)

The burst random write performance of the Optane SSD 900P is slightly higher than the Intel SSD 750 1.2TB, and about 14% faster than Samsung's fastest.

As with the sustained random read test, our sustained 4kB random write test runs for up to one minute or 32GB per queue depth, covering a 64GB span of the drive and giving the drive up to 1 minute of idle time between queue depths to allow for write caches to be flushed and for the drive to cool down.

Sustained 4kB Random Write

With higher queue depths in play, the Optane SSD 900P scales up faster than the Intel SSD 750 1.2TB, leaving the Optane SSD with a 7-10% lead over the Samsung 960s and Intel 750.

Samsung's 960 PROs and the larger 960 EVO all trail slightly behind the Optane SSD's random write performance for queue depths 1 to 4, then the Samsung drives level off and leave the Optane SSD with a substantial performance advantage at high queue depths. The Intel 750 is slightly faster at QD1 and QD2, but saturates at an even lower performance level than the Samsung 960s.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Light Sequential Performance
Comments Locked

205 Comments

View All Comments

  • Meteor2 - Tuesday, October 31, 2017 - link

    I always switch to 'read comments as a single page'
  • mapesdhs - Tuesday, October 31, 2017 - link

    I've used the scroll wheel so much, I had to buy a new mouse... :}
  • Rektide - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link

    Does the P4800X self-destruct/go-read-only after it reaches the advertised 20.5 PBW endurance?

    That's twice what a Samsung 850 Pro managed in a stress test, but the Pro is a consumer class device. The idea that I'd buy some fancy enterprise drive that would stop operation the second it's endurance rating is over makes me fume.
  • mkozakewich - Monday, October 30, 2017 - link

    From what I've heard, they never stop. At that point, they'll be out of warranty, but they'll continue to work at poorer and poorer performance levels.
  • FwFred - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link

    I see the comments are 50/50 impressed vs not impressed by this review. I also see that ddriver is 50% of the comments 😂
  • Notmyusualid - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link

    @FwFred

    Indeed. I thought the drive was amazing. I guess ddriver read some other article.
  • todd.nonja - Monday, October 30, 2017 - link

    I needed a good laugh after wading through the muck that ddriver has been spewing. Thanks for that!
  • mapesdhs - Tuesday, October 31, 2017 - link

    Definite lol marker point. :D
  • iwod - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link

    The price is much cheaper then I thought!. For what it is capable of I think this is actually cheap. This is a first gen ( third ? ) product. So i expect there should still be lots of headroom for improvement. But i still struggle to find the use of it in normal day to day computing.

    While latency is extremely important, you dont want your system to Jank or halt, but newer SSD is nearly avoided the problem. And as NAND gets cheaper ( Which isn't happening.... ) and better controller, I would call this problem solved.

    SSD continues to uses less power, something that is important in Laptop market. And for 99% of our workload we are no longer limited by I/O. As shown in the benchmark with very little performance improvement, why should i get a Optane is an question that needs better answer from Intel.

    What i think will be interesting, is the use of Optane SSD on Database server, with those kind of latency, Random Read Write, and Endurance, it think this is going to be a gigantic leap forward.
  • DanNeely - Friday, October 27, 2017 - link

    Yup. I was expecting it to be several times more expensive. Still more than I'd be willing to spend if building a new system but only; only because I don't think I could live with only half a TB for long before running low on space, and I don't want to do the multiple drives thing again. (I currently have about 400GB used on a 1 TB SSD). 2nd/3rd gen in 2-4 years when I build my new system I could see dropping $500ish for a ~2TB model if it exists then.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now