Note: Our SSD testbed is currently producing suspiciously slow scores for The Destroyer, so those results have been omitted pending further investigation.

Note2: We are currently in the process of testing these benchmarks in PCIe 4.0 mode. Results will be added as they finish.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy

Our Heavy storage benchmark is proportionally more write-heavy than The Destroyer, but much shorter overall. The total writes in the Heavy test aren't enough to fill the drive, so performance never drops down to steady state. This test is far more representative of a power user's day to day usage, and is heavily influenced by the drive's peak performance. The Heavy workload test details can be found here. This test is run twice, once on a freshly erased drive and once after filling the drive with sequential writes.

ATSB Heavy
Average Data Rate
Average Latency Average Read Latency Average Write Latency
99th Percentile Latency 99th Percentile Read Latency 99th Percentile Write Latency
Energy Usage

The 250GB Samsung 980 PRO is a clear improvement across the board relative to the 970 EVO Plus. It still has some fairly high latency scores, especially for the full drive test run, but that's to be expected for this capacity class. The 1TB model seems to have sacrificed a bit of its full drive performance for in favor of a slight increase in empty-drive performance—the enlarged SLC caches are probably a contributing factor here.

Both drives show a significant reduction in energy usage compared to the older generation of Samsung M.2 NVMe drives, but there's still a ways to go before Samsung catches up to the most efficient 8-channel drives.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Light

Our Light storage test has relatively more sequential accesses and lower queue depths than The Destroyer or the Heavy test, and it's by far the shortest test overall. It's based largely on applications that aren't highly dependent on storage performance, so this is a test more of application launch times and file load times. This test can be seen as the sum of all the little delays in daily usage, but with the idle times trimmed to 25ms it takes less than half an hour to run. Details of the Light test can be found here. As with the ATSB Heavy test, this test is run with the drive both freshly erased and empty, and after filling the drive with sequential writes.

ATSB Light
Average Data Rate
Average Latency Average Read Latency Average Write Latency
99th Percentile Latency 99th Percentile Read Latency 99th Percentile Write Latency
Energy Usage

The Samsung 980 PRO does not bring any significant improvements to performance on the Light test. Peak performance from most high-end NVMe drives is essentially the same, and the only meaningful differences are on the full-drive test runs. Aside from a relatively high 99th percentile write latency from the 250GB 980 PRO, neither capacity has any trouble with the full-drive test run.

Samsung has made significant improvements to energy efficiency with the 980 PRO. Samsung's previous generation of M.2 NVMe drives were among the most power-hungry in this segment, with their performance potential largely wasted on such a light workload. The 980 PRO cuts energy usage by a third compared to the 970 generation drives, bringing them more into competition with other high-end M.2 drives. But as with the Heavy test, there's still a lot of room for improvement as illustrated by drives like the WD Black SN750.

Cache Size Effects Random IO Performance
Comments Locked

137 Comments

View All Comments

  • Billy Tallis - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link

    I don't expect PCIe 4.0 to provide any significant benefit to NVMe HMB operation. But widespread PCIe 4.0 support may eventually lead to low-end NVMe SSDs typically using just two PCIe lanes, and saving a bit more power that way.
  • anad0commenter - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link

    This is very disappointing. I guess we should expect 980 EVO to be QLC based next year.
  • kevin.mcc - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link

    This late in the game and being a "PRO" product, there are the 2TB and 4TB drives? Are people that are looking at the "PRO" line really that interested in sub-1TB drives these days? Especially 250GB drives?
  • XabanakFanatik - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link

    Nope. Nobody looking at the PRO drives was interested in TLC, either. The entire product is crap.
  • FXi - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link

    These things run hot. Be very careful what devices you put them into.
  • Billy Tallis - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link

    These drives generally put out less heat than Samsung's previous generation of NVMe SSDs, except in a few circumstances where the performance is much higher—and even then, they put out less thermal energy for the same amount of work.
  • fred666 - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link

    So in short there is basically very little benefit in moving from PCIe 3 to 4, even with this high end drive.
    Would have been interesting to see also a PCIe 2 x4 (or PCIe 3 x2) for comparison.
  • Billy Tallis - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link

    I do have a handful of results from the Samsung XP941 in Bench: https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2227?vs=26...

    That's a PCIe 2.0 drive, but uses AHCI instead of NVMe.
  • Luckz - Thursday, September 24, 2020 - link

    The type of NAND (and how it's accessed: using NVMe instead of AHCI) is more relevant than the connection itself.
    PCIe 3 is just one potential bottleneck. As you can read in the article multiple times, you'd really want multiple CPU cores and separated I/O queues to fully benefit from the increased bandwidth of PCIe 4.
  • Beaver M. - Wednesday, September 23, 2020 - link

    Good price. I rather buy this than a comparable EVO.
    Are they trying to change their branding or why is that?
    We might see a 980 "Ultra" and EVOs all getting QLC instead.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now