Burst IO Performance

Our burst IO tests operate at queue depth 1 and perform several short data transfers interspersed with idle time. The random read and write tests consist of 32 bursts of up to 64MB each. The sequential read and write tests use eight bursts of up to 128MB each. For more details, please see the overview of our 2021 Consumer SSD Benchmark Suite.

QD1 Burst IO Performance
Random Read Random Write
Sequential Read Sequential Write

The WD Black SN850 turns in excellent scores on almost all of the burst IO tests. For random reads, it edges out the Intel SSD 670p to set a new record for flash-based SSDs, and even when testing beyond the bounds of any possible SLC caching it is only 2% slower than the MLC-based Samsung 970 PRO. For random writes the WD Black SN850 is slightly slower than the Phison E16 drive, but otherwise is s clear step up in performance from the rest of the field. When testing sequential transfers on a small slice of the drive, the SN850 is substantially faster than everything else, but when testing across 80% of the drive its sequential read performance drops dramatically and is beat by the Samsung 980 PRO and several of the faster PCIe 3.0 drives.

Sustained IO Performance

Our sustained IO tests exercise a range of queue depths and transfer more data than the burst IO tests, but still have limits to keep the duration somewhat realistic. The primary scores we report are focused on the low queue depths that make up the bulk of consumer storage workloads. For more details, please see the overview of our 2021 Consumer SSD Benchmark Suite.

Sustained IO Performance
Random Read Throughput Power Efficiency
Random Write Throughput Power Efficiency
Sequential Read Throughput Power Efficiency
Sequential Write Throughput Power Efficiency

On the longer random read test, the WD Black SN850 doesn't quite stand out from the best performance offered by other drives with newer flash. But on the other three workloads the SN850 is clearly superior, with significant performance leads over the rest of the competition. Its power consumption is consistently on the high side and in some cases it is drawing more than any of the other drives, but the performance is high enough that the efficiency scores are all good.

Random Read
Random Write
Sequential Read
Sequential Write

For random reads, the SN850 eventually ramps up to around 4GB/s or 1M IOPS at the end of the test, which is significantly faster than any other drive that we've tested so far on this new test suite. However, when testing across 80% of the drive instead of just a 32GB slice, the random read performance falls to roughly the same level as the Samsung 980 PRO.

For random writes, the SN850's performance scales up a bit quicker than the 980 PRO, but it hits a throughput limit sooner and the 980 PRO ends up being much faster for random writes to the SLC cache at high queue depth.

For sequential reads, the SN850 ends up slightly faster than the 980 PRO, but when testing across 80% of the drive the Samsung reaches full performance with a lower queue depth. For sequential writes the SN850 is again a bit faster than the 980 PRO and this time it doesn't need higher queue depths to reach full speed, but it also starts running out of SLC cache before the test is over while the 980 PRO maintains full performance through the end of the test.

Random Read Latency

This test illustrates how drives with higher throughput don't always offer better IO latency and Quality of Service (QoS), and that latency often gets much worse when a drive is pushed to its limits. This test is more intense than real-world consumer workloads and the results can be a bit noisy, but large differences that show up clearly on a log scale plot are meaningful. For more details, please see the overview of our 2021 Consumer SSD Benchmark Suite.

The WD Black SN850 starts off this test with good random read latency, but around 80k IOPS it shifts gears and latency spikes alarmingly. It actually improves a few times later in the test so by the time the drive is approaching its throughput limit, it is only a bit slower than the Samsung 980 PRO.

Trace Tests: AnandTech Storage Bench and PCMark 10 Advanced Synthetic Tests: Block Sizes and Cache Size Effects
POST A COMMENT

82 Comments

View All Comments

  • Unashamed_unoriginal_username_x86 - Thursday, March 18, 2021 - link

    Answer is no but he's mentioned it earlier in the comment section
    "As I mentioned in the article, my first Phison E18 drive arrived yesterday and I don't have complete results yet. But the first batch of results is in Bench:"
    https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2732?vs=27...
    Reply
  • James5mith - Saturday, March 20, 2021 - link

    Nah, I'm just a big fan. Like others here though, I wish I also had a 905p for my OS drive due to the sheer performance. But for a bulk data drive, the Sabrent 4 Plus has been awesome.

    Everytime though these PCIe 4.0 drives come out though, nothing can beat the performance of the 905p unless you are talking raw sequential numbers.
    Reply
  • Tomatotech - Thursday, March 18, 2021 - link

    Nice review! It’s amazing to see how fast SSDs are developing - I well remember the pain of running everything off HDDs. What’s even more impressive is there seems to be no natural limit in sight for SSD speeds - it feels like peak speeds are doubling around every 18 months. Reply
  • Makaveli - Thursday, March 18, 2021 - link

    Peak Sequential speeds are doubling, however there are still other area's to improve on. Reply
  • cx1983 - Thursday, March 18, 2021 - link

    I failed to see why did you put the Optane 905P drive in the mix... It's a $2,500 enterprise drive in the middle of ~$200 costumer drives. It's like throwing in a Xeon Scalable/Epyc when benchmarking a Core i7/Ryzen 7. All it does is distort the graphs, making it harder to see how the drives fare against each other.
    It would only make sense if you were writing an article comparing costumer grade hardware vs enterprise grade hardware.
    Reply
  • Billy Tallis - Thursday, March 18, 2021 - link

    The Optane 905P is technically a consumer/enthusiast drive. The enterprise version is the P4800X, which doesn't have RGB LEDs. I included the 905P because it is somewhat relevant when discussing the fastest consumer drives that money can buy, but I left out the power consumption data because that would have distorted all of those graphs. Reply
  • Slash3 - Thursday, March 18, 2021 - link

    Power Consumption: Yes Reply
  • Billy Tallis - Friday, March 19, 2021 - link

    Pretty much. On the old test suite, I measured it as 7.3W idle, 8.5W for QD1 random read, up to 17.1W for sequential writes (2.2GiB/s). I'm really curious to see if second-gen 3DXP in the P5800X improves on that. Reply
  • Hifihedgehog - Friday, March 19, 2021 - link

    Unlimited... POWER! Reply
  • MDD1963 - Thursday, March 18, 2021 - link

    About 4 years ago, it took X99 and three 950 Pros in RAID 0 to allow 1M IOPS...; this is quite impressive! Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now