Samsung SSD 850 Pro (128GB, 256GB & 1TB) Review: Enter the 3D Era
by Kristian Vättö on July 1, 2014 10:00 AM ESTPerformance vs. Transfer Size
ATTO is a useful tool for quickly benchmarking performance across various transfer sizes. You can get the complete data set in Bench. To highlight the performance of each capacity, I decided to divide the ATTO graphs by each capacity, which should also make the graphs a bit more readable.
IO size scaling remain very similar to the 840 Pro and EVO. It is only at the 128GB capacity where the V-NAND provides a substantial advantage and the 850 Pro is almost as fast as the 120GB Intel SSD 525, which is a SandForce based drive, so its high performance is explained by ATTO's use of compressible data.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
160 Comments
View All Comments
alacard - Monday, June 30, 2014 - link
Fascinating stuff, thanks for the in depth analysis.Iketh - Tuesday, July 1, 2014 - link
Good read on the software not taking advantage of SSDs yet. Windows is the biggest offender. I have 8 threads and an SSD and I still have to wait for each of my startup programs to load like a snail 1 at a time after bootup...tetsuo77 - Monday, June 30, 2014 - link
"There are some drops, although I am not sure what is causing them"It looks suspiciously like your values overflowed an unsigned int (prior to being converted from B to KB). Just add ~4.3 million to the 4 mysteriously low values and you have a nicely shaped curve.
tetsuo77 - Monday, June 30, 2014 - link
Oops.. I pasted the wrong quote. Meant to quote this: "It looks like read performance scales quite linearly until hitting the IO size of 256KB where RAPID stops caching"I maintain that there is an error in the numbers on the graph :)
Gigaplex - Tuesday, July 1, 2014 - link
32 bit unsigned integers support around 4.3 billion, not million.lyeoh - Friday, July 4, 2014 - link
if the values were being stored internally as bytes and not kilobytes it might overflow as tetsuo77 mentioned. 4.3 million * kilobytes per sec = billions of bytes/sec which could overflow.nirwander - Monday, June 30, 2014 - link
I cant see how they aim at mainstream with these prices.Crucial MX100 512 is already fast enough for SATA 6 Gbps and.. twice as cheap!
Technology geeks will probaly go for Intel PCIe NVMe drives.
Gigaplex - Monday, June 30, 2014 - link
And if you really need the performance, just get two of the MX100s and RAID 0 them.willis936 - Tuesday, July 1, 2014 - link
Unless you care about storage latency at all.Gigaplex - Tuesday, July 1, 2014 - link
Fair point, but SSDs are so far ahead of hard drives in terms of latency that it hardly matters.