Samsung SM951 (512GB) PCIe SSD Review
by Kristian Vättö on February 24, 2015 8:00 AM ESTFinal Words
When the news that the SM951 isn't NVMe enabled hit the Internet, there was a lot of disappointment around. Understandably many were expecting that the SM951 would merely be an evolutionary step from the XP941 because AHCI command set would still limit the full potential of the PCIe interface, but Samsung proved us all wrong. The SM951 is far from being a marginal step up from the XP941 because in most of our tests the SM951 beats the XP941 by a 50-100% margin. As a matter of fact, the upgrade from XP941 to SM951 is bigger than going from a SATA 6Gbps SSD to the XP941. Despite the lack of NVMe, there's no arguing about the fact that the SM951 is the fastest client SSD and by a very healthy margin.
From a performance perspective I have absolutely no complaints aside from thermal throttling. I wouldn't consider it to be a major issue because regardless of some throttling in synthetic tests, the SM951 is easily the highest performing drive. The Destroyer test takes about 10 hours to run on modern drives, so if throttling was a real issue it would show up more clearly in the results too. Besides, my half-open testbed isn't ideal for airflow either, but since I haven't encountered noticeable throttling in the past I wanted to mention it in case anyone runs into performance issues with the drive.
Right now the biggest issue with the drive is its nearly nonexistent availability, though. If you want to get your hands on the drive today, the only known way to do that is to buy Lenovo's ThinkPad X1 Carbon that is configured with a PCIe SSD. The cheapest configuration with a 512GB SM951 comes in at $1,709.10, so there's practically no sane way to get access to the drive (unless, of course, you want the X1 Carbon laptop as well and are willing to pay the price).
That brings us to the next subject. Since retail availability isn't expected until late May at the earliest, there's a chance that the SM951 will no longer be the fastest SSD once it's actually available for purchase. At CES last month, several SSD vendors told me that they should have PCIe SSDs ready for Computex, which is in early June, i.e. right after the SM951 is scheduled to start shipping.
If the SM951 was available today, I would have no reason not to give it our "Recommended by AnandTech" award. Being hands down the fastest client SSD on the market is enough justification for the award, but because the drive won't be shipping for several months I can't be sure that I'm still recommending the SM951 once it's available. For now the only thing we can do is wait, but at least we can do it in peace by knowing that the future is quick and bright.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
128 Comments
View All Comments
iLovefloss - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Samsung's first two TLC drives, the 840 and 840 EVO, has some firmware issues that cause month old data to be read slowly. The severity ranges from slower than a speedy HDD to as slow as a SATA2 SSD. Samsung's first patch didn't resolve the issue for all the 840 EVO SSDs suffering from the slowdowns or only temporarily resolved, so Samsung is in the process of making another patch.kgh00007 - Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - link
I have an 840 EVO and I applied the firmware fix in October last year and the reads have dropped again to below 50MB/s on older data, ie. my OS files and stuff that was installed when I first set the drive up.I will be waiting to see how Samsung handle this before I buy another SSD from them. Benchmarks and reviews mean nothing if an SSD drops below HDD read speeds after a few months of real world use.
Cold boot now takes minutes, not seconds!!
3DoubleD - Wednesday, February 25, 2015 - link
Exactly. I have one drive that has sequential read minimums as low as 8.8MB/s and large portions averaging 50MB/s. Another drive is fine and operates at 300MB/s consistently (although I'm pretty sure that should be higher on SATA3, but day-to-day that is fast enough not to notice). They need to squash this bug if they plan on selling TLC drives in the future in any real volume. Enthusiasts will care, which is admittedly a small market, but I think some laptop vendors might begin to take notice and avoid Samsung TLC products as well, and that's a larger market.Irish_adam - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
So when are they going to make a desktop version with a heatsink on it? It seems like everyone is so obsessed with portables these days that the desktop crowed is getting ignored but surely this kind of performance would mainly be used for a desktop machine than an ultra thin laptop. Its my main gripe with PCIe SSDs atmdananski - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Same occurred to me. Could probably get a substantial boost in long-running operations by attaching a heatsink. Should be easy enough to do yourself - thermal tape and some old vram heatsinks would probably do the trick without being so heavy as to break the pcie slot.I would like to see the rate of heat dissipation after heavy use (i.e. how that temperature graph looks after you stop writing to the disk). It starts throttling after roughly 180GB sequential, which is plenty for most scenarios, but how long does it take to cool back down again for your next big write? Does throttling occur under more mixed, sustained loads like a database server? Not exactly my kind of use cases, but I'd be interested to see.
DanNeely - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
"However, it's nowhere near the maximum bandwidth of the PCIe 3.0 x4 bus, though, which should be about 3.2GB/s (PCIe only has ~80% efficiency with overhead after the 128b/132b scheme used by PCIe 3.0)."Where's the 20% loss coming from? 128/132 bit encoding only has a 3% overhead, is this an incompletely updated copy/paste from a description of PCIe 2.0? The 8/10bit encoding used in the older version did have a 20% penalty.
Kristian Vättö - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
That's the overhead on top of the encoding scheme and is a rough figure based on our own testing with GPU memory bandwidth that will saturate the interface.It's the same in PCIe 2.0 too: the interface is good for 5GT/s per lane, which equals 500MB/s per lane once you take the 8b/10b encoding and bits to bytes translation into account. However, in real world the best bandwidths I've seen have been about 390MB/s per lane.
extide - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Protocol overhead (NOT the 120/132b part) -- the commands and stuff, interrupt latency from the cpu and other devices, DMA latencies on read/write to main system memory, etc.Hulk - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
Would it be possible to display the entire AS SSD results window?Kristian Vättö - Tuesday, February 24, 2015 - link
I only run the sequential test, but I can certainly switch to running the full test and publishing the results as a screenshot if that's preferred.