Intel SSD 750 PCIe SSD Review: NVMe for the Client
by Kristian Vättö on April 2, 2015 12:00 PM ESTATTO - Transfer Size vs Performance
I'm keeping our ATTO test around because it's a tool that can easily be run by anyone and it provides a quick look into performance scaling across multiple transfer sizes. I'm providing the results in a slightly different format because the line graphs didn't work well with multiple drives and creating the graphs was rather painful since the results had to be manually inserted cell be cell as ATTO doesn't provide a 'save as CSV' functionality.
 |
|||||||||
AS-SSD Incompressible Sequential Performance
I'm also keeping AS-SSD around as it's freeware like ATTO and can be used by our readers to confirm that their drives operate properly. AS-SSD uses incompressible data for all of its transfers, so it's also a valuable tool when testing SandForce based drives that perform worse with incompressible data.
TRIM Validation
The move from Windows 7 to 8.1 introduced some problems with the methodology we have previously used to test TRIM functionality, so I had to come up with a new way to test. I tested a couple of different methods, but ultimately I decided to go with the easiest one that can actually be used by anyone. The software is simply called trimcheck and it was made by a developer that goes by the name CyberShadow in GitHub.
Trimcheck tests TRIM by creating a small, unique file and then deleting it. Next the program will check whether the data is still accessible by reading the raw LBA locations. If the data that is returned by the drive is all zeros, it has received the TRIM command and TRIM is functional.
And as expected TRIM appears to be working.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
132 Comments
View All Comments
kaisellgren - Friday, May 1, 2015 - link
Do not forget the Fiji 390x!dzezik - Saturday, May 7, 2016 - link
who needs chipset for PCIe if You have 40 lanes directly from CPU. it is step back in the configuration. it was big step ahead to put memory and PCIe to CPU. the chipset is useless.zrav - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link
>It's again a bit disappointing that the SSD 750 isn't that well optimized for sequential IO because there's prcatically no scaling at allThat's a weird conclusion. I'd say it is quite impressive that the drive almost reaches peak throughput at QD 1 already. Requiring higher QD to achieve more throughput is a not a positive characteristic. But if that matters depends on the usage scenario ofc.
Kristian Vättö - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link
It's impressive that the performance is almost the same regardless of queue depth, but I don't find 1.2GB/s to be very impressive for a 1.2TB PCIe drive.futrtrubl - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link
Unfortunately your use of un-normalised standard deviation for performance consistency makes them a barrier to understanding. A 1000 IOPS drive with 5% variance is going to have lower standard deviation and by the way you have presented it "better consistency" than a 10000 IOPS drive with 1% variance.Kristian Vättö - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link
Any suggestions for improving the metric? Perhaps divide by the average IOPS or its square root to take that into account as well?futrtrubl - Thursday, April 2, 2015 - link
Yes, I think dividing by the average IOPs would be perfect. You could even x100 to get it to a sort of percentage deviation.bricko - Saturday, April 4, 2015 - link
Here is test and review of the new 750, what is up with boot time...its SLOWEST of 14 drives. Everything else is great, but boot time. The Plextor M6 is 15 seconds, the 750 is 34 sec....ideashttp://techreport.com/review/28050/intel-750-serie...
Ethos Evoss - Saturday, April 4, 2015 - link
Plextor SSDs - BESTbricko - Saturday, April 4, 2015 - link
Its only slow on the boot time, otherwise it beats ALL other ssd on different loads and tests , by 2 - 3 times....odd it seems