The Samsung 950 Pro PCIe SSD Review (256GB and 512GB)
by Billy Tallis on October 22, 2015 10:55 AM ESTAnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
Our Heavy storage benchmark is proportionately 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 the 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.
Performance of the 950 Pro is comparable to the SM951, which is to say that it's significantly better than everything else we've tested. The penalty when starting with a fill drive is a bit larger than normal, but simply being full isn't enough to tank the performance the way a sustained test can.
Average service time and latency outliers are vastly better than any SATA drive, but NVMe doesn't seem to make a huge difference.
The high performance comes with the price of high power consumption, and the total energy used over the course of this test is significantly higher than all the high-performance SATA drives we're comparing against.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
142 Comments
View All Comments
sorten - Friday, October 23, 2015 - link
'elsewhere' is one wordFrozenGiraffe - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link
And why would these people boot it every day?Rajinder Gill - Friday, October 23, 2015 - link
If speed matters that much, use S3 resume, it is the fastest way back to the desktop. :)Samus - Friday, October 23, 2015 - link
I reboot my PC 3 times a year. I could give two shits in a cup about boot times.5th element - Monday, October 26, 2015 - link
Couldn't. It's couldn't give two shits not could.Beaver M. - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link
With the beta NVMe driver it takes about 300 ms longer.geniekid - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link
http://techreport.com/review/29221/samsung-950-pro...Based on that link I would say issues with NVMe boot times are largely firmware issues that are being rectified.
Refuge - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link
If they updated their baseline every time new tech came out then they would be so busy retesting to have comparable results, that we would never see a new review ever again.AnnonymousCoward - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link
Thanks geniekid! That review is far more valuable than what we have here on AT. AT said "loading a new level in a video game would be more likely to show noticeable difference from better performance here". More likely, huh. Then you go look at the actual data at techreport and find there's nearly zero difference. When will AT learn to measure an SSD in an actually useful way?StrangerGuy - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link
Game load times are actually the least sensitive to SSD speeds. Even a 15 year old game like Red Alert 2 with a next to zero RAM footprint certainly doesn't load instantly on a Crucial M550, much less current titles.