Mixed Random Read/Write Performance

Most real-world use consists of a mix of reads and writes, and interleaving the two often poses a particular challenge to drive controllers. This mixed random access test is conducted across a 16GB span of the drive, but on a full drive and with a queue depth of 3.

Iometer - Mixed 4KB Random Read/Write

Mixed random access seems much improved over Samsung's earlier M.2 drives, and the 950 Pros fall behind only the Intel SSD 750. The 512GB drive is well behaved here and surpassing the 256GB drive as it should.

Iometer - Mixed 4KB Random Read/Write (Power)

In this case, the higher power consumption of the 950 Pro is very well justified by the higher performance.

Samsung 950 Pro 256GB

There's not much variation across the different workloads. Performance hardly drops during the middle of the test where many controllers have trouble with a balanced mix, but on the other hand the performance at either end of the test is nothing spectacular. Power consumption climbs hand in hand with the proportion of writes, but is accompanied by some increasing in overall data rate.

Mixed Sequential Read/Write Performance

The queue depth of 3 is sufficient for many drives to perform very well at either end of this test, while testing 100% reads or 100% writes. In between, performance typically suffers greatly, and that's where the winners and losers of this test are determined. Anything that's duplicating duplicating or transforming a large amount of data on the drive will produce I/O patterns similar to this test. Creating a System Restore snapshot, backing up files to a different directory on the same drive, and file compression can all produce interleaved reads and writes of large blocks of data, though not necessarily fast enough to be limited by the drive's performance.

Iometer - Mixed 128KB Sequential Read/Write

These sequential workloads allow the PCIe drives to stand out and achieve average speeds that would saturate SATA.

Iometer - Mixed 128KB Sequential Read/Write (Power)

With power consumption in the same neighborhood as the SATA drives, the 950 Pro is significantly more efficient.

Samsung 950 Pro 256GB

Looking at the breakdown by workload, the 950 Pro performs well on the balanced mixes and far outstrips the SATA limit on the very read-heavy workloads and the pure write section at the end of this test.

Sequential Performance Idle Power Consumption & TRIM Validation
Comments Locked

142 Comments

View All Comments

  • bill.rookard - Sunday, October 25, 2015 - link

    VERY interesting. Of particular note is the Crucial MX200 - an older drive, and connected via SATA which trades blows back and forth with the newer PCIe - nvme based drives. Wow, good stuff.
  • Deders - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link

    I think it was only PCIe drives that had long booting times like the Intel 750.
  • Gigaplex - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link

    These are PCIe drives.
  • Deders - Friday, October 23, 2015 - link

    I mean slotted drives as the drive controller has to load from the device
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link

    I have a 256GB 950 PRO in my system (AsRock Z170 Extreme 7) and boot time is about 8 seconds with ultra fast boot enabled in BIOS/UEFI.
  • Jacerie - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link

    Why would you go on about how awesome Skylake and the 100 series chipset are for PCIe connected drives and then use a Haswell chip and a Z97 board for the test rig? Time to go back to the bench.
  • Billy Tallis - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link

    The Haswell system is what I've got on hand to test with, and it's what allows my results to be directly comparable with the reviews from earlier this year.

    Skylake gives you PCIe 3 from the PCH, but on the testbed we always use an x16 slot directly off the CPU for PCIe SSDs, so we don't need Skylake to run the drive at PCIe 3 speeds.
  • Jacerie - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link

    Will you be posting a follow-up to highlight any controller differences with the newer hardware?
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link

    This is not a SATA controller we're talking about, it's PCIe. And there we have hardly seen any differences between different implementations over the years.
  • hansmuff - Thursday, October 22, 2015 - link

    May I humbly request an addition to the review to show performance AND issues when using a PCI Express 2.0 to M.2 adapter on an older platform like the P67A?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now