Mixed Random Read/Write Performance

The mixed random I/O benchmark starts with a pure read test and gradually increases the proportion of writes, finishing with pure writes. The queue depth is 3 for the entire test and each subtest lasts for 3 minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. As with the pure random write test, this test is restricted to a 16GB span of the drive, which is empty save for the 16GB test file.

Iometer - Mixed 4KB Random Read/Write

The 960 EVO is essentially tied for second place with the OCZ RD400 and significantly behind the 960 Pro in overall performance on mixed random I/O.

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

The 960 EVO's power efficiency on this test is not great, but it is a big improvement over last year's 950 Pro.

The 960 EVO's high performance score comes primarily from its great performance in the pure write final phase of the test. Throughout the rest of the test, the 960 EVO is not as fast as the 950 Pro.

Mixed Sequential Read/Write Performance

The mixed sequential access test covers the entire span of the drive and uses a queue depth of one. It starts with a pure read test and gradually increases the proportion of writes, finishing with pure writes. Each subtest lasts for 3 minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The drive is filled before the test starts.

Iometer - Mixed 128KB Sequential Read/Write

The 960 EVO's mixed sequential I/O performance is the second-fastest among M.2 SSDs and third place overall. Performance is modestly improved over the 950 Pro.

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

The 960 EVO's power efficiency is better than most PCIe SSDs, but still well behind the 960 Pro.

The 960 EVO's performance in the pure read first phase of the test is great, but its performance with an 80/20 mix is much worse than the 950 Pro or OCZ RD400. The worst-case performance is also not as good as the RD400 or 960 Pro.

Sequential Performance ATTO, AS-SSD & Idle Power Consumption
Comments Locked

87 Comments

View All Comments

  • SaolDan - Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - link

    Neat!
  • jwhannell - Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - link

    Do want
  • nathanddrews - Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - link

    can haz
  • edward1987 - Friday, December 2, 2016 - link

    I've never seen such a demand for nvme ssd like samsung 960 evo. They are sold only on preorders basis. Looks like the only available capacity is 250GB https://www.span.com/search/960_space_evo/-Samsung
  • EKFxWtB - Wednesday, November 16, 2016 - link

    Yea!
  • yankeeDDL - Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - link

    The 960 EVO is today, what the 850 EVO was a couple of years ago. Buying anything else makes little sense.
    The 850 EVO is still today an excellent SSD with a fantastic price/performance ratio.
    I am happy to see such impressive improvements: I only hope we don't need to wait 2 years to see some worthy competitor ...
  • Ninhalem - Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - link

    Only if you have 480 USD to spend on a 1 TB SSD. If you don't (and many people don't need those read/write speeds), then something like the Mushkin Reactor 1 TB can be had for half the cost.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - link

    While I agree, it's a bit of apples to oranges. The reactor is a sata III SSD, not a NVMe class SSD. Compared to other NVMe drives, the 960 evo is a great performance per dollar value.
  • ImSpartacus - Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - link

    I think the confusion arises from the op not specifying that he was only talking about nvme m.2 drives.
  • ddriver - Tuesday, November 15, 2016 - link

    It doesn't really matter when the speed doesn't result in any tangible practical improvements.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now