Samsung 950 Pro NVMe M.2 SSD Review – NVMe for the masses

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following review: Samsung 950 Pro NVMe M.2 SSD Review – NVMe for the masses[newsimage]http://static.myce.com//images_posts/2015/10/950pro2-95x75.png[/newsimage]

Samsung was kind enough to send me one of their brand new 950
Pro M.2 series NVMe SSDs for review. In this case the 250GB M.2 NVMe version.
There is also a 512GB version available, which I hope to review soon.

The Samsung 950 Pro NVMe M.2 range of SSDs are aimed squarely at mainstream consumers, where the price of the product matters.
Therefore the Samsung 950 Pro will have to compete head on with SATA SSDs where price is concerned.

Let’s find out how this brand new SSD range performs.

            Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/review/samsung-950-pro-nvme-m-2-ssd-review-nvme-for-the-masses-77616/](http://www.myce.com/review/samsung-950-pro-nvme-m-2-ssd-review-nvme-for-the-masses-77616/)

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

Nice results for a consumer PCIe drive. I expected it to perform slightly better than it did, considering its roots, but my expectations were higher than they should have been. Still, nice to see this level of performance from a device with no active cooling (& nothing to assist with passive cooling).


#3

This type of drive for the operating system is definitely where we are headed, but I wonder how many will justify spending twice the amount of money for it any time soon? Typical SSD’s in 240-256gb range are about $80 to $85 here in the US right now. The projected cost of this Samsung is $200 at Amazon.Â

It may be faster than the older generation SSD’s but will we really notice that speed in day to day use? I suppose the answer to that depends entirely on your typical workloads, but I doubt it will help me personally, since my most demanding task is still encoding 20-30gbs of video data between large, traditional spinning storage drives.

So even if I do wind up building a new computer sometime in the next year, I seriously doubt I’ll be splurging for a PCIe drive for the operating system. Perhaps the question really becomes, what tasks will most benefit from a very fast operating system drive when the rest of the storage system cannot keep up?


#4

I am sort of surprised that the Intel PCIe SSD beat this one by a mile.


#5

I guess you’re all hung up on synthetic benchmarks?
Check out the real world.
PC Mark 8
Myce Reality suite.

Now check which is the fastest.

The Intel is classed as a consumer SSD, but it’s performance profile suggests it’s really a workstation class SSD. The OCZ REVODrive 350 doesn’t pretend to be a consumer product. Its performance profile is also workstation class.

The Samsung 950 Pro is by far the fastest with small block size files, actually by a country mile.
Those file sizes are found in ‘true’ consumer workloads, and that also matches its performance profile.

The Intel will be faster, if you can load it enough. I don’t think anyone I’ve seen on this forum will come anywhere near to loading it enough. :slight_smile:

Just my opinion, but for most folks here, the Samsung 950 Pro will be faster, simply because it performs better than the Intel 750 with the type of workload a consumer will throw at it.

The 256GB version is also quite a bit slower than the 512GB version, which I hope to review soon.


#6

[QUOTE=Dee;2762357]I guess you’re all hung up on synthetic benchmarks?
Check out the real world.
PC Mark 8
Myce Reality suite.

Now check which is the fastest.

The Intel is classed as a consumer SSD, but it’s performance profile suggests it’s really a workstation class SSD. The OCZ REVODrive 350 doesn’t pretend to be a consumer product. Its performance profile is also workstation class.

The Samsung 950 Pro is by far the fastest with small block size files, actually by a country mile.
Those file sizes are found in ‘true’ consumer workloads, and that also matches its performance profile.

The Intel will be faster, if you can load it enough. I don’t think anyone I’ve seen on this forum will come anywhere near to loading it enough. :slight_smile:

Just my opinion, but for most folks here, the Samsung 950 Pro will be faster, simply because it performs better than the Intel 750 with the type of workload a consumer will throw at it.

The 256GB version is also quite a bit slower than the 512GB version, which I hope to review soon.[/QUOTE]

I took my evaluation from the " Reality Suite":bigsmile:


#7

[QUOTE=alan1476;2762359]I took my evaluation from the " Reality Suite":bigsmile:[/QUOTE]Strange
The 950 Pro was fastest in four of the six tests. The two it wasn’t fastest is CPU tied, which I explain in the article.


#8

[QUOTE=Dee;2762360]Strange
The 950 Pro was fastest in four of the six tests. The two it wasn’t fastest is CPU tied, which I explain in the article.[/QUOTE]

When you tested with Anvil, the 750 clearly beat the Samsung by a wide margin, in the large file transfer it did so also, that Real World or no.:iagree:



#9

Anvil’s is a synthetic benchmark. It will show which is technically the fastest SSD when you hammer it with I/O’s.

Real world consumer workloads are very different, they tend to be all at low queue depths and block sizes. You won’t find a consumer based workload that hammers an SSD with as many I/O’s as Anvil’s or any other synthetic benchmark. That’s why reviewers have developed ‘real world’ test traces to test the drives, and that’s why Futuremark developed PCMark 8.

PCMark8 uses ‘real’ applications and real data to test the drives. So does the Myce Reality Suite.
They both use real applications and real data.


#10

According to this YouTube video the Samsung 950 Pro can also get quite a bit hot when transferring very large files. When compared to the Samsung SM951 the Samsung 950 Pro was around 12 degrees Celsius lower than the Samsung SM951 but at the same time it was also slower due to its Dynamic Thermal Throttling Protection technology so that it doesn’t overheat too much.


#11

[QUOTE=Auzzie Kid;2762714]According to this YouTube video the Samsung 950 Pro can also get quite a bit hot when transferring very large files. When compared to the Samsung SM951 the Samsung 950 Pro was around 12 degrees Celsius lower than the Samsung SM951 but at the same time it was also slower due to its Dynamic Thermal Throttling Protection technology so that it doesn’t overheat too much.[/QUOTE]I noted the thermal throttling when running the ‘Myce sustained performance’. That test writes and reads hundreds of Gigabytes of data during the test. It slowed down by about 55MB/s, so not a huge amount, and you literally have to write over a 100GB for throttling to take place. I doubt anyone will reach that amount of data if the 950 Pro is used as a system drive.

However, there is nothing wrong with the SSD controller, it gets hot because unlike a SATA based SSD, you can’t use the SSD case itself as a heatsink. This is where the M.2 form factor has its limits. The form factor is tiny, so you have issues with getting a capacity over 512GB, and because the components are all jammed together, problems with heat.

IMO, M.2 for the desktop isn’t the best solution. A PCIe SSD installed in a 16x PCIe3 socket is ok, providing you’ll only ever want to fit a single graphics card.

The new U.2 form factor makes much more sense in a desktop, but so far, you’ll only see U.2 supported in top end Z170 motherboards, and perhaps some new X99 motherboards. My own Asus Z170 Deluxe supports U.2, and you also get a ‘Hyper kit’ to install it.


#12

I’ll definitely have to put this on the get list when I upgrade to a new Skylake board in the next few months.


#13

Hi Wendy, thanks a lot for the review. I would like to know which block size you chose during your HD Tune’s benchmark. When I run the benchmark with its default block size which is 64 KB, I get low reading speed (less than 900 mb/s). But 8 MB of block size gives 2250 mb/s.
Best regards


#14

Hi vigvig, and welcome to the forum.
I use the same block size as [B]Anvil’s [/B] for the sequential read test in HD Tune, 4MB.


#15

Thanks.


#16

I have the same ssd and same motherboard and samsung drivers. Windows 10 pro. My benchmark in Samsung Magician is 2583MB/s read and 1530MB/s write. However my HD Tune Pro 5.6 benchmark for read is only 1283MB/s. I noticed you were running HD Tune v5.5. Have you tried 5.6? Did you do anything special in the bios? Trying to figure out why your HD Tune benchmark is twice as fast as mine.


#17

Hello Brendin, and welcome to the forum.

Nothing special in the BIOS, apart from CPU power saving states disabled. You can achieve the same thing by switching to Windows 10 ‘performance power profile’.

In HD Tune I test with a 4MB block size, which you an select in HD Tune preferences.

Review drives are also tested as a ‘spare drive’. In other words, they are not running the OS.