Windows 10: Samsung 960 EVO NVMe performance...

69matrix69 · Feb 4, 2018

Im sorry, my drive is a Samsung's 960 Pro. That's the added speed. (I would love to buy a 2nd drive but my board only has one slot) Its a Asus Rampage V Edition 10.

Cr00zng · Feb 4, 2018

Hi,
That's generally true and to be expected.
One major factor is proper cooling of NVMe drives which is crucial to prevent thermal throttling. A cooler that only lowers the drive's temp by a few degrees is useless if you're talking degrees Celcius.
Much depends of the size of the casing the motherboard resides in and the airflow present.
Click to expand...

In case of Samsung EVOs, the operating temperature range is 0 - 70 °C. In my system, it is 35-37 °C in normal use, during CrystalDisk testing the increase was to 44-46 °C. That's pretty far from throttling...

For my next build I'll also pick a motherboard with two M2 PCIe x4 slots that I'll configure in raid 0 for maximum I/O throughput. Either using Samsung's 960 Pro's or Intel's Optane modules. Not decided yet but in everyday use the Intels may well beat the PRO's from Samsung and are much cheaper too although of course much smaller in capacity.

Cheers, *Wink
Click to expand...

The Intel Optane M.2 drives are slower than the Samsung EVOs by a large margin and also have less in capacity. I believe that the 32 GBs is the largest size....

fdegrove · Feb 4, 2018

Hi,

The Intel Optane M.2 drives are slower than the Samsung EVOs by a large margin and also have less in capacity. I believe that the 32 GBs is the largest size....
Click to expand...

The Optane modules and drives outperform anything where it matters most thanks to amongst other factors, their very low latency.
Yes, 32 Gb is the largest module but two as raid 0 will make for a 64Gb drive which is more than ample for the OS.

Cheers, *Wink

Cr00zng · Feb 5, 2018

Hi,
The Optane modules and drives outperform anything where it matters most thanks to amongst other factors, their very low latency.
Yes, 32 Gb is the largest module but two as raid 0 will make for a 64Gb drive which is more than ample for the OS.

Cheers, *Wink
Click to expand...

Where it matter most is at the latency, the 4K random read performance and that's where the Intel Optane cards are fast. Well, as long as accessed programs and files are on the small side that is. I did look at that option, but the couple of database sizes currently on the E drive changed my mind. The chances are it would have worked, just didn't want to take a chance. Then there's the system requirements for the Optane memory cache, albeit the current system would've met the requirements.

If you build your system, I'd like to see some benchmark from it.

I was wrong about the temperatures for the Samsung EVO on my system; idle/business use temperature:

Running CrystalDisk benchmark on E drive:

This is an air cooled system and the ambient temperature is 21 ℃.

The "C" and "E" drives are the Samsung EVO NVMe drives...

swarfega · Feb 5, 2018

These two screenshots show today's test and the day I got it. I've not seen that high number since then.

Clintlgm · Feb 5, 2018

My new system is based on the Asus Prime Z370-A MB, that has two PCIe (x4), M.2_1 and M.2_2. Both of the sockets are populated with Samsung SSD 960 EVO 250 GB M.2 cards.

Checking the performance of the "C" drive with CrystalDisk looks good:

Attachment 175000

Well, until the other NVMe drive is checked that is:

Attachment 175001

In every category, the "E" drive performs better than the the "C" drive, especially in write performance , and it puzzles me.

The only difference visible between the two is the used space; "C" has 47 while "E" has 7GBs used space.

Could the disk space utilization be responsible for the different performance, or the "C" drive came with some slight factory fault(s)?

While there are temperature differences between the two NVMe cards, the "C" drive has a heatsink and actually runs 2-4 degree cooler than the "E" drive:

Attachment 175002

Any advice would be appreciated, TIA...
Click to expand...

Yea this computer came with the 2 x 256 GB M.2 NVME= 512 GB They were in RAID 0 together. I would install the IRST software and put them back in RAID O

you can run any benchmark and at different times and get different results a lot has to do with whats going on behind the background. I just use them for reference. To me, you read is great but your write sucks about 961 speeds. RAID 0 will fix that slow write speed but won't change your read speed much is anything from where you are.

Clintlgm · Apr 4, 2018

The storage size of the drive does impact the performance to a certain extent, at least in the case of Samsung EVOs. The 250GBs EVO has a write speed of 1,500 MB/s, while the larger EVOs do 1,900 MB/s. All EVOs have the read speed 3,200 MB/s.

For backup and restore purposes, I like to separate the OS/programs from the data. It's easier to manage and marginally faster in the case of the ~20GBs database. Hence the two separate 250 GBs EVO drives. Cost wise, it's a wash when compared to a single 500 GBs EVO that provide an increase in write speed.

I am not even convinced that overall performance wise the system is much better than my SSD based system. Yes with PCIe 3.0 x4 drives Windows boots in a jiffy, large programs start faster, loads up large databases faster, etc., with Samsung EVO/PRO drives. but beyond that in everyday use of the system, the performance increase isn't as noticeable. Certainly, there is a performance increase, but it's nowhere close to moving from the HDD to SSD drives, despite the six fold increase in read speed. My guess is that accessing small, around couple of MB or so programs/files with the PCIe drives isn't that much different from doing the same with an SSD drive...

Your 2 TBs PCIe 3.0 x4 drive is probably a Samsung Pro that has a nominal read speed of 3,500 MB/s and write speed of 2,100 MB/s. Your benchmark results are right around that.

I've looked at the Samsung Pro, but for less than the 2 TBs Pro cost nowadays, I've built the whole system and glad I did. It's doubtful, if the performance of this system would be better with a single, large PCIe drive...
Click to expand...

I use the M.2 SSD for OS and Progams, I keep my DATA on a 2.5 SSD and any thing that I don't use regulrly on a WD Passport 4TB USB3.0.

I do think the extra speed comes in when working with larger files Video editing, Auto Cad or any drawing program Regen are really faster. File transfers are limited to the slowest device and method. USB 3.0 is only so fast. 7200 hard drives are only so fast even SATA SSD is only so fast so it hard for ordinary people to see the difference. the jump from SATA 3 hard drives to SATA SSD was indeed monumental. So If you using any hard drive intense software the jump to M.2 PCIe NVME is substantial. And the size of them I mean a 2TB M.2 SSD with the heat sink is still way smaller than any 2.5 SSD or HD. So that will allow us to build much smaller computers hard drive bays not needed!!

Windows 10: Samsung 960 EVO NVMe performance...

Samsung 960 EVO NVMe performance...

Samsung 960 EVO NVMe performance...

Samsung 960 EVO NVMe performance...

Samsung 960 EVO NVMe performance... - Similar Threads - Samsung 960 EVO

Upgrading my Samsung EVO NVMe M.2 drive

Samsung 960 EVO, suddenly random IOPS read is much slower

samsung 970 evo NVMe M2

Introducing new Samsung 970 EVO Plus NVMe SSDs

Samsung SSD 850 Evo Performance

960 evo nvme speed improvement

Samsung introduces the Samsung 970 PRO and EVO NVMe M.2 SSDs

Can't Boot from Samsung 960 EVO M.2 Drive, Sort Of

New Samsung 960 PRO and EVO Solid State Drives