AnandTech Storage Bench - Light

Our Light storage test has relatively more sequential accesses and lower queue depths than The Destroyer or the Heavy test, and it's by far the shortest test overall. It's based largely on applications that aren't highly dependent on storage performance, so this is a test more of application launch times and file load times. This test can be seen as the sum of all the little delays in daily usage, but with the idle times trimmed to 25ms it takes less than half an hour to run. Details of the Light test can be found here. As with the ATSB Heavy test, this test is run with the drive both freshly erased and empty, and after filling the drive with sequential writes.

ATSB - Light (Data Rate)

The Light test reveals bigger performance differences for full and empty drive states than the Heavy test, but the 760p doesn't suffer as much as most drives. The average data rates from the 760p are slightly higher than from the Intel SSD 750, and much higher than the 600p or the SATA drives. On the other hand, the TLC-based Samsung PM981 is almost twice as fast.

ATSB - Light (Average Latency)ATSB - Light (99th Percentile Latency)

The average latency scores of the Intel SSD 760p are twice those of the fastest NVMe SSDs, but this isn't enough to amount to a noticeable difference on a light workload. The 99th percentile latencies are much higher than those of Samsung's NVMe drives, but are still faster than SATA SSDs.

ATSB - Light (Average Read Latency)ATSB - Light (Average Write Latency)

The average read latencies from the Intel 760p fall into the middle of the range for NVMe SSDs, but the average write latencies are clearly on the high side of normal.

ATSB - Light (99th Percentile Read Latency)ATSB - Light (99th Percentile Write Latency)

The 99th percentile read latencies of the 760p on the Light test are acceptable for a low-end NVMe SSD, but the full-drive score is actually slightly worse than the Intel 600p. On the write side, the 99th percentile latency is actually very slightly worse than good SATA SSDs, but the 760p doesn't get noticeably worse when full.

ATSB - Light (Power)

The two SM2260-based NVMe SSDs join the Toshiba XG5 this time as the most efficient NVMe SSDs ahead of the Intel 760p, but the SM2260-based 600p and GAMMIX S10 fall behind when the test is run on a full drive. The Samsung drives mostly use slightly more power than the 760p, but the PM981 ends up near the bottom of the chart.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy Random Performance
Comments Locked

51 Comments

View All Comments

  • HStewart - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Make sense especially with their own fab, they no longer need Micron to supply, but these chips are older generation, so they probably realize that future generations are not necessary
  • ilt24 - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Intel converted a factory in China from making chipsets to making 3D-NAND a couple of years ago, then a couple of weeks ago Intel and Micron announced they would stop working together on 3DNAND once their 3rd generation was released ~2019. They said they would continue to collaborate on their 3DXpoint memory.

    Currently it isn't clear if all of Intel's supply comes from the Intel factory or if they are still getting any from the Micron fabs. Independent of where the flash comes from, it will have the Intel logo since they just get wafers from Micron and package it themselves.
  • rawcode - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Your pricing for the the Samsung 960 PRO are way off. You have prices for the 512GB in the 256GB column. 1TB for the 512GB, and 2Tb for the 1TB.
  • Billy Tallis - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Fixed. Thanks!
  • lux44 - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    I guess post-Meltdown/Spectre benchmarking is in the pipeline, as IO-benchmarks should show a large drop... It definitely will make Core8 benchmarks a lot more interesting. I wish you all good luck in getting to the bottom of the things regarding performance impact, we count on you!
  • tuxRoller - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Not as bad as was once thought.

    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&...

    Ignoring the XFS results (just that they are using cfq means the fs is starting the fight with one arm, and most of a leg, disabled) it looks like 5% or less (except for the compile benchmark which caused one fs to drop 15%)
  • lux44 - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    Given recent news about Intel microcode update recall and Linus's rants about unacceptable kernel updates, I think the actual Spectre mitigation impact is unknown, at least under Linux. I doubt it's larger than 15%, but we'll see.
  • Jhlot - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Bummer, still significantly outpaced by the 960 EVO which was released more than a year ago.
  • msabercr - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Dang it, this VW Beetle is nowhere near as fast as my 911 turbo.
  • shabby - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Price is close enough that it should be.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now