Iometer - Maximum IOPS
Version and / or Patch Used: Iometer 2014
We use Iometer to measure high queue depth performance. (No Partition)
Max IOPS Read
Max IOPS Write
OCZ's factory specifications list the RD400 as capable of up to 210K random read and up to 140K random write IOPS depending on capacity point. Both of these specifications are given at QD32. We test PCIe drives at QD256. At QD256, with our configuration, we are able to greatly exceed OCZ's given maximum IOPS for both read and write. When we look back at our Anvil's IOPS testing, we find that the 512GB and 1TB models both hit about 220K read IOPS at QD32, the 256GB model 200K. It is important to keep in mind that we ran that test with our drives filled to 75% of their capacity which is a big handicap. Looking at our Anvils write IOPS shows the drives averaging about 180K write IOPS which clearly shows that OCZ is being conservative with their maximum IOPS specifications.
Intel's 750 clearly displays higher max IOPS than the RD400's and the 950 Pro's. The 950 Pro's display better maximum random read performance than the RD400's. The RD400's are capable of double the max write IOPS of the 950 Pro's. It is evident at this point that Samsung's 950 Pro's deliver better read performance than OCZ's RD400 and OCZ's RD400's deliver superior write performance in comparison to the 950 Pro's.
Iometer - Disk Response
Version and / or Patch Used: Iometer 2014
We use Iometer to measure disk response times. Disk response times are measured at an industry accepted standard of 4K QD1 for both write and read. Each test runs twice for 30 seconds consecutively, with a 5-second ramp-up before each test. We partition the drive/array as a secondary device for this testing.
Avg. Write Response
Avg. Read Response
The Samsung drives in our test pool deliver the best (lowest) read latency at QD1. Intel's 750 delivers by far the best write response. Again we see that the RD400's deliver better write performance than the 950 Pro's and the 950 Pro's better read performance than the OCZ drives.
DiskBench - Transfer Rate
Version and / or Patch Used: 22.214.171.124
We use DiskBench to time a 28.6GB block (9,882 files in 1,247 folders) composed primarily of incompressible sequential and random data as it's transferred from our DC P3700 PCIe NVME SSD to our test drive. We then read from a 6GB zip file that's part of our 28.6GB data block to determine the test drive's read transfer rate. Our system is restarted prior to the read test to clear any cached data, ensuring an accurate test result.
Write Transfer Rate
Read Transfer Rate
Throughout our testing one thing has remained consistent, the RD400's deliver better write performance and the 950 Pro's better read performance. However, our transfer testing does not follow this established pattern. All three RD400's deliver better read transfer rates than the 950 Pros. They even deliver better read transfer rates than Intel's 750 1.2TB behemoth. The 256GB RD400 easily dispatches the 950 Pro 256GB with both read and write transfers, which is unexpected. We expected the 256GB 950 Pro to have superior read transfer rate, but it does not - it is 200MB/s slower than the RD400 256GB.
The larger capacity RD400's completely reverse the established pattern. They both deliver better read transfer rates than the 512GB 950 Pro, but lower write transfer rates. As expected, Intel's 750 provides the best write transfer rates of our test pool.
PRICING: You can find products similar to this one for sale below.
United States: Find other tech and computer products like this over at Amazon's website.
United Kingdom: Find other tech and computer products like this over at Amazon UK's website.
Canada: Find other tech and computer products like this over at Amazon Canada's website.
- Page 1 [Introduction, Drive Specifications, Pricing and Availability]
- Page 2 [Drive Details]
- Page 3 [Test System Setup, Drive Properties, & OCZ SSD Utility]
- Page 4 [Synthetic Benchmarks - ATTO & Anvil Storage Utilities]
- Page 5 [Synthetic Benchmarks - CrystalDiskMark & AS SSD]
- Page 6 [Benchmarks (OS) - PCMark Vantage, PCMark 7 & PCMark 8]
- Page 7 [Benchmarks (Secondary) - IOPS, Response & Transfer Rate]
- Page 8 [Benchmarks (Secondary Volume) - PCMark 8 Extended]
- Page 9 [Benchmarks (Secondary Volume) – 70/30 Mixed Workload]
- Page 10 [Maxed-Out Performance (MOP)]
- Page 11 [Final Thoughts]
Recommended for You
- We at TweakTown openly invite the companies who provide us with review samples / who are mentioned or discussed to express their opinion of our content. If any company representative wishes to respond, we will publish the response here.
Latest News Posts
- Kingdom Hearts 3 may release in 2019
- Google Pixel 2 devices to feature Snapdragon 835
- Fisker to unveil their new electric car in August
- New Friday the 13th game slashes PC, consoles this May
- Nintendo Switch owners can share game updates locally
- Synology RT2600ac Wireless Router Review
- Cursor disappearing randomly
- AORUS GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11G Review
- Intel Optane Memory 32GB M.2 NVMe SSD Review
- ASRock Fatal1ty Z270 K6 USB 3.1/TB Issues
- Nokia partners with Lucasfilm to deliver an immersive behind-the-scenes VR experience of Star Wars: The Last Jedi
- New LaCie 2big Dock Thunderbolt 3 bridges the port gap and delivers massive capacity to streamline creative workflows
- ENERMAX launches D.F. STORM, the 3500RPM fan featuring self-cleaning design
- Tenda unveils new USB 3.0 AC1300 wireless network adapter
- SAPPHIRE introduces new PULSE graphics card family