Performance Comparisons – Client QD Weighted
These results attempt to simplify things by focusing on what really matters – the Queue Depths that folks actually see when using these products. A dimension is eliminated from the previous charts by applying a weighted average to those results. The weights were derived from trace recordings of moderate to heavy workloads, which still ended up running closer to QD=1-2 even on a slower SATA SSD. The intent here is to distill the results into something for those wanting 'just the facts' to grab and go when making their purchasing decisions. Don't be alarmed by the low figures. Remember, these are low queue depths – the place where these SSDs actually operate when in use by those not just running benchmarks all day!
The 750 EVO does surprisingly well here, even at the lower capacities (which have fewer dies to spread the workload). The WD Blue shows the same higher read / slower write trend seen on the previous page, but we were only sampled the 1TB model of that part, so the higher performance must be tempered by the capacities not being on parity. The Intel 600p is the lowest performer on low-QD reads while its higher interface bandwidth and SLC cache helps it beat the pack on writes.
Most of the SATA parts here ride close to interface saturation. The 600p, despite being an NVMe part, is unable to reach its full throughput at lower queues, limiting its lead on the SATA parts.
For those curious how these results pan out in comparison to older / other SSDs, well, here's a few hundred results for your viewing pleasure:
…did I mention we have thoroughly validated our new test suite?