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!

Since client workloads lean heavily towards reads, keep a focus on the blue bars for now. The neat progression as we increase through 960 EVO capacities is obvious, as is the predictable gains when moving from 960 to 970 of a given line. The 970 PRO 512GB hits an impressive 27,678 QD-weighted random read IOPS. This is the highest score recorded to date for a NAND-based SSD!

Now let's shift to random writes (orange bars) for a moment. The WD Black maintains its impressive lead here, but most of the NVMe parts are within the same few percentage points. There are obvious ~10% gains from 960 to 970 across the board.

Samsung still owns the field for sequential reads, but once again the WD and SanDisk are cleaning house on writes, and yes, those are once again the highest recorded scores across all SSDs we've ever tested (scroll down), including Optane parts. It's really too bad that client workloads are typically heavier on reads than writes.

This % read sweep chart shows the random QD weighted results between full reads and full writes. We look for a smooth curve here and all SSDs behave as expected with no surprises.

For those who want to see comparisons against a greater number of products, I offer these excessively long charts. I will be maintaining the sort order by random read performance throughout this review. This should make it easier to follow a given comparison SSD as it will stay in the same chart location throughout.

« PreviousNext »