• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

UL Announces 3DMark SSD Storage Benchmark

Joined
Mar 28, 2020
Messages
1,115 (1.66/day)
That Intel Optane 900P SSD from 2017 may really be ultra fast, I have never seen one.

However, seeing a 5 year old niche Intel product with a much higher score than a Samsung 980 Pro reminded me why I don't trust Bapco and PCMark series of benchmarks: somehow, Intel branded products score much higher than other brands. Somehow, 0.1 second difference in a specific product feature in Intel branded product leads to hundreds or thousands of higher score in the overal score for the Intel branded product.

On the other hand, whatever additional features products from other brands have, they don't get "special points".
Intel Optane don’t excel at sequential read/write speed as compared to a fast PCI-E 4.0 SSD. But Optane has a huge advantage when it comes to latency and seek time, it is in a league of its own. So if you are looking for faster loading time, Optane should offer that. Conventional NAND based SSDs have been improving on sequential speed, which does not really improve responsiveness, at least not anywhere close to Optane. Which is why Optane tends to dominate benchmarks that don’t just focus on pure transfer rates.
 

isvelte

New Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2020
Messages
28 (0.05/day)
It's a really boring test nothing to see. It took about 25 minutes to show only 2 result numbers... If the test measures suposed time to load Battlefield V, why not show this in time?
"Saving game progress on outer worlds" that weirdly takes over a minute is not interesting to watch aswell :p
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
1,027 (0.33/day)
Intel Optane don’t excel at sequential read/write speed as compared to a fast PCI-E 4.0 SSD. But Optane has a huge advantage when it comes to latency and seek time, it is in a league of its own. So if you are looking for faster loading time, Optane should offer that. Conventional NAND based SSDs have been improving on sequential speed, which does not really improve responsiveness, at least not anywhere close to Optane. Which is why Optane tends to dominate benchmarks that don’t just focus on pure transfer rates.
I would not say that 7200MB/s read and 4800MB/s write is anything to sneeze at compared to fastest NAND drive with 7400/7000 numbers:

Like you said yourself the user will problably not notice the difference in sequential transfer speeds. Especially between 7000 and 4800.
And that 7000 is SLC cached on NAND. It drops to around 1000 when the cache is full.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2019
Messages
427 (0.39/day)
Location
UK, Leicester
System Name Main PC
Processor 9900k@4.8ghz
Motherboard Asrock Fatality K6 Z370
Cooling Noctua NH-D15S
Memory 32 Gig 3200CL14
Video Card(s) 3080 RTX FE
Storage 970 EVO 1TB
Display(s) LG 27GL850
Case Fractal Define R4
Audio Device(s) Asus Xonar D2X
Power Supply Antec HCG 750
Not sure of the merits of this, people already incorrectly think gen 4 drives are going to make a big difference to common every day usage. Its also already been proven even on the consoles with their new i/o API gen 3 drives are as good as gen 4.

But this will sell many premium gen 4 drives though so samsung etc. will be happy. :)
 

isvelte

New Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2020
Messages
28 (0.05/day)
I don’t know Rick, benchmark that takes away precious write cycles from my SSD. I will pass.
I monitor the tbw during the whole process, it barely wrote 10gb, watching youtube for 20 mins does more write cycles than that
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
1,231 (0.22/day)
Location
Northern Ontario Canada
System Name Just another PC
Processor Ryzen 1700
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-AX370-K3
Cooling Noctua NH-C12P SE14
Memory DDR4-2133 2x16GB
Video Card(s) XFX RX480 8GB
Storage 960 EVO 500GB OS, 1TB SSD Steam & 2TB WD Blue SSD Storage
Display(s) LG 27UL550-W
Case Be Quiet Pure Base 600 (no window)
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1220
Power Supply EVGA Supernova G2 550W
Mouse Mionix Naos 8200
Keyboard Corsair Strafe with browns
Software W10 Pro x64
Benchmark Scores Starts when push power button!!
In my opinion, this is another meaningless benchmark. From what I can glean from the benchmark results, I feel the few tests that impacts the result is likely the last test where files are being copied over. The rest like loading of games, I think there are plenty of test results that shows very little difference between good SSDs. So the benchmark results make you feel like you have a crap SSD, but in reality it works perfectly fine for people just thinking about game/ application loading time.
Ya, when it comes to drives and most other hardware I prefer real world benchmarks, pull out the stopwatch and show me how fast my OS and games load and stuff installs. (for home use anyway)


For game loading SATA and NVMe are about even most things considered. However I guess driver makers would like this, it gives them grounds for market segregation and jacking up prices for drives with high benchmark numbers.
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2007
Messages
603 (0.11/day)
Location
Round Rock, TX
System Name Teh Beast
Processor i9 12900k
Motherboard Asus STRIX Z690-A
Cooling Noctua NH-U12A
Memory 32GB G.Skill Trident NEO 3600mhz
Video Card(s) EVGA 3080 XC3 Ultra
Storage Samsung 980 Pro 2TB
Display(s) LG 38" 38GL950G
Power Supply EVGA 850W
Software WIndows 11 Pro
I have one. I won it as a door prize at that year's annual "Citizen Con" - The yearly (except for the last couple, obviously) conference for video game, Star Citizen.
Intel sponsored that year's event to launch the SSD, and gave the company 200 or so to give away.

Yup, I also have one (280GB) sitting in my closet.
Was using it as a boot drive for a long time but its just too small.
 
Top