#CRYSTAL DISK MARK 0.00 RESULTS SERIAL#
#CRYSTAL DISK MARK 0.00 RESULTS DRIVERS#
#CRYSTAL DISK MARK 0.00 RESULTS WINDOWS 10#
#CRYSTAL DISK MARK 0.00 RESULTS PRO#

Keep in mind that the two Samsung 850 PRO SSDs are using hardware RAID1, which seems to help their sequential read performance, and that the two NVMe devices are both using the native Microsoft NVMe drivers, which may be hurting their performance somewhat.įigure 1: 512GB Samsung 950 Pro M. Table 1: Sequential and Random Results (Queue Depth 32, 1 Thread) As you can see below, both the Samsung 950 PRO and the Intel 750 PCIe NVMe cards have tremendous sequential and random I/O performance! Device

#CRYSTAL DISK MARK 0.00 RESULTS DRIVERS#

The two NVMe devices are both using the native Microsoft NVMe drivers from Windows 10. I did some quick and dirty I/O testing today with CrystalDiskMark 5.02.

#CRYSTAL DISK MARK 0.00 RESULTS WINDOWS 10#

This system has Windows 10 Professional installed, so it has native NVMe drivers available from Microsoft. The Intel Z170 Express chipset supports 26 PCIe 3.0 lanes, so you need to think about what devices you are trying to use. Since I have an NVidia GeForce GTX 960 video card in one of the PCI 3.0 x16 slots, both that slot and the PCI 3.0 x16 slot that the Intel 750 is using will go down to x8 (which means 8 lanes instead of 16 lanes). (1) 6TB Western Digital SATA III hard drive in a SATA III port.(1) 400GB Intel 750 PCIe NVMe card in a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot.(1) 512GB Samsung 950 PRO M.2 PCIe 3.0 NVMe card in an Ultra M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 slot.(2) 512GB Samsung 850 PRO SATA III SSDs in RAID 1 (using the chipset RAID controller).As of now, here is the available storage in this system: The latest addition to the storage family is a brand new 512GB Samsung 950 PRO M.2 PCIe NVMe card that just arrived from Amazon yesterday afternoon. By design, this system has several different types of storage devices, so I can take advantage of the extra PCIe bandwidth in the latest Intel Z170 Express chipset, and do some comparative testing. I have some details about this system as described in Building a Z170 Desktop System with a Core i7-6700K Skylake Processor.

Check them out here.)Ī few weeks ago, I built a new Intel Skylake desktop system that I am going to start using as my primary workstation in the near future. Your question is a good one but actually goes beyond the topic of SSDs, although someone else can feel free to chime in on the subject, but ultimately it's more of a file system limitation.(New: we’ve published a range of SQL Server interview candidate screening assessments with our partner Kandio, so you can avoid hiring an ‘expert’ who ends up causing problems. There's a lot of metadata involved with a file for example so splitting a file up increases this overhead. Various reasons copies are made serially, including latency and overhead, plus it was less sequential in nature with HDDs (SSDs fundamentally work differently, hence the flash translation layer). I don't see anything out of the ordinary tbh. If this server is bare-metal, you may still get more or less an idea of its storage performance, though. AmorphousDiskMark measures storage read/write performance in MB/s and IOPS.

DiskSPD is a more accurate tool for this.

#CRYSTAL DISK MARK 0.00 RESULTS SERIAL#

When you're transferring with just one thread it's a serial copy, otherwise its multi-threaded it's possible to do a multi-threaded copy with robocopy for example. Crystal disk mark can't really be the right tool to test the underlying RAID performance. Although it depends on the parallelization of the workload (and SSDs fundamentally try to leverage parallelization). You can think of your CPU as having similar facets - you might have 8 cores but 16 threads, where 2 threads per core is more efficient than one thread per core with multithreading, and likewise having outstanding instructions allows for better pipelining, etc. QD is actually outstanding I/O, performance is improved because you're able to better organize incoming I/O. OK, so I run tests on iperf3 between my PC and my Smartphone, here are the results. Well, I suppose in this case we're actually talking threads rather than queue depth (CDM can test both), I was just using multiple simultaneous transfers to illustrate the concept. Storage benchmarks: PC (Program: CrystalDiskMark): Sequential Read.

Crystal disk mark 0.00 results