Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › SSD › SSD Samsung 840 Pro 256GB low benchmark results
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

SSD Samsung 840 Pro 256GB low benchmark results

post #1 of 9
Thread Starter 
I ran Samsung Magician (4.3) and got these results:
Seq Read: 558
Seq Write: 482
Random Read: 62855
Random Write: 52895


I ran AS SSD as well, and got low random scores as well, but I don't have the exact numbers.
It reports "iaStorA-OK", so I think I'm using the correct drivers.

I'm concerned about the Random r/w speeds, as my previous SSD (Samsung 830, with 12TB written on it) had a random read score of 74600.

The numbers seem considerably lower than advertised.

Specs:
CPU
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3635QM CPU @ 2.40GHz
Motherboard
Samsung NP780Z5E-S01UB
Motherboard Chipset
Intel HM76 (Panther Point)
RAM
8 GB DDR3
Graphics
Intel HD Graphics 4000 (integrated)
Radeon HD 8700 (discrete)


SSD
Latest firmware (according to Samsung Magician)
Used Space: 29 GB
Free Space: 208 GB
Intel(R) 7 Series Chipset Family SATA AHCI Controller [ATA]
Microsoft Storage Spaces Controller [SCSI]
Firmware : DXM05B0Q
Interface : Serial ATA
Major Version : ACS-2
Minor Version : ATA8-ACS version 4c
Transfer Mode : SATA/600 | SATA/600
Power On Hours : 121 hours
Power On Count : 167 count
Host Writes : 258 GB
Features : S.M.A.R.T., 48bit LBA, NCQ, TRIM, DevSleep

Sorry, I tried making it as readable/informative as possible-- I apologize that it's jumbled.
post #2 of 9
Looks fine to me wink.gif

If your not already make sure your using Intel RST driver version 12.9.0.1001 wink.gif
Dreamland
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7-6800K ASRock X99 Taichi ASUS GTX 1060 Turbo 6GB 4x4GB G.SKILL DDR4-2400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SM961 128GB Pioneer BDR-208DBK Noctua NH-U9S Windows 10 Pro for Workstations 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 32MP58 Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2016 EVGA SuperNOVA 750 G2 Antec Three Hundred 
MouseAudio
Logitech G Pro Creative Gigaworks T40 Series II 
  hide details  
Reply
Dreamland
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7-6800K ASRock X99 Taichi ASUS GTX 1060 Turbo 6GB 4x4GB G.SKILL DDR4-2400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung SM961 128GB Pioneer BDR-208DBK Noctua NH-U9S Windows 10 Pro for Workstations 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 32MP58 Razer Blackwidow Ultimate 2016 EVGA SuperNOVA 750 G2 Antec Three Hundred 
MouseAudio
Logitech G Pro Creative Gigaworks T40 Series II 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 9
Thread Starter 
Thanks for your response!

Yes, I'm using RST 12.9.0.1.001; is there anything else that you can think of that would be causing this?
Edited by Jayner - 1/6/14 at 5:17pm
post #4 of 9
Laptop PC normally have lower benchmark scores, since they are configured for saving power, not ultimate performance.

The Samsung 830 was tested on the same PC? Were you using IRST 12.9 with the 830?

Did you do both tests with the PC plugged into AC power, or using battery power? Do you know if the Windows Power Plan used is the same in both tests? All OS configurations exactly the same?

The amount of CPU activity will affect AS SSD results. More CPU activity will give higher AS SSD scores, since the CPU is not changing into the low power C-States.

Don't forget the magic words in the specs, "Up To...". Benchmark scores of all SSDs are all over the place with AS SSD, same SSD but quite different results. PCs can be and are quite different from one another.
post #5 of 9
Thread Starter 
Yes, I made sure the power plan was the exact same as well as having the AC adapter plugged in; I also had the same driver version. The only thing that changed would be uninstalling bluetooth PROset, after installing the 840 Pro-- I don't think those two should have any effect, since bluetooth was turned off both times.


I asked around on other forums and received answers such as "I'd be glad to have your scores" which weren't really helpful, so I truly am grateful for your in depth responses.

My main concern is that the IOPS scores for the 840 Pro were consistently less than the advertised value (ran 5-6 benchmarks over the course of one month), whereas on the 830 was pretty much spot-on, even having 12TB written on it. I don't think it's possible that I received a defective drive? Everything is functioning normally, except the scores which are ~1/2 as advertised for R/W.

A couple of weeks ago, I enabled RAPID, hoping to see improvement; it doubled the Sequential R/W, but didn't affect Random R/W. Does that help with any troubleshooting? (RAPID mode is now off)
Edited by Jayner - 1/7/14 at 12:29pm
post #6 of 9
This is from the Samsung 840 Pro's specification document:



We see "Up to" and "Max" for various specs, which is normal. Notice the NOTE section that describes their test PC, a desktop. Mobile PCs always score lower. The IOPs specs were done using IO Meter 2008, using IRST 11.2, generally recognized as the fastest version of IRST. All benchmark tests are different and cannot be compared one to another.

Show us where it is advertised that an 840 Pro will achieve whatever you think it should be, guaranteed? No SSD has specs like that.

My point is there is no fix for your IOPs scores. Was an OS installed on both the 830 and 840 Pro when you ran the benchmarks?

I just checked my saved AS SSD benchmark screenshots of my 830's, compared to my 840 Pro's. None of my 830's had a 4K-64Thrd Random Read score (if that is what you are referring to) of 70,000, mid 60's at best. The 840 Pro's are in the high 77,000 Reads, all on desktop PCs.

Notice again the 840 Pro specs are for QD=32, when the AS SSD test is QD=64. Do you have QD=64 I/O requests on your PC during your usage?
post #7 of 9
Thread Starter 
Yes, the same exact OS was installed on both.

I did research on the RST(e) drivers, as I was concerned if that was the cause for my lower-than-expected numbers; I was advised to use version 12.9, as switching from driver versions after 11.7 to those before (such as 11.2) were known to cause severe problems for people who switched between RST and RST(e) (if you would like, the reading is here.

Also, I have attached a screenshot of one of the benchmarks I ran on my Samsung 830. I sold it on eBay after installing my 840 Pro, so I no longer have it to do any tests with. But I do know that it was consistently in the 70,000 range-- which sparked my concern over the 840 Pro scores.

I am not getting any QD=64 requests.

My final thoughts: Thank you for directly telling me there is no fix for what I thought were low IOPS scores, I will adjust my expectations accordingly.

830.JPG 34k .JPG file
post #8 of 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayner View Post

Yes, the same exact OS was installed on both.

I did research on the RST(e) drivers, as I was concerned if that was the cause for my lower-than-expected numbers; I was advised to use version 12.9, as switching from driver versions after 11.7 to those before (such as 11.2) were known to cause severe problems for people who switched between RST and RST(e) (if you would like, the reading is here.

Also, I have attached a screenshot of one of the benchmarks I ran on my Samsung 830. I sold it on eBay after installing my 840 Pro, so I no longer have it to do any tests with. But I do know that it was consistently in the 70,000 range-- which sparked my concern over the 840 Pro scores.

I am not getting any QD=64 requests.

My final thoughts: Thank you for directly telling me there is no fix for what I thought were low IOPS scores, I will adjust my expectations accordingly.

830.JPG 34k .JPG file

So you're comparing 830 scores on a desktop, X79 board using RSTe (and/or IRST) to a laptop PC? Or is the PC with the 840 Pro some kind of all in one PC using a mobile type CPU?

There's the main answer right there. Laptops will always be slower in benchmarks than desktop PCs. It really helps to know these things when making comparisons. RSTe won't work on any PC besides a board with the X79 chipset.
post #9 of 9
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by parsec View Post

So you're comparing 830 scores on a desktop, X79 board using RSTe (and/or IRST) to a laptop PC? Or is the PC with the 840 Pro some kind of all in one PC using a mobile type CPU?

There's the main answer right there. Laptops will always be slower in benchmarks than desktop PCs. It really helps to know these things when making comparisons. RSTe won't work on any PC besides a board with the X79 chipset.

No, the 830 scores are on the same exact computer (my laptop listed in the OP) that the 840 Pro was tested on. Same laptop, same OS, same programs installed, same power plan, same firmware, about the same space available (210GB)-- hence my disappointment toward the 840 Pro scores.

That link was to show that reverting from the newer RST drivers to the traditional RST drivers would have caused trouble for my system.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: SSD
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › SSD › SSD Samsung 840 Pro 256GB low benchmark results