![]() ![]() Samsung's 980 PRO is now out and a few more Gen4 devices are on the way. You can swap the names for the corsair in the benchmarks above if you want to see how it compares. Well, the 1TB Seagate FireCuda 520 and the 2TB Sabrent Rocket NVMe 4.0 are identical to the Corsair Force MP600, so they all perform the same. I will try to include the next closest capacity in with the updated capacity under test, though. I wish we could simply update a database for easy to make charts. Seanwebster said:That's a good idea, but can get tricky. If you want to use this in a workstation, be sure to provide additional cooling. The NAND temperature on the surface of the package got up to 77C while the DRAM peaked at 74C. The controller measured 94C, while the SMART data reported upwards of 100-103C before the drive finally throttled down to speeds of 200MBps. After we threw a few 50GB and 100GB file transfers its way, the P5 heated up and ultimately throttled. That's 10-15C higher than most M.2 NVMe SSDs. At idle, the Crucial P5's controller hovers around 50C. This is the company's first implementation so there's room for improvement, which usually comes from firmware tuning as a design matures. Idle power consumption is a little high, too, probably because the controller has six cores. Placing third to last place, the P5 is twice as efficient as a SATA SSD but isn't up to par with the competition. The P5 regulates its average and peak power consumption well, but the drives' somewhat weak file copy performance hurts its power efficiency score. Bear in mind that results will vary based on the workload and ambient air temperature. data and an IR thermometer to see when (or if) thermal throttling kicks in and how it impacts performance. We also monitor the temperature of the drive via the S.M.A.R.T. A drive might consume more power during any given workload, but accomplishing a task faster allows the drive to drop into an idle state faster, which ultimately saves power. Average workload power consumption and max consumption are two other aspects of power consumption, but performance-per-watt is more important. Some SSDs can consume watts of power at idle while better-suited ones sip just milliwatts. ![]() Idle power consumption is an important aspect to consider, especially if you're looking for a laptop upgrade. We use the Quarch HD Programmable Power Module to gain a deeper understanding of power characteristics. After an additional minute of idle time, the SLC cache grew to 500GB. This means that while the initial fill shows that the SLC cache is only about 200GB, we measured 350GB after 30 seconds of idle time. In contrast, other SSDs will immediately recover all of the cache as fast as possible, and at a fairly steady rate.Ĭrucial, however, can recoup its entire cache immediately after a write transfer stops, and the cache also expands when it detects a large sequential workload. Some SSDs recover only 4-6GB of SLC cache within a few moments, and then take hours to recover the rest of the cache capacity. Like the 1TB model, the 2TB Crucial P5 has rather unusual write performance characteristics, largely because it comes with one of the most interesting caching mechanisms we've seen. The Crucial P5 wrote roughly 200GB of data at 3GBps before degrading to a speed of 1,100 MBps. We also monitor cache recovery via multiple idle rounds. We use iometer to hammer the SSD with sequential writes for 15 minutes to measure both the size of the write cache and performance after the cache is saturated. Sustained write speeds can suffer tremendously once the workload spills outside of the cache and into the "native" TLC or QLC flash. Most SSDs implement a write cache, which is a fast area of (usually) pseudo-SLC programmed flash that absorbs incoming data. Official write specifications are only part of the performance picture. Sustained Write Performance and Cache Recovery The P5’s random read performance is fast at QD1, while its performance in random write tests is much slower than the competition. ![]() The P5’s performance in random workloads is the polar opposite of the trends we see in our sequential tests. Crucial’s multi-core design seems to be a liability here because while the SSD can deliver fast sequential performance at larger block sizes, it suffers at smaller block sizes - especially with write workloads.Īfter intensifying the workload, the P5’s sequential performance peaks at 3.5/3.3 GBps read/write. The P5’s overall write performance looks good, but it lagged behind even the WD Black SN750 during read workloads. We tested Crucial’s P5 at a QD (queue depth) of 1, representing most day to day file access at various block sizes. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |