samsung 950 pro crystaldiskmark results

this is what i have.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/imdh3indp4v5f1h/950 PRO 4-8 HW CDM.png?dl=0

yours are a bit low but whats your CPU? CDM is shitty and is CPU bottlenecked. you can try using more threads but it doesn't work too well.

I see a difference in score from 4.2 to 4.8 GHz on a HW and the numbers change a little when you make it 2 thread. Any more than 2 thread doesnt help. at least form my experience. Try AS SSD.

AS SSD score (i tested and it is not CPU limited or at least not like CDM)
https://www.dropbox.com/s/mr11i5lxbcpxozl/950 PRO 4-8 HW as ssd.png?dl=0
 
Looks like what my XPS 15 does with my 256gb. I think my 4k read is ~5mb/s faster, but nothing big. Keep in mind, SomeGuy133's results will be faster as he has the 512gb variant.
 
thanks all for the replies!

here are my results after upping the threads (1,2,4,6,8,12) (i7-3930K - 3.2Ghz / turbo 3.8Ghz):

http://imgur.com/2wUdZb9

a couple thoughts:

is there a better adapter than 'Lycom DT-120 M.2 PCIe to PCIe 3.0 x4 Adapter (Support M.2 PCIe 2280, 2260, 2242)'?

would it be faster if i installed the PCIe card closer to Slot 1 (right now it is in the Slot furthest away)?
 
Last edited:
Phattio said:
thanks all for the replies!

here are my results after upping the threads (1,2,4,6,8,12) (i7-3930K @ 3.2Ghz):

http://imgur.com/2wUdZb9

a couple thoughts:

is there a better adapter than 'Lycom DT-120 M.2 PCIe to PCIe 3.0 x4 Adapter (Support M.2 PCIe 2280, 2260, 2242)'?

would it be faster if i installed the PCIe card closer to Slot 1 (right now it is in the Slot furthest away)?
Click to expand...

as i said use AS SSD. That rpogram is coded well vs CDM. Your CPU is not exactly slowing your SSD....its really your CPU is slowing the program.

Now that may or may not translate to a real world changes.

Nearly every program that you use is single thread dependent. AV/AM is single thread limited and your single thread is not slowing the SSD its slowing the scanning process. I saw an increase in AV/AM scanning speed by upgrading CPU and SSD. It is largely limited by CPU but the faster SSD helps keep the CPU as loaded as possible. There are times where the SSD is the limiting factor.

A little off topic but i hope that helps explain how single thread and SSD are bottlenecks and how CDM is a total shit benchmark now.

use AS SSD and yes please state thats the 256GB because that makes much more sense. The 512GB is considerable faster, which i have and is why yours looks oddly slow.

Google for the offical hard forum 950 Pro thread and post in that. A few people have the 256GB version and can better give you an idea.
 
I didn't realize the cpu issue with crystal mark, Phattio, can you try posting up some AS SSD benches?
 
custom90gt said:
I didn't realize the cpu issue with crystal mark, Phattio, can you try posting up some AS SSD benches?
Click to expand...

the newer version you can enable more threads but i have not seen very good scaling with that. It seems at best 2 threads no matter if you select 1000 threads or 2 threads. It is a bit glitchy.

NVMe drives are starting to push the limits of its shotty coding. AS SSD ran really nicely for me and showed no signs of any of them.

dying for XPoint :/
 
SomeGuy133: thanks for all of the insight!

i'm back with more results... on my PC, the number of threads does indeed make a difference. peak results at 6 or 8 threads. maybe i would see more improvement if i overclocked the CPU also.

NOTE: be sure to install the updated samsung NVMe driver. not only better speeds but AS SSD works correctly now (it was really slow on 4K writes before.)

CDM / 6 threads / before & after samsung NVMe driver install:

http://imgur.com/gwXrbVh

AS SSD:

http://imgur.com/5gowJBR
 
looks decent to me...yea sorry i thought the nvme drivers were a given :D

did you also install windows nvme driver? i installed both...not sure if it matters

If you look at usage BTW for the total program you'll see 2, 6,8 threads use the same amount of CPU as in it tops around 50% total usage...at least for me. I think i actually see a loss above 6 threads...its weird. As i said glitchy.
 
Interesting. My 4k reads are about 10mb/s faster, but everything else looks fairly spot on. You're running the Samsung NVME 1.1 driver right?
 
custom90gt said:
Interesting. My 4k reads are about 10mb/s faster, but everything else looks fairly spot on. You're running the Samsung NVME 1.1 driver right?
Click to expand...

year his 4K is a tad low but maybe he just got the short end of the stick. Mine gets 60 :D 512GB the way to go!
 
SomeGuy133 said:
looks decent to me...yea sorry i thought the nvme drivers were a given :D

did you also install windows nvme driver? i installed both...not sure if it matters

If you look at usage BTW for the total program you'll see 2, 6,8 threads use the same amount of CPU as in it tops around 50% total usage...at least for me. I think i actually see a loss above 6 threads...its weird. As i said glitchy.
Click to expand...

:)

i read windows 10 already had NVMe drivers and thought i was all good... i didn't install any additional (or updated) windows NVMe drivers, only samsung.
 
Phattio said:
:)

i read windows 10 already had NVMe drivers and thought i was all good... i didn't install any additional (or updated) windows NVMe drivers, only samsung.
Click to expand...

oh your on 10 nm. I am using win 7 so i had to install windows driver.
 
custom90gt said:
Hah wish they weren't 330 bucks or I would have got the 512gb vs the 256gb
Click to expand...
agreed! exactly why i went with the 256gb version. just my first experiment with the new NVMe SSD's (didn't even really need it.) now i'll wait for the 1tb or 2tb drives :)
 
My results -- skylake system @ 4.5Ghz, Samsung Driver.

L7dlUtz.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top