950 Sammy is exact same speed of my 850 pro ?

[tweakboy]

I have PCIe and also I tried all I could before I posted here.. I was using the 850 pro ,, it was great,, but 950 is same speed when it should be much much faster and powerful

boot up is same speed these two. . Im talking exact


Anyhow thanks for reading this. please write your comments etc..

 

[VirtualLarry]

Well, boot speed is hardly conclusive of an SSD's capabilities, and the thing about M.2 NVMe SSDs, is that they excel at high queue depths, which, most desktop users rarely encounter.

I've got some SM951 M.2 AHCI PCI-E 3.0 x4 128GB SSDs. They're fast, but random IOPS on mine seem barely any better than my 2.5" SATA6G PNY CS1111 240GB SSD. Sequentials benchmark like 2GB/sec for reads though.

 

[UsandThem]

Well, boot speed is hardly conclusive of an SSD's capabilities, and the thing about M.2 NVMe SSDs, is that they excel at high queue depths, which, most desktop users rarely encounter.

+1

I have a lowly 850 EVO as my OS drive, and it gets to the desktop very quickly. If I have my system powered down, after the BIOS post I am at my Windows login screen in moments. All my programs and games load very quickly as well.

If you want to make sure you have things configured correctly or want to make sure there are no issues, try running CrystalDiskMark or similar program.

 

[tweakboy]

Loading up tray stuff,,,Same exact when I was using the 850 pro . thx I tried CDM and it gives 7000 5000 write 7000 read

 

[VirtualLarry]

thx I tried CDM and it gives 7000 5000 write 7000 read

Which... is only possible if you are running Samsung's RAPID driver, which is a RAM caching mechanism. If you were running CDM on both drives, while RAPID was running, you would probably end up getting the same scores, because you would just be benchmarking the RAM cache in both cases.

Start by disabling RAPID (having RAPID enabled can cause data-loss if you're not on a UPS), and reboot, then benchmark both drives with CDM.

 

[BSim500]

I have PCIe and also I tried all I could before I posted here.. I was using the 850 pro ,, it was great,, but 950 is same speed when it should be much much faster and powerful

boot up is same speed these two. . Im talking exact

As VirtualLarry said, it's a very specialist drive designed for the most extreme loads, but for most real world usage there's very little difference for booting, gaming, etc, outside of synthetics:-
http://techreport.com/review/29221/samsung-950-pro-512gb-ssd-reviewed/4

The perceivable impact of the SATA 3 "bottleneck" is way overblown for real life general usage.

 

[nerp]

Yes. Many people buy the 950 Pro expecting a huge leap from the 850 EVO and end up frustrated.

 

[wpcoe]

Yes. Many people buy the 950 Pro expecting a huge leap from the 850 EVO and end up frustrated.

I'm not really frustrated, per se, but even though the 950 Pro benchmarks to exceptional speeds, in regular use (including booting) it doesn't "seem" any faster than my old build with a 840 EVO as my boot drive.

 

[nerp]

Yes, for normal real world use it's hard to reach the limit of SATAIII SSDs. Most people find NVMe PCIe faster when they're doing specific types of data stuff can actually take advantage of that speed.

 

[2blzd]

Using a 950 pro as a boot drive is a waste if you ask me.

I see so many new editing machines setup with that as the primary boot/os drive while they're using normal SSD's for all their I/O. Backwards!

 

[whm1974]

For the vast majority of use cases, most folks aren't going to see any differences.