Intel 600p vs. Samsung 950 Pro

[TemjinGold]

So in looking at the new 600p line, on paper the metrics are far below the 950 Pro but I recall people saying you don't get to experience most of the 950 Pro's performance with consumer loads. I imagine you can't see all of the 600p's either, which makes me wonder--given the 600p is being priced more like the 850 EVO, did Intel just either force everyone else to drop their prices or make it a no brainer to buy the 600p over any performance SATA SSDs?

 

[UsandThem]

It depends on the reviews. I checked various sites, but it seems all that is out there right now are press releases.

The theoretical performance looks great as a mainstream 'everyday' drive. I'd love for Intel to be much more competitive against Samsung, so prices would start trending back down a little bit.

If the reviews are good, a 512 GB drive for $190 at launch with a 5-year warranty, and performance that is better than SATA-based drives seems like a winner on paper.

 

[Beer4Me]

I don't think this is a fair apples/apples comparison. The 950 Pro is using MLC NAND, and it has a far superior controller which justifies it's price. The 600p is a budget M.2 offering based on inferior TLC NAND. I think usually people that are shopping for M.2 drives don't cross shop these two. I find it odd that you are.

 

[UsandThem]

Yes, there is no doubt the 950 Pro is faster, that's not the point he was making. That isn't the point of the new Intel 600p lineup. It is for people and businesses who do not need, or will never use the full potential the 950 Pro offers. Many times people post on this site about how they upgraded to a 950 Pro, but it doesn't seem "any faster" than using a 850 EVO or PRO because what they use their computers for is not I/O intensive workloads. A 512 GB 950 Pro is $318, whereas the 600p is $190.

It's place is geared to be in between SATA-based SSDs and the NVMe 950 Pro. Also, the new 600p drives use 3D NAND, and not the budget planar NAND.

 

[TemjinGold]

Exactly. And if the paper numbers bear out (i.e. 600p crushes 850 Pro at a lower price), that should either mandate price drops or all performance SATA drives have suddenly become irrelevant (why would you pay more for something that's worse). I'm just wondering if I'm missing something tangible there.

 

[UsandThem]

Exactly. And if the paper numbers bear out (i.e. 600p crushes 850 Pro at a lower price), that should either mandate price drops or all performance SATA drives have suddenly become irrelevant (why would you pay more for something that's worse). I'm just wondering if I'm missing something tangible there.

No, I think you are spot on. That's why competition is good for the consumers.

The only difference I see (besides performance of course) is the 850 Pro (512 GB) has a 10 year warranty or 300 TBW. The Intel 600p just lists 5 years warranty with a life expectation of 1.6 million hours MBTF.

 

[corkyg]

I don't think this is a fair apples/apples comparison. The 950 Pro is using MLC NAND, and it has a far superior controller which justifies it's price. The 600p is a budget M.2 offering based on inferior TLC NAND. I think usually people that are shopping for M.2 drives don't cross shop these two. I find it odd that you are.

This is a valid consideration. I do not even own a computer that can accommodate M.2. In the notebook world, only the newest models can. When 600p appears in 2.5 format, the comparison would have more validity

 

[TemjinGold]

That's a fair point if someone doesn't have the slot. I'm curious because I'm itching to replace my rig after all these years (though I'll wait till Zen comes out first to decide).

 

[jarablue]

So if you had a choice between getting 250gb M2 850 EVO or the Intel 600p 250gb M2 NVME drive, what would you get? Does the 850 EVO M2 outperform the 600p M2 drive?

Microcenter has these for 99.99$ and I have 5 days left of my return period on my M2 850 EVO that I bought from them. I am not sure if I should take it back and get the 600p.

Thanks!

 

[UsandThem]

Does the 850 EVO M2 outperform the 600p M2 drive?

850 EVO 250 GB M.2 specifications:

• Sequential Read: Max. 540 MB/s
• Sequential Write: Max. 500 MB/s
• 4KB Random Read (QD1): Max. 10,000 IOPS
• 4KB Random Write (QD1): Max. 40,000 IOPS
• 4KB Random Read (QD32): Max. 97,000 IOPS
• 4KB Random Write (QD32): Max. 89,000 IOPS

http://www.samsung.com/us/computing...ives/ssd-850-evo-m-2-250gb-mz-n5e250bw/#specs


Intel 600P 256 GB specifications:

• Sequential read: Max. 1570 MB/s

• Sequential write: Max. 540 MB/s

• Random read (IOPS): 71,000

• Random write (IOPS): 112,000

http://hexus.net/tech/news/storage/96214-intel-ssd-600p-series-mainstream-m2-pcie-ssds-announced/

There are no hands-on reviews of the Intel 600p drives yet, but on paper they are faster and Intel claims they are up to 3x faster than a SATA-based SSD (which your 850 EVO M.2 is). Will you see the performance difference? It depends on your usage.

 

[nerp]

I am a good use case. I have an m.2 slot and can support PCIe NVMe SSDs and currently have a 850 EVO SATA SSD. On paper this gives me a nice performance boost, frees up a SATA slot, takes advantage of the newer architecture I can support on my current motherboard, takes up less space and costs less? The only thing holding me back from buying right this second is the fact there could be sales and discounts and the market will adjust to this so I might even find it to be a better deal in a few months. Plus I don't feel urgency. But this fits a sweet spot. Until this product, I saw no reason to go pcie nvme for the price considering the great performance I already have.

 

[UsandThem]

Someone finally posted a review (on the 256 GB version), and there were a few interesting results:

Sustained write speeds exceeding 120 MB/s for a long enough period to completely fill the SLC cache appear to put the 600p into a data shuffling frenzy that ultimately results in *very* inconsistent performance. As a result, all benchmarks that involve sustained write operations turn in poor figures. Fortunately for Intel, most use cases will never result in a full cache, as the 600p does its best to empty it as quickly as possible. While the 600p did poorly in a lot of our legacy benchmarks, we must understand that it was not an SSD designed or optimized to run heavy-write benchmarks.

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Stora...-Low-Cost-M2-NVMe/Sequential-Performance-HDTa

I'm going to possibly pick up a 512 GB version (16 GB SLC cache vs 6 GB for 256 GB version) after I see some reviews on it. Even from Intel's own specifications, the bigger the drive the faster the performance.

512 GB specs:

Sequential Read (up to) 1775 MB/s
Sequential Write (up to) 560 MB/s
Random Read (8GB Span) (up to) 128500 IOPS
Random Write (8GB Span) (up to) 128000 IOPS

 

[nerp]

Someone finally posted a review (on the 256 GB version), and there were a few interesting results:

https://www.pcper.com/reviews/Stora...-Low-Cost-M2-NVMe/Sequential-Performance-HDTa

I'm going to possibly pick up a 512 GB version (16 GB SLC cache vs 6 GB for 256 GB version) after I see some reviews on it. Even from Intel's own specifications, the bigger the drive the faster the performance.

512 GB specs:

Sequential Read (up to) 1775 MB/s
Sequential Write (up to) 560 MB/s
Random Read (8GB Span) (up to) 128500 IOPS
Random Write (8GB Span) (up to) 128000 IOPS

In the PcPer podcast this week, Intel apparently is reviewing the results from their testing and a firmware adjustment could be coming to help smooth out what happens when it reaches its cache limit during write operations.

I agree that the 512 looks nice. I am very, very tempted to order one rigth now.

 

[SinOfLiberty]

 

[nerp]

Posted in other thread:

Ordered the 512GB model. Woohoo.

I don't expect to be moving files larger than 16GB at more than 200mb/sec for long sustained periods of time anytime soon. Now I have a nice speed upgrade over my 850 EVO SSD, which can now slide over from being a system drive to a game drive, bumping a smaller EVO out of my machine and into my wife's MacBook. Everyone is happy. Discovered I had a pile of Amex rewards available so I saved almost $100 off the price. Final cost was $120 for a 512 PCIe NVMe M.2 SSD!

 

[UsandThem]

Posted in other thread:

Ordered the 512GB model. Woohoo.

Congrats and a really good price with those rewards.

After you get it up and running, be sure report back on the results and how it went for you. I want to get one as well, however I usually wait a little bit for them to work out the early-adapter taxes (drivers or firmware) before taking the plunge.

 

[nerp]

I will. I've never benchmarked a drive before and the PcPer review indicates it would be pretty pointless to run a traditional benchmark. That review also was for the 256gb model which has half the cache as the 512gb version AND the sustained write speed to outpace whatever balancing going on with the controller is above 120mb/sec or so threshold needed to flood the 256gb controller. Not many things can sustain that speed for that long on my network, etc, so the only time I'd see this is while conducting benchmarks. Looks like I'll be keeping my eyes peeled for Intel to update the firmware at some point -- they are reportedly investigating the frenzied state that happened in that PcPer review and might offer some optimizations to improve how it handles those scenarios. Looking at the raw numbers reported so far, the 512gb is a strong leap in performance and comes with much more breathing room in terms of cache.

Now I have to dig out my motherboard box and find that M.2 screw!

And reinstall Windows. .. Again. This machine has been reborn almost 10 times this year at this point.​

 

[UsandThem]

And reinstall Windows. .. Again. This machine has been reborn almost 10 times this year at this point.​

I wonder if you cloned your old drive with Intel's Data Migration software, if Windows 10 would still be able to boot (either by fixing the MBR itself) or using a bootable USB/disc and clicking repair. The nice thing with Windows 10, and you probably have already done this upgrading your system 10 times, is using the 'Reset this PC' option.

I've never owned a M.2 drive yet, but I have thought about how that would work out.

 

[nerp]

Honestly, since everything is in the cloud, I can go from nothing to a completed install in almost 30 minutes. There might be a ton of email downloading and steam apps pumping in but all I really have to do is run a bunch of installers: office, slack, chrome, then go to the windows store and go to my library and click a pile of arrows and that's it. Everything is synced with Onedrive and Chrome and Windows 10. It's actually pretty cool. And it's pretty remarkable how little fussing around I have to do to get my machine working just right after a fresh install.

I will set aside my steam libraries so that's just a matter of moving them locally and pointing steam at them. That will save some time. But I'm lucky to live in an area with 100mbit/100mbit FIOS so even that isn't so big of a deal. Just minimize steam and forget about it. It's the one thing I have to set a bandwith cap. Steam can flood my network like nothing else.

 

[UsandThem]

Yeah, I have 200Mbps/20Mbps TWC service here, but I don't have any data caps, which is nice. With two teenagers who are always gaming (Steam and Xbox One), uploading video and audio, programming games, or watching Netflix, it's nice not having to worry about going over a data cap.

I keep all my stuff backed up (mostly music and photos) on an external SSD, so it will copy back over pretty quickly. I think I might just go the cloning route when I do it, just to see how it goes. If there are major issues or if it becomes too time consuming trying to figure it out, I'll just do a clean install.

 

[UsandThem]

@nerp

I guess you bought it at the right time. Last night Newegg jacked the price up to $219.99; $30 over Intel's suggested retail price.

Back when they first started, I didn't notice them doing that, and that's why I first started using them. Now it seems with any new component or item that's in demand, they either charge over MSRP or force a bundle on the buyer (PS4 with a Changhong 50" TV for example).

Oh well. I don't need it, so I'll wait until it pops up at MSRP somewhere.

 

[SinOfLiberty]

Sumsung, the heater. Better be water cooling it.

There is even an Anandtech review on it with heatsink, LOL

 

[jarablue]

It really is great living next to Microcenter. They are cheaper than newegg on a lot of stuff. I think I saved 200$ in total going with them. But newegg has stuff that is cheaper on occasion so..give or take. I bought the 256gb 600p drive from Microcenter for 99$. I swapped my 850 evo for no cost extra. I was within my 30day return period and figured this was a no brainer. Speeds are fine and I am very happy for now. 256gig is all I need for my apps/programs. I will get a 1tb ssd for my steam library and data, then a platter drive behind that. Hopefully Intel releases a updated firmware for the slc cache issue. Intel needs to release their ssd toolbox to work with this drive. It is lacking at the moment. Well worth 99$ though.

 

[DesiPower]

So anyone bought 600p yet? I am planning to go with the 256GB version, 950 pro is twice as expensive. Wanted a PCIe m.2 to free up sata port.
Will be pairing with a X99 mobo too later, can X99 really harness the power of 950 pro, will be there a noticeable difference? PC is mostly for gaming, OS only on this m.2 drive games on 1TB 850 EVO.

 

[UsandThem]

So anyone bought 600p yet? I am planning to go with the 256GB version, 950 pro is twice as expensive. Wanted a PCIe m.2 to free up sata port.
Will be pairing with a X99 mobo too later, can X99 really harness the power of 950 pro, will be there a noticeable difference? PC is mostly for gaming, OS only on this m.2 drive games on 1TB 850 EVO.

That's what I was going to go with until I read about the Samsung 960 EVO. It should be around the same price, but faster.

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016/09/samsung-ssd-960-pro-evo-price-specs-release-date/

Nerp bought a 600p though, so you could shoot him a message. From talking to him on here, he seems to be pleased with the purchase.