Path: csiph.com!xmission!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder01.blueworldhosting.com!nntpswitch.blueworldhosting.com!not-for-mail Content-Type: Text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 15:25:31 -0800 (Seattle) Message-ID: References: Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,sci.physics Subject: 540 MegaBytes/Second reading, 520 writing, Max. User-Agent: Jeff-Relf.Me/X.ZIP X-Complaints-To: abuse@blueworldhosting.com Organization: BWH Usenet NNTPSwitch-Cluster Lines: 36 NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 18:25:31 -0500 X-Trace: b517d5650fd6bec90b8a631381 Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:334044 sci.physics:534449 You (Peter_Köhlmann) replied (to me): > > My $350 TeraByte Samsung 850 EVO SSD is: > > > > 540 MegaBytes/Second reading, 520 writing, Max. > > Samsung.COM/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/SSD/global/html/ssd850evo/specifications.html > > > > Sata III is the limiting factor. > > And the sustained transfer rates ? A one gig test (Samsung 850 EVO): http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2014/12/08/samsung-ssd-850-evo-review/4 I don't have my Samsung 850 EVO yet, but I can tell you about my 3 year old "OCZ Vertex 4" SSD. Testing 4 gigaBytes, it's: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- CrystalDiskMark 3.0.4 x64 (C) 2007-2015 hiyohiyo Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- * MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s] Sequential Read : 465.104 MB/s Sequential Write : 410.081 MB/s Random Read 512KB : 337.857 MB/s Random Write 512KB : 411.990 MB/s Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 36.124 MB/s [ 8,819 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 151.607 MB/s [ 37,013 IOPS] Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 357.237 MB/s [ 87,216 IOPS] Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 345.837 MB/s [ 84,432 IOPS] Test : 4000 MB [ C: 58% free (137/238 GB) ] (x1) Date : 2015/07/22 8:06:21 OS : Windows 8 [6.2 Build 9200] (x64)