Single page Print

IOMeter — Sequential and random performance
IOMeter fuels much of our latest storage test suite, including our sequential and random I/O tests. These tests are run across the full capacity of the drive at two queue depths. The QD1 tests simulate a single thread, while the QD4 results emulate a more demanding desktop workload. For perspective, 87% of the requests in our old DriveBench 2.0 trace of real-world desktop activity have a queue depth of four or less. Clicking the buttons below the graphs switches between results charted at the different queue depths.

Our sequential tests use a relatively large 128KB block size.



Um. It's not often that one feels giddy after opening a results spreadsheet. The 960 Pro's sequential speeds are astonishing. At both queue depths, it puts up the fastest read speeds we've ever seen, nearly breaching the 2000 MB/s barrier. And while the 960 Pro can't claim the sequential write crown (thanks to that meddling datacenter drive, the P3700), its results are still head and shoulders above the other client SSDs. If the drive's random response times are as strong, the 960 Pro will be a fearsome contender indeed.



Whoo! It's been a long time since a drive has delivered such an irreproachable performance in both our sequential and random tests. Again, the 960 Pro breaks the record for random read response times. And again, only Intel's high-end NVMe stuff stops the 960 Pro from snagging the write record. So far, this drive looks crazy fast. If this keeps up, we'll have a new top dog in our overall performance index. Let's see if some more nuanced testing can reveal any weaknesses.