Samsung SSD 850 EVO & Transcend SSD 370 test

· Krešimir Matanović · Mediji · Stranica 5 od 7

Rezultati testova – drugi dio

ATTO Disk Benchmark

Patriot Blaze 240GB358,4OCZ Vector 150 120GB316,6OCZ Vector 180 240GB311,3OCZ Vector 256GB308,2OCZ Vector 180 960GB299,1OCZ Vertex 460 240GB288,8Corsair Force LX 256GB267,3Samsung 850 PRO 256GB266,2Samsung 850 EVO 500GB263,2Transcend SSD370 128GB263,2OCZ ARC 100 240 GB259,5Intel SSD 730 240GB248,8Transcend SSD370 256GB248,2Patriot Pyro 240GB242,7takeMS UTX-PO318239,0Transcend SSD370 512GB233,3Intel DC S3500 480GB232,9OCZ Vertex 450 256GB224,7Crucial MX100 512GB211,4AMD Radeon R7 SSD 240GB201,7Intel SSD335 240GB110,0ASUS Hyper Express 256GB95,80360 Patriot Blaze 240GB344,1takeMS UTX-PO318339,1OCZ Vector 180 960GB331,8Patriot Pyro 240GB328,7OCZ Vector 180 240GB293,9Intel SSD 730 240GB285,7OCZ Vertex 460 240GB270,3Intel DC S3500 480GB264,2OCZ Vector 256GB259,4Samsung 850 EVO 500GB248,8Samsung 850 PRO 256GB248,8Corsair Force LX 256GB247,8OCZ ARC 100 240 GB243,1Transcend SSD370 256GB217,1Crucial MX100 512GB208,9Transcend SSD370 512GB208,4OCZ Vector 150 120GB195,5AMD Radeon R7 SSD 240GB182,8OCZ Vertex 450 256GB181,6Transcend SSD370 128GB154,9ASUS Hyper Express 256GB118,8Intel SSD335 240GB96,00350 OCZ Vector 150 120GB562,5OCZ Vector 256GB561,3Samsung 850 PRO 256GB561,3Corsair Force LX 256GB558,9Transcend SSD370 128GB558,9Transcend SSD370 256GB558,9Transcend SSD370 512GB558,9Crucial MX100 512GB558,8takeMS UTX-PO318557,8OCZ Vector 180 240GB554,9OCZ Vector 180 960GB554,3Intel SSD 730 240GB554,3Patriot Blaze 240GB553,2OCZ Vertex 460 240GB550,9Samsung 850 EVO 500GB548,6AMD Radeon R7 SSD 240GB547,5Patriot Pyro 240GB528,9Intel DC S3500 480GB502,9OCZ ARC 100 240 GB487,7OCZ Vertex 450 256GB404,1Intel SSD335 240GB399,5ASUS Hyper Express 256GB231,00600 ASUS Hyper Express 256GB723,1takeMS UTX-PO318535,5OCZ Vertex 460 240GB532,9Samsung 850 PRO 256GB530,2OCZ Vector 180 240GB530,2Patriot Blaze 240GB528,9Samsung 850 EVO 500GB528,9OCZ Vector 180 960GB527,6AMD Radeon R7 SSD 240GB523,0Crucial MX100 512GB511,5Patriot Pyro 240GB510,3Intel DC S3500 480GB477,7Transcend SSD370 512GB445,3OCZ ARC 100 240 GB430,6OCZ Vector 256GB417,8Intel SSD335 240GB388,4OCZ Vertex 450 256GB369,2Corsair Force LX 256GB306,2Transcend SSD370 256GB304,2Intel SSD 730 240GB290,2OCZ Vector 150 120GB195,3Transcend SSD370 128GB160,80730

Situacija je ponovno slična kao i kod AIDA testova. Samsungov je disk vrlo brz u svim situacijama dok Transcendovi nešto kaskaju u zapisu – bilo kod 4K bilo kod 512K.

I/O Meter Mixed Workload

Samsung 850 EVO 500GB @ Database9.340,0Samsung 850 EVO 500GB @ FileServer9.352,3Samsung 850 EVO 500GB @ Workstation13.335,5Samsung 850 EVO 500GB @ WebServer27.653,8028.000

Rezultati miješanih testova, tj. simulacija četiri načina rada u serverskom okruženju su poprilično slabi u svemu osim zadnjem testu za ovog Samsunga i tu se ponavlja situacija iz testa 850 PRO modela.

Transcend SSD370 128GB @ Database3.191,7Transcend SSD370 256GB @ Database22.997,7Transcend SSD370 512GB @ Database36.775,4Transcend SSD370 128GB @ FileServer4.583,3Transcend SSD370 256GB @ FileServer19.469,7Transcend SSD370 512GB @ FileServer20.149,6Transcend SSD370 128GB @ Workstation4.566,7Transcend SSD370 256GB @ Workstation25.254,6Transcend SSD370 512GB @ Workstation29.858,6Transcend SSD370 128GB @ WebServer20.038,6Transcend SSD370 256GB @ WebServer24.125,5Transcend SSD370 256GB @ WebServer24.290,1030.000

Jača dva Transcenda su sasvim ugodno iznenadila i imaju vrlo dobre performanse u ovome testu, dok je 128GB model znatno slabiji i od Samsungovog 850 EVO modela.

POVEZANI ČLANCI