The Samsung PM981 SSD Review (512GB, 1TB): Next Generation Controller And 3D NAND
by Billy Tallis on November 30, 2017 9:02 AM ESTAnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
Our Heavy storage benchmark is proportionally more write-heavy than The Destroyer, but much shorter overall. The total writes in the Heavy test aren't enough to fill the drive, so performance never drops down to steady state. This test is far more representative of a power user's day to day usage, and is heavily influenced by the drive's peak performance. The Heavy workload test details can be found here. This test is run twice, once on a freshly erased drive and once after filling the drive with sequential writes.
On the Heavy test, the average data rates of the 512GB Samsung PM981 again lag slightly behind most MLC-based NVMe drives but are clearly ahead of the competitors' TLC drives. The 1TB PM981 is behaving a bit oddly with slower than expected performance after a secure erase, but great performance when filled.
The average latency of the 1TB PM981 is a significant improvement over the 1TB 960 EVO, while the 512GB PM981 doesn't stand out from the other 512GB drives. The 99th percentile latencies aren't particularly good, and the 512GB PM981 scores worse than almost all the other PCIe SSDs of that size.
The average write latency of the 1TB PM981 is excellent especially when the test is run on an empty drive. Average read latencies for both drives are decent but aren't a big improvement over their predecessors.
The 99th percentile read latencies are one of the few ATSB scores where the TLC-based nature of the PM981 shines through. Many MLC-based SSDs are much better at keeping read latency under control, and the TLC-based Toshiba XG5 also scores much better than the PM981 here. The 99th percentile write latency of the 1TB PM981 is pretty good, following suit to the average write latency, while the 512GB model could use some improvement.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
53 Comments
View All Comments
peevee - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link
The most important parameter is the sustained random read, when the user have to actually wait (buffered writes let you continue working right away and it is almost impossible to overflow write caches during normal desktop usage).And even SSDs continue to suck in this parameter. 60MB/s? Booo...
Although testing on 4k random is too strict, NTFS runs are usually 16 clusters (64k).
wyewye - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link
This is why I stopped coming to Anandtech daily: you keep excluding top offers from Intel in your SSD benchmarks.Samsung shills!
ddriver - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link
LOL, second funniest thing I heard this weekddrіver - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link
The first one was actually a joke with a priest and a rabbi... Can't really remember the punchline now.lilmoe - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link
Thank you, competing OEMs. Thanks to you, Samsung isn't even trying anymore. Just when I thought they'd introduce 64 layer SLC, they decide to go full TLC, because why try harder? Screw you too, Samsung.ddrіver - Thursday, November 30, 2017 - link
Exactly my point. It's not so hard for them to go to 64 or 128 or even 256 layer SLC, with even an 8TB SSD. That should be in the range of $500-$600 to be competitive. Instead they choose to deliver a drive that simply doesn't massively improve on every single data point relative to the old generation. It might be good for 95% of consumers but they don't even think of us, professionals.Just downloading a game nowadays takes 50-100GB of SSD writes. At this rate who know how long I'm going to be able to use this kind of SSD. Greedy people selling to sheeple. Wake up!
zodiacfml - Friday, December 1, 2017 - link
Samsung, like Intel, has no competition taking their sweet time with each iteration.AnnonymousCoward - Saturday, December 2, 2017 - link
In many cases Samsung costs more and has less endurance; the competition is better.melgross - Friday, December 1, 2017 - link
It’s good to see that manufacturers are so far in advance of where they already are:“Other M.2 PCIe SSD vendors have used that tactic and many have also released drives with more substantial heatspreaders or heatsinks in the future.”
trumanhw - Sunday, December 31, 2017 - link
1TB 960 Pro looks like it's the shiznit. By far my choice... cost per dollar, and as they said, impunity to the negatives seen in other sizes and models. Where it's not the first, it's so close in the other positions as to require measurement to verify. As always, thank you anand -- you guys rock.