3 ms·
Part of my goal with this article was to take a fresh look at drives that had been through the old test suite, and be able to refer to the older results as a sa
by wtallis 6y ago
Part of my goal with this article was to take a fresh look at drives that had been through the old test suite, and be able to refer to the older results as a sanity check for the new results. (I found at least two bugs in FIO and one in Windows while working on this.) I have tested the SN850 on the new suite, but haven't written up a proper review yet: https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2732 https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2732 I should also be getting an equivalent to the Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus soon.
- acidbaseextract 6y agoLove it, thank you — the article already had my upvote! In particular SLC cache-aware tests and the inclusion of latency information (both average and 99th percentile) were both heartening to see. Too much crappy storage benchmarking these days. Looking forward to seeing what you pick in terms of application benchmarks. I think application benchmarks help to keep us honest in terms of real-world impact of storage upgrades. LTT seeing if people could tell the difference between SATA and NVMe for games was great. I'm interested in database workloads, and the reason I was asking about the SN850 is that in Postgres benchmarks I've seen it has smoked the 980 Pro.