I just read a full Samsung 950 Pro SSD review as seen below:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-950-pro-ssd,4313-5.html
Samsung is winning all the 'PCMark 8 Real-World Software Performance' benchmarks by a few fractional seconds over Intel SSD 750 400GB PCIe..
But the Intel SSD is WAAAY better than Samsung at latencies. How important are latencies, the review says latencies is arguably the most important factor but why? Especially when the Intel SSD loses on real life applications.
QuickEdit: Reason for the post above is that I'm looking at buying either a 500GB Samsung 950 Pro, raiding 0 two 250GB or get the Intel 750 (on discount). Not sure what would be best for my needs, random reads or low latency. The build would be for a workstation with some games.
Please only reply if you know the answer, not THINK you know it, there is too much false information on the internet, thank you in advance.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-950-pro-ssd,4313-5.html
Samsung is winning all the 'PCMark 8 Real-World Software Performance' benchmarks by a few fractional seconds over Intel SSD 750 400GB PCIe..
But the Intel SSD is WAAAY better than Samsung at latencies. How important are latencies, the review says latencies is arguably the most important factor but why? Especially when the Intel SSD loses on real life applications.
QuickEdit: Reason for the post above is that I'm looking at buying either a 500GB Samsung 950 Pro, raiding 0 two 250GB or get the Intel 750 (on discount). Not sure what would be best for my needs, random reads or low latency. The build would be for a workstation with some games.
Please only reply if you know the answer, not THINK you know it, there is too much false information on the internet, thank you in advance.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram