In the following tests, we subject our enterprise-oriented SSDs to 25 hours of continuous random 4 KB writes. We record the IOPS every second, giving us 90,000 data points. We then zoom in on the last 60 minutes to better visualize the results.

The 800 GB SSD DC P3700 puts up impressive numbers during our performance consistency testing. While it's true that Micron's P420m achieves lower response times across a majority of its writes, outliers are enough to pull down the overall performance.
You might be wondering how Intel's new drive posts such low response times, since we just showed you that it's slower than the competition from Micron. Our tests are performed at a conservative queue depth of 32, where the 800 GB SSD DC P3700 holds its own (even though it's less expensive and lower-capacity).
We did receive the 1.6 TB SSD DC P3700 late in our testing process, so we only have data from the 800 GB for this metric. Regardless, though, consistency is excellent, and the smaller model easily beats the P420m and SSD 910. It simply cannot match the tight grouping posted by Micron's P320h, which benefits from expensive, low-latency, SLC NAND.

We also wanted to look at how consistency changed across queue depths. And as you can see, there is very little change as we shift from a command depth of four to 32 to 256. It's particularly impressive that the SSD DC P3700 fares so well at low queue depth settings. You can expect it to behave equally well in server or workstation environments.

As mentioned, the SSD DC P3700 is supported by a native driver in Windows Server 2012 R2 and proprietary software from Intel. We wanted to test for performance differences between the two.
Although the resulting patterns appear quite distinct, standard deviation and overall consistency remained almost identical. We didn't run every one of our tests with both drivers, but instead chose to focus on some of the more strenuous. In a couple of pages, we'll regale you with more comparative data.

We normally don't include out-of-box performance in our charts because enterprise-oriented hardware spends most of its time in a steady state. But I just had to plot this data. Right out of the box, Intel's SSD DC P3700 hit more than 400,000 write IOPS for almost 10 minutes, and didn't settle into steady-state for another two hours. In fact, the drive aggressively fought our efforts to keep it in steady state. Pausing for as little as a few seconds was all it took to push performance back into the 300,000 IOPS-range for short bursts.

Finally, we charted the distribution of response times at steady-state. The SSD DC P3700 gives us a beautiful bell curve without any outliers. This is the sort of consistency we have come to expect from Intel, and the SSD DC P3700 delivers.
|
|
|
|
|
- Intel SSD DC P3700: NVMe Enterprise Storage
- A Deeper Look At NVM Express
- Intel's SSD DC P3700: Up Close and Personal
- How We Tested Intel's SSD DC P3700
- Results: 4 KB Random Performance and Latency
- Results: Performance Consistency
- Results: Sequential Performance
- Results: Enterprise Workload Performance
- Results: Enterprise Video Streaming Performance
- Intel SSD DC P3700: A Stellar First Look at NVMe
(3500 scores highest, while the 3700 scores lowest)
By the way, OCZ revodrive was priced similarly, I don't see that big fuzz from Toms here.
What the hell is LFM?
Edit:
It's not actually wrong it might just be my out of date browser I'm using in the office but for me the numbers aren't lining up correctly.
What the hell is LFM?
Linear Feet per Minute of airflow
What the hell is LFM?
Linear Feet per Minute of airflow
What the hell is LFM?
Linear Feet per Minute of airflow
Ah that makes sense now
(3500 scores highest, while the 3700 scores lowest)
Fixed - Thanks!
You are correct, there are PCIe SSDs that can beat the P3700, but Intel undercuts the price on those SSDs by a wide margin. SSDs that are in the same price ballpark as the P3700 don't come close in most tests.
Yes, these SSDs still have a write endurance specification that is listed on the first page. The P3700 can withstand 10 drive writes per day (DWPD) for a full 5 years.
By the way, OCZ revodrive was priced similarly, I don't see that big fuzz from Toms here.
The OCZ RevoDrive's that are similarly priced are more consumer drives and not enterprise like the P3XXX series from Intel. These drives will have more write endurance and greater sustained IOP performance, which is what enterprise customers pay for. Also, NVMe isn't an Intel unique thing. Expect to see all PCIe SSD companies, including OCZ, to follow.
I wouldn't say Intel is trying to claim anything. They are following\leading an industry specification that most companies will move to eventually, including OCZ. Native booting is obviously one benefit, but low latency and fewer CPU cycles required are what enterprise customers are happy about.
AKA Megatron ?
i don't see the point in this, it reminds me of the ISA memory storage cards. i can't see this lasting more than 5-10 years as some company already figured out how to do this with RAM (samsung wasn't it?) and is working on the need for storage drives altogether and just have RAM drives that don't lose their data sort of an mpci but in a 304-9 pin dimm slot form factor if i recall properly ?
so these nvmhci might be on the market now but when that company brings their solution to market it's going to eliminate the need for pcie and sata except for optical disc reading and graphics cards. but i am sure those manufacturers will be looking for a way to incorporate gpus into DIMM slot factors to take real advantage of boards with 32+ PCIe lanes like socket 2011/X79/X99 solutions.
it would eliminate the pathway needs for alot of peripherals and decrease the size of M/B tremendously to where you'd only need a PC the size of a 9"x 6"x 8" case which USB 3.1 and display port/thunderbolt/lightning eliminating the need for alot of built ins
Yes, these SSDs still have a write endurance specification that is listed on the first page. The P3700 can withstand 10 drive writes per day (DWPD) for a full 5 years.
oh, i see, i think i have miss that part. when NVMe first come to my mind, i thought their storage chips have move to non volatile memory base like PCM, ReRAM and ST-MRAM. but now only i notice their storage chips are still NAND base.