Results: Random Performance
We turn to Iometer as our synthetic metric of choice for testing 4 KB random performance. Technically, "random" translates to a consecutive access that occurs more than one sector away. On a mechanical hard disk, this can lead to significant latencies that hammer performance. Spinning media simply handles sequential accesses much better than random ones, since the heads don't have to be physically repositioned. With SSDs, the random/sequential access distinction is much less relevant. Data are put wherever the controller wants it, so the idea that the operating system sees one piece of information next to another is mostly just an illusion.
4 KB Random Reads
Testing the performance of SSDs often emphasizes 4 KB random reads, and for good reason. Most system accesses are both small and random. Moreover, read performance is arguably more important than writes when you're talking about typical client workloads.
It's pretty rare to see more than 100,000 IOPS in a 4 KB random read test. And the M5 Pro running Plextor's Xtreme-branded firmware falls just short. The 256 GB M6e sneaks past that barrier at a queue depth of 32, though.
Separately, it's notable that Crucial's SATA 6Gb/s M550 at 1 TB also posts 100,000 IOPS. A conversion to MB/s would show this test to be device-limited, and not held back by its interface, which is why both Plextor drives come so close to each other.
4 KB Random Writes
Random write performance is also important. Early SSDs didn't do well in this discipline, seizing up even in light workloads. Newer SSDs wield more than 100x the performance of drives from 2007, though we also recognize that there's a point of diminishing returns in desktop environments.
We're still dealing with small, random transfers, so this metric cannot illustrate the benefit of PCI Express' faster pipe. But there's a performance difference to explain, and I'd suggest the difference comes down to drivers. Why software? Well, the M5 Pro is SATA-attached, meaning Intel's Rapid Storage Technology driver controls it. The M6e isn't a SATA device, though it still employs AHCI and leans on Microsoft's built-in AHCI drivers. In Windows 7, that's MSACHI.sys. We've seen those two drivers throw off our storage scores in the System Builder Marathon many, many times.
Here's a break-down of the maximum observed 4 KB sequential read and write performance with Iometer. The order the drives appear in our chart is determined by maximum combined read and write performance.
Plextor's M6e earns top honors. No other drive can match its combined maximum read and write transactional 4 KB performance. The margin of victory isn't large, though. PCI Express nets this SSD a big win in large-block sequential transfers. Lots of overhead limits the benefit of more headroom in random reads and writes, though.
The M.2-based M6e and A110 are both held back in our random performance benchmark, and we believe the culprit is AHCI. When the SSD-only NVMe standard takes off, then watch out. We're going to see big reductions in latency and improved random transfers.
Why does SanDisk's A110 fall so far relative to the competition? It might have shown better, except that its emulated SLC-like caching algorithm is swamped by random writes. We test with 16 GB LBA spaces (meaning random data gets sprinkled over 16 GB worth of addresses), hampering the caching mechanism. Tuned more for real-world storage workloads, the A110 exhibits lower results in synthetic random write metrics to larger address spaces. Had I tested just 8 GB, we'd see significantly better numbers.
Current page: Results: Random PerformancePrev Page Results: Sequential Read And Write Performance Next Page Results: Performance Variation
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
Nice product design, please make one in red (it will be faster).Reply
Someone needs to build an adapter that connects to a PCIe x8 slot and has mounting points for up to 4 or 8 PCIe M2 SSDs.Reply
lots of empty space on that PCB and its only a half height card. Maybe its possible we can see multiple TB PCIs SSDs in the consumer space or they may just restrict it to enterprise.Reply
300 dollar for 256 gb... i can buy 4x 120gb v300 kingston (2200mb/s R) (1920mb/s W)Reply
raid 0. too expensive. that plextor
Who keeps telling you there is no demand for M.2 drives?Reply
I bought a Lenovo Y410P shortly after they were released (and was incorrectly told it had mSATA not NGFF/M.2 for the SSD), and have been waiting over a year for a decent M.2 drive to put in it.
May be in a few years we will see an ssd connected to a PCIe x16 the and size of a graphics card.Reply
How much does it add to boot-time with its bios loading stuff? Other PCI-e cards add as long as a 1-2 minutes to boot time.Reply
It's only a single AHCI device, and it doesn't have to wait for spinup like other raid controllers, so likely only a second or so extra init time.Reply
13209105 said:lots of empty space on that PCB and its only a half height card. Maybe its possible we can see multiple TB PCIs SSDs in the consumer space or they may just restrict it to enterprise.
The drive itself has no wasted space. The bridge board has plenty, being that the drive is only 22mm x 80mm.
13209786 said:How much does it add to boot-time with its bios loading stuff? Other PCI-e cards add as long as a 1-2 minutes to boot time.
It adds all of about a second. You'll never notice, and based on UEFI settings, you might never even see the Plextor op-rom splash screen at post.