Samsung SM951-NVMe Versus AHCI Versus SATA 850 Pro

By Chris Ramseyer
published

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

PCMark 8 Real-World Software

For details on our real-world software performance testing, please click here.

Image 1 of 10

Here's your first real look at the two SM951s compared to Samsung's 850 Pro in real-world desktop applications. We didn't expect to see the SM951-NVMe improve over the AHCI model, but that's not the case; there is in fact a slight speed-up. Many of these tests run in a single thread at low queue depths, the Photoshop Heavy metric serving as the sole exception. 

Singling out that benchmark, the two SM951s finish within two seconds of each other. The SM951-NVMe wraps up the job a full 10 seconds faster than Samsung's 850 Pro. Photoshop Heavy also shows the widest gap between the three drives. Most of the other benchmarks are separated by a few seconds or less.

Each run takes about 20 minutes to complete. Over that span of time, we see a large divide between the three products in question. The results above are presented in MB/s rather than time to complete, if only to show that those small time differences really do equate to a big impact on user experience.

Chris Ramseyer
Chris Ramseyer
Chris Ramseyer is a Contributing Editor for Tom's Hardware US. He tests and reviews consumer storage.
24 Comments Comment from the forums
  • killabanks
    Glad to see that some aspects of computing are getting rapid improvements.
    Reply
  • Amdlova
    I will stick with 2.5" For Heat problems lol
    Reply
  • Amdlova
    hpv-2560 is rated 1.9A and the another one VPV-2560 is 2.7A Maybe you guys need test the power consumption.
    Reply
  • atheus
    I find the preamble about comparing these M.2 drives to regular SATA drives a little odd. When SSD's first came out, of course they were compared to HDD's because that was precisely the question of the moment — how much more performance can one expect from the more expensive SSD's. With this new generation of SSD's, it's only natural to want to see them compared to the old, cheaper stuff. How else are we going to evaluate whether it's worth it to upgrade?

    If it only resulted in an extra 10% on a real-world test, then it wouldn't make any sense to spend double or more on a NVMe drive. With these solid numbers, though, the massive performance leap will be well worth the cost for those who can afford it.
    Reply
  • TechyInAZ
    Looks great! NVMe is defiantly the ideal solution for users that need high speed/responsive storage.

    I wish you guys would of compared this NVMe SSD to the Intel NVMe SSD that just came out.
    Reply
  • CRamseyer
    The Intel SSD 750 and the Samsung SM951-NVMe will show up side by side soon in another review.
    Reply
  • barnyrubble
    What about the rest of the system in which they were tested?
    Reply
  • CRamseyer
    Test systems: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-we-test-storage,4058.html

    All three drives were tested in the PCIe test system. They are the only systems setup for testing queue depths beyond 32.
    Reply
  • dwnelson
    I'm sad the real world chart is misleading. If you show seconds instead of MB/s you'd see it doesn't justify the cost. Sad.
    Reply
  • dark_wizzie
    The Intel SSD 750 and the Samsung SM951-NVMe will show up side by side soon in another review.
    That is a natural comparison and I look forward to reading it.
    Reply