Compressible Data Test
Contents
As mentioned in the previous page, me measured the performance of each drive using the CrystalDiskMark 4 program. In this version, the software performs sequential and random reading and writing with 4 kiB blocks, first with a queue depth (QD) of 32, and then with a QD of one. So, it does not only test the performance with a single task, but also the performance with simultaneous read and write requisition, mimicking a scenario such as the one found in database servers.
Also keep in mind that CrystalDiskMark 4 uses a different measuring methodology from CrystalDiskMark version 3, so data obtained with different versions are not comparable.
First, we ran CrystalDiskMark in “All 0x00 Fill mode”, where the data written on the drive are only zeros, in order to measure the SSD performance with compressible data.
On the sequential read test with a queue depth of 32, the Intel SSD750 at a PCI Express 3.0 was 116% faster than the Kingston HyperX Predator. While connected to a PCI Express 2.0 slot, its performance dropped by 55%.
On the sequential write test with a queue depth of 32, the SSD 750 Series was 24% faster than the Predator. Connected to a PCI Express 2.0 slot, it maintained the same performance.
On the random reading test with 4 kiB blocks and QD 32, the 750 Series was 134% faster than the HyperX Predator 480 GiB. Connected to a PCI Express 2.0 slot, the performance dropped by 40%.
On the random writing test with 4 kiB blocks and QD 32, the Intel SSD was 131% faster than the Kingston model. While connected to a PCI Express 2.0 slot, its performance dropped by 35%.
On the simple sequential read test (i.e., queue depth of one), the SSD 750 was 81% faster than the Predator. Connected to a PCI Express 2.0 slot, its performance was 10% lower.
On the simple sequential writing test (i.e., queue depth of one), the SSD 750 beat the Predator by 24%. Connected to a PCI Express 2.0 slot, its performance dropped by 5%.
On the simple random reading test, the SDD 750 was 11% faster than the HyperX Predator. Connected to a PCI Express 2.0 slot, its performance was 7.5% lower.
On the random write test with 4 kiB blocks, the SSD 750 Series was 266% faster than the HyperX Predator. Its performance dropped 34% when connected to a PCI Express 2.0 slot.