Incompressible Data Test
Contents
For this test, we set CrystalDiskMark to the default mode, which uses incompressible data.
On the sequential read benchmark with QD 32, the 960 EVO was 94% faster than the HyperX Predator.
On the sequential write benchmark witn QD 32, the 960 EVO was 68% faster than the HyperX Predator.
On the random read test with 4 kiB blocks and QD 32, the 960 EVO was 31% faster than the HyperX Predator.
On the random write benchmark with 4 kiB blocks and QD 32, the 960 EVO was 16% slower than the HyperX Predator.
On the sequential read benchmark, the 960 EVO was 44% faster than the HyperX Predator.
And on the sequential write benchmark, the 960 EVO was 65% faster than the HyperX Predator.
On the random read benchmark with 4 kiB blocks, the 960 EVO performed similarly to the HyperX Predator.
On the random write benchmark with 4 kiB blocks, the 960 EVO was 22% faster than the HyperX Predator.