Since I recently got access to a Samsung SM951 NVMe SSD, I have done some benchmark tests with my ASRock Z97 Extreme6 system running Win10 x64.

At least I was able to compare the performance of the following 4 SSDs:

• 512 GB Samsung XP941 M.2 SSD (supporting 4 x PCIe 2.0 lanes with the AHCI protocol)
• 256 GB Samsung SM951 AHCI M.2 SSD (using 4 x PCIe 3.0 lanes with the AHCI protocol)
• 256 GB Samsung SM951 NVMe M.2 SSD (using 4 x PCIe 3.0 lanes with the NVMe protocol) and
• 400 GB Intel 750 PCIe SSD (using 4 x PCIe 3.0 lanes with the NVMe protocol)

1. Samsung XP941 (512 GB variant):
   



2. Samsung SM951 AHCI (256 GB variant):
   



3. Samsung SM951 NVMe (256 GB variant):
   



4. Intel 750 NVMe (400 GB variant):
   

• All tested SSDs showed an extremely good performance, if you just look at the benchmark scores. The question is, whether the user will realize this performance gain while doing his daily work.
• Although the Intel 750 gave my system the absolutely best overall scores, there is no explicit performance winner:
  The Samsung SM951 NVMe was the champion while READING, whereas the Intel 750 NVMe was the winner while WRITING.

• Measured Boot Times:
  • Samsung XP941 AHCI: 3,7 Sec
  • Samsung SM951 AHCI: 3,9 Sec
  • Samsung SM951 NVMe: 3,9 Sec
  • Intel 750 PCIe NVMe: 5,4 Sec (Update: 4,3 Sec after having flashed the latest Intel 750 SSD Firmware)
  
  Evaluation: The measured boot time of the Intel 750 NVMe SSD was much lower than I expected and found in reviews about this specific SSD.
• Write Caching Settings
  Contrary to all other tested SSDs it was impossible to enable the Write Caching and to disable the write-cache buffer flushing while running the Intel 750 NVMe SSD.

Zitat von 100PIER im Beitrag #15

---

1) the default values settings policies properties for SM951 512 GB NVMe (secondary media) gives this very poor and abnormal ANVIL score (and it is also true for any other benchmark tools)
2) to get acceptable SM951 512GB NVMe (secondary media) performance results I have had to modify default values settings policies properties

---

Zitat

---

Can you explain me why the Current Link Speed is set (down) to 5 Gb/s and not 8 GB/s ?

---

Why should it run with the maximum speed while reading the HWInfo details?

Zitat von 100PIER im Beitrag #17

---

You wrote Point No 8 was for AHCI protocol only.

---

Zitat

---

So, it is also true for NVMe protocol ?

---

Yes, my advice regarding the Write-Caching settings from within the Device Manager is valid for all IDE modes and SATA protocols.

Zitat

---

For SM951 NVMe model HWINFO details displays a Current Link Speed = 5 Gb/s. The Maximum Link Speed is 8 Gb/s.
So, why the Current Link Speed value is negotiated lower than the Maximum value ?

---

The word "Maximum" means, that this value is the highest possible, but means as well, that this value is variable.

Zitat

---

What values do you have on your side ?

---

I haven't run HWInfo yet, but I don't expect any different (higher) values with my "old" Z97 system.

@ 100PIER:

Already yesterday I have flashed the new Firmware and added >here< the new boot time of the Intel 750 SSD.

Zitat von Marsianin im Beitrag #6

---

Got only 5,337.51 (system drive) and 5,736.35 (other drive, same type SSD's in RAID too) in Anvil under Windows 10.
What I did wrong?

---

Zitat von 100PIER im Beitrag #26

---

i750 NVMe 400 GB SSD ANVIL score goes down by 11% after applying new SSD firmware and new Intel NVMe driver

---

@ 100PIER:
What did you want to express by the pictures?
It is wellknown, that the Intel 750 NVMe SSD doesn't allow to change its default Write-Caching Policies settings (contrary to the Samsung SM951 M.2 SSDs as AHCI and NVMe variants).
Nevertheless the WRITE scores (except the "Seq 4MB" ones) are much better than with any other single consumer SSD.

Here are my results:

1. 400 GB Intel 750 PCIe NVMe SSD (used as system drive running Win10 x64) after having flashed the latest Firmware:
]


2. 256 GB Samsung SM951 M.2 AHCI SSD (used as system drive running Win10 x64 Pro) after having checked both possible Write-Caching Policies options:

Zitat von 100PIER im Beitrag #21

---

I have no explanation for that.

---