Crucial T700 Clocks 12.4 GB/s Sequential Reads in Previews

[btarunr]

Crucial T700 marks the brand's return to the high-end SSD segment after years of catering to the mainstream segment with well-priced drives that the company can move in high volumes. The company had retired its Ballistix brand to mark its withdrawal from the high-end. The drive combines Micron's 232-layer 3D TLC NAND flash with a Phison E26-series controller and LPDDR4-based DRAM cache, and takes advantage of the PCI-Express 5.0 x4 host interface, with NVMe. A small section of the tech press was sampled with these drives and permitted to do performance previews.

Every SSD manufacturer's favorite benchmark, CrystalDiskMark (CDM), shows the drive clock 12.4 GB/s sequential reads (1 MB, QD8), along with 9.22 GB/s (1 MB QD1). Sequential writes are as high as 11.87 GB/s (1 MB QD8), and 9.66 GB/s (1 MB QD1). IOMeter testing revealed that the sustained write speeds are rather low, with the T700 holding onto top speeds only up to 25 GB, beyond which write performance falls off a cliff to 3.8 GB/s. Find more such interesting results in the source link below.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[PenguinBelly]

Not very impressive compared to..

 

[Bwaze]

Another "review" that doesn't even adress what you gain with these impressive charts of synthetic benchmark. No Windows and application start measurements - I wonder why?

"There are a lot of DirectStorage skeptics, but Crucial seems pretty excited about the technology"

It's a bit hard to be excited about something that isn't here?

 

[erek]

Not very impressive compared to..

View attachment 292026

How’d you manage that?

 

[Minus Infinity]

The Crucial might fall off a cliff to "only" 3.8GB/s for sustained, but compare that to the garbage Sammy 990 Pro which drop to about 1.8GB/s, slower than the 970 EVO plus.

 

[usiname]

How’d you manage that?

ram disk

 

[bobsled]

ram disk

Pretty slow then!

 

[Bwaze]

The Crucial might fall off a cliff to "only" 3.8GB/s for sustained, but compare that to the garbage Sammy 990 Pro which drop to about 1.8GB/s, slower than the 970 EVO plus.

Large SSDs with best price for TB - 4 and 8 TB SATA Samsung 970 QVO fall down from 550 MB/s to 120 or even 80 MB/s - slower than a decade old hard disk! :-D

 

[Wirko]

Pretty slow then!

With this kind of queued random performance, his ram sticks are probably broken in half and held together by duck tape...

 

[Minus Infinity]

Large SSDs with best price for TB - 4 and 8 TB SATA Samsung 970 QVO fall down from 550 MB/s to 120 or even 80 MB/s - slower than a decade old hard disk! :-D

Well I wouldn't touch current QVO with a 10' barge pole. Pro models from Samsung have gone to hell, and they should be properly called EVO these days. Nothing pro about them at all. How the mighty have fallen.

 

[Wye]

That is cache speed, not drive speed.
I have a feeling pcie5 ssds will be a massive lie fest.

 

[erek]

ram disk

RAID0 RAM disk?

 

[usiname]

RAID0 RAM disk?

Ask PenguinBelly, he posted the photo