Review Index:
Feedback

Samsung 830 Capacity Range Roundup - Samsung Takes a Serious Turn on Performance

Subject: Storage
Manufacturer: Samsung
Tagged: ssd, sata, Samsung, 830, 6gbps

PCPer File Copy Test

Our custom PCPer-FC test does some fairly simple file creation and copy routines in order to test the storage system for speed.  The script creates a set of files of varying sizes, times the creation process, then copies the same files to another partition on the same hard drive and times the copy process as well.  There are four file patterns that we used to try and find any strong or weak points in the hardware: 10 files @ 1000 MB each, 100 files @ 100 MB each, 500 files @ 10 MB each and 1000 files at 1 MB each. 

View Full Size

File creation is pretty much limited by the write speed limits or bottlenecks of all of the various test units. The hard limit of the 64GB 830 puts it right on par with the 300GB Intel SSD 320. While the speed is not great for that model, it's very good considering the small capacity point of that model.

View Full Size

Since all three Samsung 830 Series models read at the same approximate speeds, the gap thins out amongst those three, and the faster/larger of the two turn in some solid numbers.

March 29, 2012 | 01:22 AM - Posted by D (not verified)

Thanks Al, I was stuck between this and the 520. I'll pretty much get which ever one I can for the least amount when I start my build.

March 29, 2012 | 07:58 AM - Posted by scajjr2

Got one of the 256Gb 830's when they first came out last fall. Compared to the OCZ and Kingston HyperX SSDs I had before, I have not had one issue at all with the Samsung. Fast and reliable.

March 29, 2012 | 08:05 AM - Posted by Rick (not verified)

How does a Crucial M4 hold up against one of these Samsung 830? The reason I ask is I have a M4 NIB, should I return it for one of these 830's?

March 29, 2012 | 02:56 PM - Posted by Lou (not verified)

I would trade it for the 830. The M4 is no slouch, but the 830 reviews seem to have been quite positive, all across the board.

March 29, 2012 | 09:41 AM - Posted by PCPerFan (not verified)

Has anyone here upgraded from an older SATA3 Intel or other SSD to one of these at SATA6 and noticed any difference in system responsiveness, boot-up, application load times, etc. Trying to determine if its a worthy upgrade to an older SSD.

March 29, 2012 | 11:33 AM - Posted by GrizzledYoungMan (not verified)

The M4 is a disaster. Massive, unpublished and unacknowledged issues with driver compatibility (especially the vital Intel RST set) that prevent correct sleeping behavior and will keep your event logs full of red warnings.

I RMA'ed mine (I had a 120GB M4 going into my latest PC) and replaced it with a similarly sized Intel 320. Despite the slower interface, the Intel SSD is noticeably more responsive (probably due to the high I/O performance at low QD, and the excellent random read performance) and certainly less buggy.

Sleep works now!

March 29, 2012 | 02:53 PM - Posted by Lou (not verified)

Interesting, I never heard a single complaint about the M4's, and I've sold plenty of them (less so since the 830s were released). To get nit-picky, there isn't a 120GB version of the M4. I think you mean 128GB.

March 29, 2012 | 02:47 PM - Posted by Lou (not verified)

Great review! I love the 830s, and I sell a ton of them. I'd like to see some head to head numbers vs the OCZ Agility and Vertex 3's. Most customers are interested in the OCZ drives because the price is better and the advertised read/write speeds are sexier. To throw in the M4's would be great, given that the prices of the Crucial drives are close to Samsung's prices.

March 29, 2012 | 07:36 PM - Posted by Rick (not verified)

i paid 130 for my m4 128gb. is the price difference worth it for an 830?

March 30, 2012 | 03:51 PM - Posted by Chris Myers (not verified)

Allyn- can you maybe explain the IOMeter results a bit more? I'm a little confused how your results show the 830 outperforming the Intel 520 by such a large margin, when other review sites, for example let's say one that does 'storage review(s)', shows a different story- with the 830 actually lagging a bit in IOPS.

Thanks.
-Chris

March 30, 2012 | 03:51 PM - Posted by Chris Myers (not verified)

Allyn- can you maybe explain the IOMeter results a bit more? I'm a little confused how your results show the 830 outperforming the Intel 520 by such a large margin, when other review sites, for example let's say one that does 'storage review(s)', shows a different story- with the 830 actually lagging a bit in IOPS.

Thanks.
-Chris

March 31, 2012 | 06:47 AM - Posted by czesiu (not verified)

Are these normal speeds for samsung 128gb 830 as a system drive in win7? (seq write @200)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/103221/as-ssd-bench%20SAMSUNG%20SSD%20830%20%202...

April 17, 2012 | 09:18 AM - Posted by razorxc (not verified)

great test, can you give me the 64 version please :)

June 13, 2012 | 11:38 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

The 128Gb is now down to £80 at a number of outlets - the price of these is now making conventional disks a bit pointless unless less you have major amounts of data.

July 14, 2012 | 09:29 PM - Posted by mAxius

WHERE IS THE PCPER LOGO HERE!!! http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147163 and thanks al i made my ssd decision

July 14, 2012 | 09:30 PM - Posted by mAxius

WHERE IS THE PCPER LOGO HERE!!! http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147163 and thanks al i made my ssd decision

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.