Samsung 960 Pro M.2 NVMe SSD Review (2TB) – Breathtaking Speed


The SSD Review uses benchmark software called PCMark Vantage x64 HDD Suite to create testing scenarios that might be used in the typical user experience. There are eight tests in all and the tests performed record the speed of data movement in MB/s to which they are then given a numerical score after all of the tests are complete. The simulations are as follows:

  • Windows Defender In Use
  • Streaming Data from storage in games such as Alan Wake which allows for massive worlds and riveting non-stop action
  • Importing digital photos into Windows Photo Gallery
  • Starting the Vista Operating System
  • Home Video editing with Movie Maker which can be very time consuming
  • Media Center which can handle video recording, time shifting and streaming from Windows media center to an extender such as Xbox
  • Cataloging a music library
  • Starting applications


The 960 Pro delivers an overall score of 330K points in this test. To our surprise, this is second place to the 1.2TB Intel 750 we tested last year that reached 338K…still this is an extremely close call. All benchmark speeds here exceeded 1GB/s and many of them are over 1500MB/s. It even averaged nearly 2.2GB/s during the Windows Media Center benchmark! Overall, these results are extremely good and we can say without a doubt it will not disappoint you if you are to buy it. Let’s move on and see how it compares to other SSDs in PCMark 8’s extended testing!




For our last benchmark, we have decided to use PCMark 8 Extended Storage Workload in order to determine steady state throughput of the SSD. This software is the longest in our battery of tests and takes just under 18 hours per SSD. As this is a specialized component of PCMark 8 Professional, its final result is void of any colorful graphs or charts typical of the normal online results and deciphering the resulting excel file into an easily understood result takes several more hours.

There are 18 phases of testing throughout the entire run, 8 runs of the Degradation Phase, 5 runs of the Steady State Phase and 5 runs of the Recovery Phase. In each phase, several performance tests are run of 10 different software programs; Adobe After Effects, Illustrator, InDesign, Photoshop Heavy and Photoshop Light, Microsoft Excel, PowerPoint and Word, as well as Battlefield 3 and World of Warcraft to cover the gaming element.

  • PRECONDITIONING -The entire SSD is filled twice sequentially with random data of a 128KB file size. The second run accounts for overprovisioning that would have escaped the first;
  • DEGRADATION PHASE – The SSD is hit with random writes of between 4KB and 1MB for 10 minutes and then a single pass performance test is done of each application. The cycle is repeated 8 times, and with each time, the duration of random writes increases by 5 minutes;
  • STEADY STATE PHASE – The drive is hit with random writes of between 4KB and 1MB for 45 minutes before each application is put through a performance test. This process is repeated 5 times;
  • RECOVERY PHASE – The SSD is allowed to idle for 5 minutes before and between performance tests of all applications. This is repeated 5 times which accounts for garbage collection; and
  • CLEANUP – The entire SSD is written with zero data at a write size of 128KB

In reading the results, the Degrade and Steady State phases represent heavy workload testing while the recovery phase represents typical consumer light workload testing.


As you can see, performance is recorded in terms of Bandwidth and Latency. Bandwidth (or throughput) represents the total throughput the drive is able to sustain during the tests during each phase. Latency, at least for the purposes of PCMark 8, takes on a different outlook and for this, we will term it ‘Total Storage Latency’. Typically, latency has been addressed as the time it takes for a command to be executed, or rather, the time from when the last command completed to the time that the next command started. This is shown below as ‘Average Latency’.

PCMark 8 provides a slightly different measurement, however, that we are terming as ‘Total Storage Latency’. This is represented as being the period from the time the last command was completed, until the time it took to complete the next task; the difference of course being that the execution of that task is included in ‘Total Storage Latency’. For both latency graphs, the same still exists where the lower the latency, the faster the responsiveness of the system will be. While both latency charts look very similar, the scale puts into perspective how just a few milliseconds can increase the length of time to complete multiple workloads.

For a more in-depth look into Latency, Bandwidth, and IOPS check out our primer article on them here.


These results show the total average bandwidth across all tests in the 18 phases. In this graph the higher the result the better.



These results show the average access time during the workloads across all tests in the 18 phases. In this graph the lower the result the better.



These results show the total access time across all tests in the 18 phases. In this graph the lower the result the better.


In PCMark 8’s extended test we can see that the Samsung 960 Pro trump’s all in terms of sheer bandwidth performance. Averaging 525MB/s during the heavy workload phase and 537MB/s during the recovery phase one can see how consistent this drive is under any workload. Looking at latency performance we can see that it does have some competition in this scenario. The Intel 750 has lower latency overall and both the Toshiba XG3 and OCZ RD400 outperform it there as well. though all are beat out by the Intel 750 400GB.  The Kingston HyperX Predator lags behind a bit compared to the rest due to its utilization of the AHCI protocol rather than NVMe. In terms of bandwidth, the Samsung 950 Pro is just barely the victor under heavy workloads and the 1TB RD400 takes the lead overall during the recovery section.


  1. blank

    Hi Sean,

    “Samsung was able to mount the LPDDR3 DRAM on the controller package, a first for client PC SSDs.”
    Thought that was what they did with the 750EVO……………
    120 and 250GB models only……….

  2. blank

    Wow, that Anvil score is just crazy! Almost hit 16,000!

  3. blank

    What O/S are you using?

  4. blank

    For a single stick use the 960 can’t be beat but if you’re into RAID configurations I think it may not be the best choice. Will three 950 sticks in a RAID 0 beat out two 960 sticks in RAID 0? If you try three 960s in RAID 0 you’ll really over-saturate the DMI, right?

    • blank

      DMI 3.0 on z170 mobo has ~3.4GB/s effective bandwidth (3.93GBps – overhead). Look at sequential read of a single 960pro.

      p.s SW raid is an option

      • blank

        ie. intels dmi3 max is exceeded by a single 960 pro. Raid is pointless. Advances in nand of no benefit and their claims to having multiple nvme ports onboard are BS.

        The moral is, if doing raid on z170, u may as well get a pair of cheaper lesser nvmeS, and even they will be limited by dmi3.

    • blank

      RAID 0 is only for playing ant some tests, wise user will never use raid 0 to keep thir data. raid 0 is not raid. it is designed to simply turn Your data into garbage. I rather buy two of this disks and make raid 1. if i need more IO then i can use RAID10, but then I need 4

  5. blank

    Can you boot win 10 off this drive?

  6. blank

    Hi.. I have a MBP 15 Retina Early 2013 (model: A1398) I would like to know if this or 950 pro will work good on it and what adapter should buy….

    Thanks in advance.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *