Intel SSD 660P M.2 NVMe SSD Review (1TB)

PCMARK 8 STORAGE

The SSD Review uses PCMark 8’s Storage test suite to create testing scenarios that might be used in the typical user experience. With 10 traces recorded from Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office and a selection of popular games, it covers some of the most popular light to heavy workloads. Unlike synthetic storage tests, the PCMark 8 Storage benchmark highlights real-world performance differences between storage devices. After an initial break-in cycle and three rounds of the testing, we are given a file score and bandwidth amount. The higher the score/bandwidth, the better the drive performs.

PCMARK 8 STORAGE RESULTS

In PCMark 8 Standard, the Intel 660p achieved an overall score of 5075 points with an average bandwidth of 538.91MB/s.

blank

This performance ranks the Intel 660p just below many of the other mainstream NVMe SSDs, but higher than the 512GB Intel 760P. This is much better than the original 600p, which scored a rather underwhelming 334MB/s nearly two years ago.

PCMARK 8 EXTENDED STORAGE WORKLOAD CONSISTENCY 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.

PCMARK 8 RESULTS

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, is 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 at Latency, Bandwidth, and IOPS check out our primer article on them here.

AVERAGE BANDWIDTH (OR THROUGHPUT)

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

blank

AVERAGE LATENCY (OR ACCESS TIME)

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.

blank

In PCMark 8’s extended test we finally see the Achilles heel of the 660p, heavy workloads over a long period of time. After being hammered for hours on end, the latency from the 660p can reach upwards of 12ms, which is even higher than that of a WD Blue 1TB HDD we compared in our Toshiba OCZ RC100 review. While the SLC cache is large enough for most consumer-oriented workloads, the native performance of the QLC NAND flash is very low, once the buffer fills performance suffers. However, once the drive entered the recovery round, its performance improved quite a bit, and rapidly, which we like to see. Although, it still wound up falling behind the rest of the drives in our comparison pool.

4 comments

  1. blank

    will the Intel 660p Series M.2 2280 2TB PCI-Express 3.0 x4 3D NAND Internal Solid State Drive actually work on an ryzen 2700 AMD AM4 motherboard something like the MSI x470 gaming Plus???

  2. blank

    these drives are junk, don’t bother. Buy cheap, buy twice. A crucial or Sandisk SATA SSD can be had for similar money and they at least write at around 450MB/sec sustained !
    I purchased 2 of these 1TB 660p drives to upgrade some old machines. When I started to copy the data over from a 7 year old HDD which is around 650GB, windows was telling me it would take around a day to copy !. WTF the 7 year old HDD is actually faster an NVMe drive as the HDD can at least write at around 160MB/sec. This level of performance is simply shocking in 2019. This drive may be ok for office use, but i’m going to try and return these as not fit for purpose.

Leave a Reply

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