Seems about right to me. Toshiba drive looking a bit slow in sequential for an NVMe drive but I believe that one is only PCIe x2 -- so those speeds are appropriate.
Only thing that looks wrong to me is that the NVMe drive performance is graphed on a different scale from the SATA drives. The raw numbers seem reasonable.
Scaling is clearly as per the maximum theoretical sequential bandwidth for the interface. So the SATA (Samsung) drives are achieving 90%+ theoretical SATA bandwidth, but the NVMe is only around maybe 30-40% max theoretical bandwidth for NVMe drives.
Its because magican is using your system ram as a buffer, and artificially tweaking your results.
You can clearly see that the numbers being shown is your RAM's speed.
Its because magican is using your system ram as a buffer, and artificially tweaking your results.
You can clearly see that the numbers being shown is your RAM's speed.
Running Samsung Magician's own Performance Benchmark on a 850 EVO, here's how it affected my scores (all with 'OS Optimization' set for 'Maximum Reliability'): Without RAPID Mode: Sequential Read: 549 Sequential Write: 528 Random Read: 96839 Random Write: 88940 With RAPID Mode...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.