News Intel 750 Series SSD Reviewed: NVMe for the Consumer

Allyn Malventano, PCPer:

Intel really hit it out of the park with the SSD 750 Series. We might have liked to see this come out sooner, but motherboard makers needed time to implement proper NVMe boot support. With that present in nearly all current generation systems (and being added to some older motherboard UEFI BIOS), Intel has chosen the appropriate time to unleash this insanely capable SSD to the masses. Read and write performance is outstanding, and random IO performance outpaces much of the benchmark software out there. NVMe does its job in limiting the CPU overhead, as a device as capable as the SSD 750 could easily saturate several CPU cores if it had to rely on dated standards. With such incredible performance at a reasonable price, the Intel SSD 750 is the obvious choice for consumers who demand the most from their storage.

You can watch PCPer's video review of the SSDs below:


As they mention in their review, I really wish Intel had released a 800GB variant. Seems like an obvious capacity to include.

 

[jeshikat]

I'm pretty sure I'll be getting one. Hopefully it won't cook with it sandwiched between my two 980s.

 

[jeshikat]

As I suspected, it gets pretty hot when installed between two video cards.

Hardware Setup:
Intel 750 400GB AIC
i7 5930K
Gigabyte X99M Gaming 5
4x8GB Crucial 2400
2xGTX 980 reference
Noctua NF-P12
Windows 8.1 Pro running off 840 EVO

Here it is installed between the two reference GTX 980s. Side panel was installed when running the tests though.


Tests were done with the 750 as a secondary drive using the Intel NVMe drivers. For stress testing the 750 I'm using Iometer w/ 4 workers @ QD32 running 4K aligned random writes to the entire drive (pretty much worst case scenario). For the GPUs I used Unigine Valley with the Ultra settings (except fullscreen).

The Intel SSD Toolbox 3.3 (which is what the reviewers used) doesn't seem to be available yet so I used the Intel SSD Data Center Tool to get the drive temps.

Assuming the ISDCT is installed to the default location (C: \isdct\) the following command (need to run from elevated prompt) will write the temp stats to a CSV file on the root of the drive:

C:\isdct\isdct.exe dump -destination c:\temp.csv -intelssd 0 datatype=nvmelog logid=197

Note: If you have more than one Intel Data Center drive (750, P3700, etc.) installed you'll need to figure out the drive's index number (the zero in the above command) with the following command:

C:\isdct\isdct.exe show -intelssd

Tests:

Iometer was left running for the entire testing period. Ran 3 tests, first no front fan, then front fan on, then front fan on and GPUs running Valley

1hour of Iometer, GPUs idling, front fan turned off
ambient: 24-25°C
750 temp: 53°C

1 hour of Iometer, GPUs idling, front fan @ 1020RPM
ambient: 26-27°C
750 temp: 49°C

1 hour of Iometer, GPUs running Valley, front fan @ 1020RPM
ambient: 28-29°C
750 temp: 72°C

Drive gets pretty toasty


Then with Valley still running I stopped the Iometer testing and ran ATTO:

So even with the video cards cooking the drive it doesn't seem to effect performance.

However, having the AIC version of this drive installed between two video cards will need to be carefully considered. The Intel spec rates the AIC version only up to 55°C operating temperature (2.5" version is rated up to 70°C). With really good case cooling and more typical workloads it should be OK depending on the video cards used.

Edit: Here's the AS SSD bench with the 750 as the primary drive:

 

[QinX]

I saw it over on [H] but man dem speeds. It's nice and toasty as well.
Hmm, perhaps with the coming of these NVME power SSDs a waterblock might be a cool idea.
You already have waterblocks for Hard drives so why not for these types of SSDs?

 

[jeshikat]

Not a bad idea. Most motherboard blocks still cool the chipset even though something like Z97 is only rated for ~5W TDP while this drive draws something like 20W.

 

[QinX]

I'm going to think about this some more. On of the down sides is probably going to be that as more and more drives come out, they are all going to be slightly different. So some kind of interplate might be a good idea. With the 2.5" drives it might be less of an issue.

 

[jeshikat]

I'm not sure how much an issue it'll be going forward. The SM951 is right up there with the 750 in performance but draws half the power: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Storag...AHCI-XP941-SSD-750-and-More/Power-Consumption

 

[Phuncz]

I'm liking that Intel is promoting PCIe NVMe storage finally, but I was also hoping it would debut with M.2 which I think will be the format for the future, seeing as you can use M.2 in an PCIe addon card but not vice-versa without using bulky adapter cables. But if this abundantly cooled PCIe card is already easily heating up beyond 50°C, I think they physically couldn't do an M.2 version without including an out-of-spec heatsink.

My hope is for the Samsung SM951 NVMe, but I'll be testing that with and without a heatsink as soon as I can get it.

 

[jeshikat]

The 750 definitely has enterprise pedigree and draws too much power for M.2.

The NVMe SM951 looks very promising but after having all the compatibility issues with an early model of the ACHI version I decided to go with the Intel since I knew for sure it would be plug and play.

 

[Phuncz]

I guess this will change if Samsung is going to go retail with these. If compatibility is iffy beyond physical properties, it would be a retailer's nightmare.
Then again, M.2 already is, with PCIe or SATA, NCVMe and/or AHCI, PCIe 2.0 or 3.0, etc etc.

But I guess this is a teething issue because manufacturers don't see the most popular specs yet. Just like SATA was in the beginning. I had a motherboard with two SATA-150 ports (before the SATA HDD's were available), but later I found out it couldn't boot from them...

 

[jeshikat]

I guess this will change if Samsung is going to go retail with these. If compatibility is iffy beyond physical properties, it would be a retailer's nightmare.
Then again, M.2 already is, with PCIe or SATA, NCVMe and/or AHCI, PCIe 2.0 or 3.0, etc etc.

It sure is, not only is there a plethora of drives, there are just as many variants on the slots on motherboards.

Sata over M.2 is pretty pointless from a performance perspective so I'm hoping manufacturers will drop it and focus on PCIe. With Skylake supposedly having 20 3.0 lanes it would make sense for the mobo makers to use x16 for GPU and dedicate the leftover x4 to M.2.

 

[Phuncz]

Yeah, I think M.2 over SATA was a bad move. As soon as those >1GB/s drives start hitting the retail market, many will realise PCIe is the way to go. It'll be those Quantum Bigfoot drives all over again: no one wants them after they realise what a sham it is. In the end it can still scale more with PCIe 4.0 and beyond, allowing more speed without the need to resort to more pins (meaning a new connector).

Wikipedia:

On November 29, 2011, PCI-SIG announced PCI Express 4.0,[36] providing a 16 GT/s bit rate that doubles the bandwidth provided by PCI Express 3.0, while maintaining backward and forward compatibility in both software support and used mechanical interface. Additionally, active and idle power optimizations are to be investigated. Final specifications are expected to be released in late 2016.​

So 6.4GB/s drives will be theoretically possible ! And what NVMe can do for latency and iops we'll soon know.

 

[jeshikat]

We'll need software to take advantage of that kind of bandwidth. That's the issue with the 750, lots of speed today but there aren't many workloads that can take advantage of it.

I'm really hoping normal SSDs drop enough in price in the near future that OEMs like Dell and HP will start using them in even their cheaper computers so we can move the lowest common denominator at least that far and encourage software developers to design for that.

 

[PlayfulPhoenix]

I'd bet that will happen soon. Even cheap SSD's have huge performance benefits over HDD's, and there's not nearly the pressure there has been in the past to ramp up storage sizes.

If manufacturers can get low end SSD's for ~20 cents/GB, that would probably the the crossing point, since from a design (low volume, low power, low noise) and warranty (reliability) perspective, it's much easier to deal with.

 

[Phuncz]

I think the biggest issue is the capacity. Many people, irrelevant of their needs or other more logical solutions, want a single large drive. This means that a 500GB SSD is the bare minimum and obviously very expensive in relation to a 500GB HDD or even a 2TB HDD. So unless these fall to $100 levels, it won't happen often.

 

[jeshikat]

Most people I run into would be fine with a 240GB, but they've been trained to think that "more GB = better" by the OEMs since HDDs keep going higher and higher in capacity so they market it that way.

People have gotten used to only having 16-32GB of storage on their phones and tablets so I'm hoping once 240GB SSDs can become the standard soon because it'll take a while before we see 500GB SSDs down to the price of a 1TB HDD or something.

 

[Phuncz]

I've been hoping that for five years but except some keen serious-minded people, most still think that your HDD will fill up and slow down easily and best is to buy big. Many still don't know much about computers and still want the one with the most RAM and HDD, regardless if it's a 4200rpm HDD and >4GB for internet browsing use. It's usually the people buying the more expensive computers that know more about them, the $500 and lower devices are usually for people that don't care and don't know about a computer and just want to use Facebook and FarmVille on it.

In that respect, I'm glad not every device at the moment has an SSD, I wouldn't want to work at tech support when someone's $500 laptop's 120GB SSD is suddenly so slow after downloading some music. I'm even having a hard time balancing my 256GB Samsung 830 with games like GTA V slurping 60GB of space. I'm glad Windows 10 will be more space-efficient too, my Windows 7 directory is over 30GB (years old install) with no reasonable way of cleaning it out without serious consequences. In my retail experience I saw this difference with Apple with the more expensive Macbook Air: people weren't immediately horrified by the low SSD storage but asked if it would be enough for their use-case.

 

[jeshikat]

I work at a computer repair shop and I find it's usually just a matter of educating customers on how much space they really need.

Besides the gamers and photographers, most everyone else could easily survive with a 120GB or 240GB. When someone comes in with a bad hard drive we try to push them to a SSD unless they actually use lots of space.

I love doing that because it makes us look like computer wizards when they get back their previously average laptop and now it runs like greased lightning

Well, except those low-end AMD systems. We've tried putting SSDs in them but they still run like dirt.

 

[Phuncz]

Yeah I know what you mean about those low-end AMD systems. We have a bunch of those E1 series laptops with Windows 8 on it, it takes about 24 hours to update to 8.1. SSD or RAM won't help, they are just incredibly slow. But they are cheap and have 500GB of HDD Educating the users about these "bad habits" is good, I hope it will pay off soon enough.

This is going way off-topic though, so back to the Intel 750. I'm curious what this kind of drive might mean for the future. While continuous transfer rates are climbing fast just by using PCIe, the massive iops increase should be useful for the consumer when the developers start using it. But when will they ? And will it ever happen ? I'm happy PCIe storage is more than just one single improved spec that is dependant on the developers to start utilizing it or it would have an incredibly slow adoption rate.
But thanks to high transfer speeds that marketing department is going to love by using "4 TIMES FASTER TURBO SUPER MEMORY GOOD YES!!!"-stickers on the boxes. Because even today, when SSD's have been around for a while, we can still barely see the advantage in games because developers optimize for 5400rpm drives.

Sometimes I wish the industry would collectively push new technologies more, like Apple did with the ODD-less Macbook Air. At that moment I thought: "Well they are right with so many online services, we also have these large USB sticks that are actually easy to use, perform much faster and don't make noise when using. Good that they are giving the nudge."
And I applaud them for this bravery because breaking the habit is hard for many people, but it's also bad for progress.

LOL I went off-topic again... My bad

 

[jeshikat]

This is going way off-topic though, so back to the Intel 750. I'm curious what this kind of drive might mean for the future. While continuous transfer rates are climbing fast just by using PCIe, the massive iops increase should be useful for the consumer when the developers start using it. But when will they ? And will it ever happen ? I'm happy PCIe storage is more than just one single improved spec that is dependant on the developers to start utilizing it or it would have an incredibly slow adoption rate.

In the HardOCP review for the 750, Chris mentions that he's talked to some of the Intel engineers and they're working with several game developers to find ways to leverage the performance of the 750.

I could see it being very useful for VR, where texture pop-in would be much more disconcerting than on a monitor.