랩터 인터내셔널에 오신걸 환영 합니다
>

logo

  • head
  • news
  • product
  • mobile
  • benchmark
  • analysis
  • computing
  • multimedia

삼성전자가 세계 최초로 '테라바...
삼성전자가 역대 최고 성능의 NVM...
LG전자는 프리미엄 인공...
Western Digital(웨스턴 디...
유전자 조작 식품은 과학계에...
제 1 장. 4분기 사이버 위협 동향...
□ 개요  o 최근 오픈소스 기반 ...

760p_drive_575px.jpg


 


Intel SSD 760p Specifications
Capacity128 GB256 GB512 GB1 TB2 TB
Form FactorM.2 2280 single-sidedM.2 2280 double-sided
ControllerIntel-customized Silicon Motion SM2262
NANDIntel 256Gb 64-layer 3D TLC
Sequential Read1640 MB/s3210 MB/s3230 MB/sTBATBA
Sequential Write650 MB/s1315 MB/s1625 MB/sTBATBA
4KB Random Read 105k IOPS205k IOPS340k IOPSTBATBA
4KB Random Write 160k IOPS265k IOPS275k IOPSTBATBA
Idle Power25 mWTBATBA
Endurance72 TBW144 TBW288 TBW576 TBW1152 TBW
Warranty5 years
Price$72.99 (57¢/GB)$108.99 (43¢/GB)$198.99 (39¢/GB)TBA (Q1 '18)TBA (Q1 '18)

 

인텔 SSD 760p

메인 컨트롤러 : Intel-customized Silicon Motion SM2262

낸드 : Intel 256Gb 64-layer 3D TLC

폼 팩터 : M.2 2280 single-sided / double-sided

시퀀셜 읽기 : 1640 MB/s ~ 3230 MB/s

시퀀셜 쓰기 : 650 MB/s ~ 1625 MB/s

4KB 랜덤 읽기 : 105k IOPS ~ 340k IOPS

4KB 랜덤 쓰기 : 160k IOPS ~ 275k IOPS

파워 : 25 mW

워런티 : 5년


ATSB - The Destroyer (Data Rate)

The Intel SSD 760p falls on the good side of a big gap in average data rate scores on The Destroyer. Scoring far below the 760p are SATA drives and most earlier entry-level NVMe SSDs. The 760p is a bit slower than some of the drives using planar MLC NAND or 3D TLC NAND, but it is clear that the 760p is capable of handling The Destroyer better than any previous SSD in its price range.

ATSB - The Destroyer (Average Latency)ATSB - The Destroyer (99th Percentile Latency)

The average and 99th percentile latency scores don't provide the clear separation that the average data rate shows, so the Intel 760p simply looks a bit below average for a NVMe SSD. Given the relative pricing and the poor performance of the Intel 600p, that's a good result for the 760p.

ATSB - The Destroyer (Average Read Latency)ATSB - The Destroyer (Average Write Latency)

Breaking down the average latency by reads and writes, the Intel SSD 760p ranks about the same either way. It is roughly on par with the slower (read: not Samsung) MLC NVMe SSDs.

ATSB - The Destroyer (99th Percentile Read Latency)ATSB - The Destroyer (99th Percentile Write Latency)

The 99th percentile read latency of the Intel SSD 760p on The Destroyer is rather poor, and the 99th percentile write latency isn't great either. The 760p doesn't seem to have serious problems with garbage collection pauses, but The Destroyer definitely does stress the 760p.

ATSB - The Destroyer (Power)

The energy consumption of the Intel SSD 760p during The Destroyer is almost as low as Samsung's best NVMe SSDs, but nowhere near the SATA-like efficiency of the Toshiba XG5. Overall, the 760p is much more efficient than Intel's previous NVMe SSDs, but there's still room for improvement.


ATSB - Heavy (Data Rate)

The average data rate of the Intel SSD 760p on the Heavy test makes it clear that the 760p is not a high-end NVMe drive, but it does perform much better than SATA SSDs and previous low-end NVMe SSDs. The 760p also handles being full relatively well, so its SLC caching strategy seems well done.

ATSB - Heavy (Average Latency)ATSB - Heavy (99th Percentile Latency)

The average and 99th percentile latency scores of the 760p aren't great, but they're still a big improvement over most earlier low-end NVMe SSDs. The 99th percentile latency has more room for improvement, since it is no better than a good SATA SSD.

ATSB - Heavy (Average Read Latency)ATSB - Heavy (Average Write Latency)

The average read latencies of the Intel SSD 760p on the Heavy test are not quite as good as a high-end NVMe SSD but are definitely close enough for a product this cheap. The average write latencies are more in line with some of the better previous budget NVMe SSDs, and are close to the level of SATA SSDs.

ATSB - Heavy (99th Percentile Read Latency)ATSB - Heavy (99th Percentile Write Latency)

The 99th percentile read latencies from the Intel 760p don't particularly stand out, and are reasonable for this product segment. The 99th percentile write latency scores are rather high, but not to egregiously like the Intel SSD 600p and a similar ADATA drive.

ATSB - Heavy (Power)

As with The Destroyer, the Intel SSD 760p shows very good power efficiency by NVMe standards, but the SATA drives and the Toshiba XG5 show that there's still room for much improvement.


ATSB - Light (Data Rate)

The Light test reveals bigger performance differences for full and empty drive states than the Heavy test, but the 760p doesn't suffer as much as most drives. The average data rates from the 760p are slightly higher than from the Intel SSD 750, and much higher than the 600p or the SATA drives. On the other hand, the TLC-based Samsung PM981 is almost twice as fast.

ATSB - Light (Average Latency)ATSB - Light (99th Percentile Latency)

The average latency scores of the Intel SSD 760p are twice those of the fastest NVMe SSDs, but this isn't enough to amount to a noticeable difference on a light workload. The 99th percentile latencies are much higher than those of Samsung's NVMe drives, but are still faster than SATA SSDs.

ATSB - Light (Average Read Latency)ATSB - Light (Average Write Latency)

The average read latencies from the Intel 760p fall into the middle of the range for NVMe SSDs, but the average write latencies are clearly on the high side of normal.

ATSB - Light (99th Percentile Read Latency)ATSB - Light (99th Percentile Write Latency)

The 99th percentile read latencies of the 760p on the Light test are acceptable for a low-end NVMe SSD, but the full-drive score is actually slightly worse than the Intel 600p. On the write side, the 99th percentile latency is actually very slightly worse than good SATA SSDs, but the 760p doesn't get noticeably worse when full.

ATSB - Light (Power)

The two SM2260-based NVMe SSDs join the Toshiba XG5 this time as the most efficient NVMe SSDs ahead of the Intel 760p, but the SM2260-based 600p and GAMMIX S10 fall behind when the test is run on a full drive. The Samsung drives mostly use slightly more power than the 760p, but the PM981 ends up near the bottom of the chart.


Burst 4kB Random Read (Queue Depth 1)

The burst random read performance of the Intel SSD 760p is great, even when compared against MLC-based NVMe SSDs. Samsung's 960 PRO is the only flash-based consumer SSD that currently beats the read latency of the 760p. The 760p has more than doubled the QD1 random read performance of the Intel SSD 600p, and is 17% faster than the Intel SSD 750.

Our sustained random read performance is similar to the random read test from our 2015 test suite: queue depths from 1 to 32 are tested, and the average performance and power efficiency across QD1, QD2 and QD4 are reported as the primary scores. Each queue depth is tested for one minute or 32GB of data transferred, whichever is shorter. After each queue depth is tested, the drive is given up to one minute to cool off so that the higher queue depths are unlikely to be affected by accumulated heat build-up. The individual read operations are again 4kB, and cover a 64GB span of the drive.

Sustained 4kB Random Read

With a longer test runtime and some higher queue depths involved, the Intel SSD 760p no longer stands out from the crowd. Its sustained random read performance is reasonable given its pricing and the current field of competitors, but in a few months time it may be looking rather sluggish. The 760p is about 5% slower than the Intel SSD 750, but on the other hand it is 54% faster than the 600p.

Sustained 4kB Random Read (Power Efficiency)

The power efficiency of the Intel SSD 760p during random reads is about average. Samsung's SSDs dominate the top half of the chart, and the two SATA SSDs hold the top two spots, showing that the performance of NVMe SSDs still doesn't offset their increased power consumption. Intel's previous consumer NVMe SSDs are tied for last place in power efficiency: the 750 is reasonably fast but power hungry, while the 600p has more modest power requirements but is quite slow.


Burst 4kB Random Write (Queue Depth 1)

The burst random write performance of the Intel SSD 760p is second only to the Intel SSD 750. Since the 750 is based on an enterprise SSD platform with MLC NAND, this regression isn't at all surprising. That the 760p manages to beat the Samsung 960 PRO is quite an accomplishment. The 760p is also 73% faster than the Intel 600p on this test.

As with the sustained random read test, our sustained 4kB random write test runs for up to one minute or 32GB per queue depth, covering a 64GB span of the drive and giving the drive up to 1 minute of idle time between queue depths to allow for write caches to be flushed and for the drive to cool down.

Sustained 4kB Random Write

On the sustained random write test that involves some higher queue depths, the performance of the Intel SSD 760p is good but not outstanding. Several of Samsung's drives and the Intel SSD 750 are faster. However, the 760p is on par with some of the slower MLC-based competitors and is almost twice as fast as the Intel SSD 600p.

Sustained 4kB Random Write (Power Efficiency)

The power efficiency of the Intel SSD 760p during random writes is a bit above average, and is substantially better than any previous Intel consumer SSD. The Toshiba XG5 and most of Samsung's recent drives are far more efficient.


Burst 128kB Sequential Read (Queue Depth 1)

The burst sequential read speed of the Intel SSD 760p is a substantial improvement over the Intel SSD 750 and 600p, but isn't quite fast enough to match Samsung's NVMe SSDs.

Our test of sustained sequential reads uses queue depths from 1 to 32, with the performance and power scores computed as the average of QD1, QD2 and QD4. Each queue depth is tested for up to one minute or 32GB transferred, from a drive containing 64GB of data.

Sustained 128kB Sequential Read

The sustained sequential read speed of the Intel SSD 760p is only slightly above SATA SSD speeds. This makes it more than twice as fast as the Intel SSD 600p, but still far slower than other recent NVMe SSDs using 3D TLC NAND such as the Toshiba XG5 and the Samsung PM981.

Sustained 128kB Sequential Read (Power Efficiency)

With subpar performance, it isn't surprising to see the Intel SSD 760p score near the bottom for power efficiency. There are a few TLC-based NVMe SSDs that score even worse—including the Intel SSD 600p—but there's clearly a lot of room for improvement here.


Burst 128kB Sequential Write (Queue Depth 1)

The burst sequential write speed of the Intel SSD 760p is slightly above average and far above Intel's previous flash-based SSDs. It is only slightly slower than the larger 1TB Toshiba XG5, and about 15–20% slower than Samsung's NVMe SSDs.

Our test of sustained sequential writes is structured identically to our sustained sequential read test, save for the direction of the data transfers. Queue depths range from 1 to 32 and each queue depth is tested for up to one minute or 32GB, followed by up to one minute of idle time for the drive to cool off and perform garbage collection. The test is confined to a 64GB span of the drive.

Sustained 128kB Sequential Write

The sustained sequential write speed of the Intel SSD 760p is comfortably above the limits of the SATA interface, which many NVMe SSDs can't manage. However, the Samsung PM981 is 60% faster than the 760p, and the 960 PRO is almost three times faster. The performance of the 760p is reasonable for a low-end NVMe SSD, but it can't compete at the high end.

Sustained 128kB Sequential Write (Power Efficiency)

The power efficiency of the Intel SSD 760p on the sequential write test is slightly below average. This is twice the efficiency of Intel's previous NVMe SSDs, but substantially worse than more recent drives from Samsung and Toshiba.


Mixed 4kB Random Read/Write

The overall performance of the Intel SSD 760p on the mixed random I/O performance is quite high for a TLC-based drive. Samsung's PM981 is much better, but the 512GB 760p is almost as fast as the 1TB Samsung 960 EVO. The 760p is clearly a viable competitor to the non-Samsung drives that use MLC NAND flash.

Mixed 4kB Random Read/Write (Power Efficiency)

The Intel SSD 760p does not score quite as well for power efficiency as it does for raw performance on the mixed random I/O test, but it is still above average and far better than previous Intel SSDs.


Mixed 128kB Sequential Read/Write

The average performance of the Intel SSD 760p on the mixed sequential workload test does not exceed the limits of a SATA link, but it does clearly beat the best speed achieved by a SATA drive on this test. Previous budget NVMe SSDs have failed to even match the fastest SATA SSDs due to the use of slow TLC NAND.

Mixed 128kB Sequential Read/Write (Power Efficiency)

The power efficiency of the Intel SSD 760p on the mixed sequential I/O test is not great. It only beats drives that were notably slow (600p, WD Black) or unusually power-hungry (Intel 750, Plextor M8PeY). Samsung and Toshiba have set a much higher standard.


출처 - https://www.anandtech.com






  1. AMD 라데온7 16GB 리뷰, 절망의 라데온 (Radeon VII)

    AMD의 신형 라데온7이 마침내 발매 되었습니다. 라데온7은 GPU 측면으로 종합 16GB HBM2 메모리가 장착되어 있습니다. 라데온7의 GPGPU 연산 성능은 FP16과 FP32 모두 RTX 2080보다 떨어지며 FP64는 앞섭니다. ...
    Date2019.02.08 CategoryGPU Reply4 Views1435
    Read More
  2. 엔비디아 지포스RTX 2060 6G 파운더스 에디션 리뷰

    엔비디아의 차세대 "튜링 아키텍처" 적용, RTX 2080TI - 2080 - 2070에 이은 RTX 2060 파운더스 에디션 리뷰 RTX 2060은 1920 쿠다코어, 48ROPs, 베이스 클럭 1365MHz, 부스트 클럭 1680MHz, 메모리 클럭은 GDDR6 14Gbps, 192비트 메...
    Date2019.01.13 CategoryGPU Reply3 Views2585
    Read More
  3. Intel Core i9-9980XE CPU 리뷰, 18코어 36스레드 성능은?

    Intel Core i9-9980XE Specifications Socket LGA 2066 Cores / Threads 18 / 36 TDP 165W Base Frequency 3.0 GHz Turbo Frequency (2.0 / 3.0) 4.4 / 4.5 GHz L3 Cache 24.75MB Integrated Graphics No Graphics Base/Turbo (MHz) N/A Memory Suppo...
    Date2019.01.13 CategoryCPU Reply0 Views1324
    Read More
  4. 인텔 순정 i5 8400 vs. AMD 오버클럭 Ryzen 5 2600X OC 승부

    테스트 시스템 [ 인텔 시스템 ] ○ CPU: Intel Core i5-8400 3.8GHz, Hexa Core / Coffee Lake ○ Cooler: Corsair Hydro Series H55 ○ GPU: MSI GeForce GTX 1080 Ti GAMING X 11G ○ Motherboard: MSI Z370 GAMING PRO CARBON ○ PSU: MODECOM VOLCANO 750W 1...
    Date2019.01.12 CategoryCPU Reply2 Views1031
    Read More
  5. AMD RADEON RX 590 벤치마크 - RX 580 오버클럭 버전

    AMD가 새로 발표한 라데온 RX 590 성능 벤치마크 라데온 VS 지포스 스펙 비교표 Test SystemTest System - VGA Rev. 2018.2Processor:Intel Core i7-8700K @ 4.8 GHz (Coffee Lake, 12 MB Cache)Moth...
    Date2018.11.17 CategoryGPU Reply2 Views1430
    Read More
  6. Battlefield V Benchmark Performance Analysis (GPU 벤치마크)

    해외 www.techpowerup.com 사이트에서 진행한 Battlefield V GPU 벤치마크. 현행 GPU 성능 분석 참고 자료 Test SystemTest SystemProcessor:Intel Core i7-8700K @ 4.8 GHz (Coffee Lake, 12 MB Cache)Motherboard:ASUS Maximus X Code Intel ...
    Date2018.11.11 CategoryGPU Reply0 Views1175
    Read More
  7. 인텔 Core i9-9900K, Core i7-9700K, Core i5-9600K 공식 벤치마크

    인텔의 최신 9세대 프로세서 Core i9-9900K, Core i7-9700K, Core i5-9600K CPU 벤치마크 입니다. 자료 출처 - https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-9900k-9th-gen-cpu,5847.html Core i9-9900K Core i7-9700K Core i5-...
    Date2018.10.20 CategoryCPU Reply4 Views4110
    Read More
  8. 아이폰 XS 벤치마크 성능 테스트 : 더 빠르고 오래 가는 아이폰

    Jason Cross | Macworld 아이폰 X과 아이폰 8에 사용된 A11 바이오닉 프로세서는 두 기종을 2017년 가장 강력한 스마트폰의 자리에 올려 놓았다. 안드로이드와 iOS 디바이스의 성능을 직접적으로 비교하기란 어렵지만, 확실한 것은 현재 안드로이드 폰 중 ...
    Date2018.09.28 CategoryETC Reply0 Views1049
    Read More
  9. 애플 iPhone XS Max, iPhone XS vs 삼성 갤럭시 노트9 성능 대결

    iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max Specs iPhone XSiPhone XS MaxStarting Price$999$1,099ProcessorA12 BionicA12 BionicScreen5.8-inch OLED (2436 x 1125 pixels)6.5-inch OLED (2688 x 1242 pixels)Storage64GB, 256GB, 512GB64GB, 256GB, ...
    Date2018.09.24 CategoryETC Reply3 Views1490
    Read More
  10. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, RTX 2080 성능 벤치마크 (탐스 하드웨어)

    탐스 하드웨어에서 진행한 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, RTX 2080 파운더스 에디션 벤치마크입니다. 출처  - https://www.tomshardware.com 지포스RTX 2080 Ti, RTX 2080의 성...
    Date2018.09.24 CategoryGPU Reply4 Views1196
    Read More
  11. 엔비디아 튜링 아키텍처 지포스RTX 2080TI, 2080 성능 확인

    엔비디아의 최신 인공지능 수퍼 GPU, RTX 2080TI / 2080의 게임 성능이 공개됐다. 테스트 게임 DirectX 12 Games Battlefield 1 – Ultra Preset Hitman – Highest Settings Shadow of the Tomb Raider – Very High Preset, TAA Star Wars: Battle...
    Date2018.09.15 CategoryGPU Reply4 Views1498
    Read More
  12. AMD 라이젠 스레드리퍼 2990WX, 2970WX, 2950X 벤치마크

    AMD가 새롭게 발표한 라이젠 스레드리퍼2 시리즈의 벤치마크 자료입니다. (탐스 하드웨어) Cores / ThreadsBase / Boost (GHz)L3 Cache (MB) PCIe 3.0 DRAM TDP MSRP Price Per Core AMD TR 2990WX 32 / 64 3.0 / 4.2 64 64 (4 to PCH) Quad DDR4-...
    Date2018.08.18 CategoryCPU Reply3 Views1482
    Read More
  13. 킹스톤 A1000 NVMe SSD 벤치마크, 저렴한 NVMe

    SpecificationsProduct A1000 240GB A1000 480GB A1000 960GB Pricing $86.96 $150.85 $314.99 Form Factor M.2 2280 S3 M.2 2280 S3M.2 2280 S3Interface / Protocol PCIe 3.0 x2 / NVMe 1.2 PCIe 3.0 x2 / NVMe 1.2PCIe 3.0 x2 / NVMe 1.2Controller P...
    Date2018.07.21 CategorySTR Reply0 Views649
    Read More
  14. HP EX920 M.2 SSD 리뷰 : Finding the Mainstream Sweet Spot

    HP 브랜드 EX920 M.2 SSD 스펙 컨트롤러 : 실리콘 모션 SM2262 낸드플래시 : 인텔 마이크론 64층 3D TLC 시퀀셜 읽기 : 3200MB/s - 3200MB/s - 3200MB/s 시퀀셜 쓰기 : 1200MB/s - 1600MB/s - 1800MB/s 랜덤 읽기 : 180k IOPS - 340k IOPS...
    Date2018.07.21 CategorySTR Reply0 Views804
    Read More
  15. Xiaomi Mi MIX 2S 스마트폰 리뷰 : 판타스틱 오버롤 밸류

     Xiaomi Mi MIX 2SSoCQualcomm Snapdragon 845 4x Kryo 385 Gold @ up to 2.80 GHz 4x Kryo 385 Silver @ up to 1.77 GHz Adreno 630 @ up to 710 MHzDisplay5.99-inch 2160x1080 (18:9) IPS LCDDimensions150.9 x 74.9 x 8.1 mm 191 gramsRAM6GB / 8GB LP...
    Date2018.07.21 CategoryETC Reply0 Views978
    Read More
  16. [8086 40주년 기념판] The Intel Core i7-8086K Review

    Intel Core i7 Coffee LakeAnandTechCoresTDPFreqL3vProDRAM DDR4iGPUiGPU TurboCore i7-8086K$4256 / 1295 W4.0 / 5.012 MBNo266624 EUs1200Core i7-8700K$3596 / 1295 W3.7 / 4.712 MBNo266624 EUs1200Core i7-8700$3036 / 1265 W3.2 / 4.612 ...
    Date2018.06.11 CategoryCPU Reply0 Views1720
    Read More
  17. AMD 라이젠 7 2700X 공식 리뷰 : 라이젠을 재정의

    AMD Ryzen 7 2700X AMD Ryzen 7 1800X AMD Ryzen 7 2700 AMD Ryzen 5 1600X AMD Ryzen 5 2600X AMD Ryzen 5 2600 Intel Core i7-8700K Intel Core i7-8700 Intel Core i5-8600K Intel Core i5-8400 MSRP $329 $349 $299 $219 $229 $199 $359 $303 $257 $182 C...
    Date2018.04.21 CategoryCPU Reply5 Views7899
    Read More
  18. 2세대 라이젠, 피나클릿지 2700X, 2700, 2600X, 2600 벤치마크

    AMD Ryzen 2000-Series CPUss Ryzen 7 2700XRyzen 7 2700Ryzen 5 2600XRyzen 5 2600CPU Cores/Threads8 / 168 / 166 / 126 / 12Base CPU Frequency3.7 GHz3.2 GHz3.6 GHz3.4 GHzTurbo CPU Frequency4.3 GHz4.1 GHz4.2 GHz3.9 GHzTDP @ Base Frequency105 W65 W...
    Date2018.04.21 CategoryCPU Reply0 Views3175
    Read More
  19. 웨스턴디지털 WD Black 3D NAND SSD Review

    Western Digital WD Black and SanDisk Extreme PRO SpecificationsCapacity250 GB500 GB1 TBWD Black ModelWDS250G2X0CWDS500G2X0CWDS100T2X0CSanDisk Extreme PRO Model-SDSSDXPM2-500GSDSSDXPM2-1T00Form FactorM.2 2280 Single-SidedInterfaceNVMe PCI...
    Date2018.04.15 CategorySTR Reply0 Views1324
    Read More
  20. 인텔 하데스캐년 카비레이크-G Core i7-8809G 벤치마크

    인텔 하데스캐년 탑재 누크 The Intel NUC8i7HVK 벤치마크 Intel NUC8i7HVK (Hades Canyon) SpecificationsProcessorIntel Core i7-8809G Kaby Lake, 4C/8T, 3.1GHz (up to 4.2GHz), 14nm+, 8MB L2, 100W Package TDPMemoryKingston HyperX Im...
    Date2018.04.01 CategoryCPU Reply3 Views1549
    Read More
  21. AMD 피나클릿지) Ryzen 7 2700X & Ryzen 5 2600 벤치마크

    AMD Ryzen 7 2700X & Ryzen 5 2600XCPU SpecificationsRyzen 2700X Pinnacle RidgeRyzen2 2600 Pinnacle Ridge  Ryzen 1700X Summit Ridge i7-6700K SkyLake Original comments by SiSoftwareMemory Speed (MHz) Max 2400 / 29332400 / 29332400 / 2666253...
    Date2018.03.17 CategoryCPU Reply5 Views2706
    Read More
  22. 삼성 갤럭시S9 스냅드래곤 845 / 엑시노스 9810 성능 확인

    Samsung Exynos SoCs SpecificationsSoCExynos 9810Exynos 8895CPU4x Exynos M3 One Core : 2.704 GHz Two Core: 2.314 GHz Four Core: 1.794 GHz 4x 512KB L2 4096KB L3 DSU4x Exynos M2 @ 2.314 GHz 2048KB L2 4x Cortex A55 @ 1.95 GHz No L2 512KB...
    Date2018.02.26 CategoryETC Reply4 Views1340
    Read More
  23. AMD 레이븐릿지, 라이젠5 2400G/라이젠3 2200G 벤치마크

    AMD가 새롭게 발표한 라이젠 CPU + 베가 GPU로 구성된 레이븐릿지 벤치마크 입니다. 라이젠5 2400G SocketAM4 CPU Cores / Threads4 / 8 CPU Base/Boost Frequency (GHz) 3.6 / 3.9 iGPU CUs11 (704 ALUs) 170달러 라이젠3 2200G SocketAM4 CPU ...
    Date2018.02.17 CategoryCPU Reply4 Views2117
    Read More
  24. 인텔 SSD 760p 512GB 리뷰 : Mainstream NVMe Done Right

      Intel SSD 760p SpecificationsCapacity128 GB256 GB512 GB1 TB2 TBForm FactorM.2 2280 single-sidedM.2 2280 double-sidedControllerIntel-customized Silicon Motion SM2262NANDIntel 256Gb 64-layer 3D TLCSequential Read1640 MB/s3210 MB/s3230...
    Date2018.02.03 CategorySTR Reply0 Views835
    Read More
Board Pagination Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 24 Next
/ 24