The ADATA XPG SX950 480GB SSD Review: In Search of Premium
by Billy Tallis on October 9, 2017 8:00 AM ESTAnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer
The Destroyer is an extremely long test replicating the access patterns of very IO-intensive desktop usage. A detailed breakdown can be found in this article. Like real-world usage, the drives do get the occasional break that allows for some background garbage collection and flushing caches, but those idle times are limited to 25ms so that it doesn't take all week to run the test. These AnandTech Storage Bench (ATSB) tests do not involve running the actual applications that generated the workloads, so the scores are relatively insensitive to changes in CPU performance and RAM from our new testbed, but the jump to a newer version of Windows and the newer storage drivers can have an impact.
We quantify performance on this test by reporting the drive's average data throughput, the average latency of the I/O operations, and the total energy used by the drive over the course of the test.
The ADATA XPG SX950 is the slowest MLC SSD in this group, going by its average data rate on The Destroyer, while the similarly-equipped Crucial BX300 is the second-fastest SATA drive in the half-TB capacity class.
ADATA has a latency problem on The Destroyer. The SX950's average latency is much worse than any other MLC SSD, and the 99th percentile latency as bad as the TLC-based SU800, which was already an extreme outlier.
Splitting the average latency up by read and write operations, it's clear that the SX950's troubles are mostly on the write side, though the average read latency is also more typical of a TLC SSD than one with 3D MLC.
The 99th percentile read latency of the ADATA SX950 is not much worse than other 3D MLC SSDs, but the 99th percentile write latency on The Destroyer is unusually high at over 81ms. It appears that the SX950 is being quite aggressive with its SLC caching, leading to a serious backlog when it is finally forced to perform garbage collection. The BX300 avoids this by using relatively small fixed-size SLC caches.
Given the mediocre data rate and poor QoS indicating a lot of background work, it's not too surprising to see that the SX950's energy usage on The Destroyer is substantially higher than the Crucial BX300 and most other 3D NAND SSDs. The SX950 does shave 25% off the energy usage of the TLC-based ADATA SU800, but Crucial still does much better with the same controller.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
45 Comments
View All Comments
menthol1979 - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link
Oh dear God, another SSD that has absolutely no reason of existence. Really bored to see another SSD that gets pwned by 850 EVO (leave the PRO). I wonder if manufacturers actually test and benchmark their products before driving them to market.Stochastic - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link
Agreed.ddriver - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link
Sadly, very little of what humans do is because it is necessary or it makes sense.Reflex - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link
@ddriver And yet you continue posting...Samus - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link
lolzddriver - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link
Moot point, as I don't identify with the human herd. Cattle mentality and the accompanying irrational behavioral patterns don't sit well with me. Which is also why I refer to humans in third person, a subtle nuance an intelligent person would have read into.But not you though, you perfectly fit the profile, seeing how once again you fail at getting stuff or making sense ;) But still, an understandable effort, you are probably still hurting by that chain of pwnage. And it's only parroting cliches because you really cannot do better.
You humans, sometimes I am amazed you made it this far. And since you wouldn't get the nuance, there are two contexts to that, the first being that you still haven't succumb to your stupidity, and the second being "this far into devolution". I suppose that's why you cherish the establishment and its mediocrity so much, even if it is what pushes you to regress into cattle, you still get to survive, suckling at its toxic tit. It's your mommy, that's what your infant mind can identify it as, not as what it really is.
ddriver - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link
And just in case you are perplexed how me responding to your post is something that makes sense, since you obviously can't get all this, it is quite simple - you are not the intended audience, just the means of making a point for the occasional few that can get it ;)[email protected] - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link
This quote "Sadly, very little of what humans do is because it is necessary or it makes sense," is a telling feature reveal of this AI Cyborg miscreant, who apparently has a deep rooted need for focusing on humans, describing humans, engaging humans, belittling humans; and it's apparent its existence and glorified self aggrandizement is defined solely on the existence lowly humans, as evidenced by the closing statement "you are not the intended audience ...".Sadly, very little of what this AI cyborg does makes sense. Prattle over product reviews is merely pretense of know how . Sadly no one has yet found the power down switch for this AI cyborg. For as much as it exudes disdain for humans, yet its very reason for being relies entirely on the necessity for engaging with them, to establish meaning in its miserable existence. These posts are its food, and a belittlement posture its means of self aggrandizement compensating for its low class software programming. The prattle is evidence that surely this really is no human (as it itself claims). It needs a firmware upgrade and an implant to put it out of its misery. I wish scientists would stop creating such experimental specimens for their own misguided research.
mapesdhs - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link
vgray, that was awesome. 8)svan1971 - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link
Bravo !