AnandTech 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 and unlike our Iometer tests, 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.

We quantify performance on this test by reporting the drive's average data throughput, a few data points about its latency, and the total energy used by the drive over the course of the test.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Data Rate)

The SM2260 sample's average data rate on The Destroyer is just a hair slower than the Phison-based Patriot Hellfire. This makes the SM2260 sample the slowest NVMe SSD using MLC NAND, but it's still faster than any SATA SSD.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

The SM2260 sample's average service time during The Destroyer is again in last place for NVMe/MLC SSDs, but the SATA SSDs and some of the TLC-based NVMe SSDs are trailing behind by a wide margin.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

The SM2260 sample is not great at avoiding high-latency outliers above 100ms and ranks behind the Samsung 850 PRO. At the 10ms threshold, the SM2260 sample performs quite well with big advantage over the Patriot Hellfire, the Intel SSD 600p and the SATA SSDs.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Power)

The SM2260 sample with 3D MLC improves significantly over the poor power efficiency of the TLC-based Intel SSD 600p, but it still ranks poorly overall. It is tied with the Phison E7-based Patriot Hellfire.

Performance Consistency AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
POST A COMMENT

27 Comments

View All Comments

  • motigez - Sunday, February 19, 2017 - link

    Honestly, at this point, TLC is the only viable technology for Client market, the incremental performance benefit you may get on MLC based SSD just don't worth it, and I expect to see little to no traction on those moving forward. Reply
  • LordanSS - Sunday, February 19, 2017 - link

    To be very honest, a 3D MLC at 40nm has very good endurance, which would be good for a usage of heavy writes.

    If you're dealing with video capture and editing, it'd be a good choice over 3D TLC, even tho 3D TLC at 40nm has decent endurance as well.
    Reply
  • leexgx - Tuesday, February 21, 2017 - link

    to bad they did not continue the BX100 line as it had insane low power use (still fast enough for a low end SSD) BX200 and higher was like the worst SSD for low end SSD and power use Reply
  • Ranger1065 - Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - link

    Does anyone really care about this? The number of comments seems to indicate a comprehensive "NO." Another article, another step towards oblivion. Great job Anandtech. Reply
  • BrokenCrayons - Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - link

    I see you're back to once again try to decry the site. It's funny if things are so bad that you keep coming back to read articles, but that's a special sort of problem, I suppose. Anyway, since you're having trouble with reading comprehension, most of the comments swirl around the drive's poor performance relative to other products. Just because someone doesn't leap to their feet to applaud a device that landed at the bottom of a chart doesn't mean the reviewer, the article, or the company publishing it is doing something wrong by reporting their test results. Just because people are generally in agreement with the results via their comments certainly doesn't indicate there's a problem with the review. You're just trying to project your silly opinion on others and hope to bend reality to your will by getting prophetic about the future...or you're trolling...probably both. Reply
  • BrokenCrayons - Wednesday, February 22, 2017 - link

    I see you're back to once again try to decry the site. It's funny if things are so bad that you keep coming back to read articles, but that's a special sort of problem, I suppose. Anyway, since you're having trouble with reading comprehension, most of the comments swirl around the drive's poor performance relative to other products. Just because someone doesn't leap to their feet to applaud a device that landed at the bottom of a chart doesn't mean the reviewer, the article, or the company publishing it is doing something wrong by reporting their test results. Just because people are generally in agreement with the results via their comments certainly doesn't indicate there's a problem with the review. You're just trying to project your silly opinion on others and hope to bend reality to your will by getting prophetic about the future...or you're trolling...probably both. Reply
  • watzupken - Saturday, February 25, 2017 - link

    So far, the Silicon Motion and Phison's controllers always seem to perform poorly with consistency. They don't seem like they are trying to fix it with each iteration of their controller. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now