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, 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.

ATSB - The Destroyer (Data Rate)

The overall performance from the 500GB and 1TB SK Hynix Gold S31 drives on The Destroyer is a bit slower than typical for mainstream SATA drives, but it's not a large gap.

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

The average latency scores from the S31 on The Destroyer are reasonable, but again slightly behind the other mainstream SATA drives we've tested. The 99th percentile latency scores rank a bit better, and are definitely competitive. The 250GB model's performance is substantially worse than the larger two models.

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

Both the average read and write latency scores show similar rankings for the S31s, with the 250GB model's latencies are roughly double that of the 500GB model, and the 1TB only slightly faster than the 500GB.

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

The 250GB S31 turns in the worst 99th percentile read latency score out of this batch of drives, but the 500GB's score is competitive, and the 1TB model's score is at the top of the chart. For 99th percentile write latencies, the three S31s rank much closer together, and the slowest 250GB model is still vastly faster than the DRAMless SSDs.

ATSB - The Destroyer (Power)

The 500GB and 1TB models of the SK Hynix Gold S31 turn in very good energy usage scores, while the smaller 250GB model ends up with efficiency that is merely typical for this class.

SLC Cache Sizes AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
Comments Locked

22 Comments

View All Comments

  • jabber - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link

    I think the thing is we are now at the point of diminishing returns. I find it hard to tell the everyday difference between running a desktop on a 550MBps SATA or a 3000MBps NVMe (NVMe was a real disappointment for the boost it gives). 20+ years ago if I got another 5FPS in Quake I could tell. Now if my games jump from 130FPS to 140FPS...meh.

    I was upgrading my CPU every 6 months at one point many years ago. Now it's lucky if i change it every 6 years...
  • Samus - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link

    Actually a pretty impressive drive. The steady state performance is excellent. When I'm pushing out images to new PC's it's ridiculous a lot of the SSD's bottleneck even the network connection (which is realistically around 160MB/sec via (1Gbps Multicast) as you see it write VERY fast for the first half of a 15GB image then fall off.

    Imaging over USB 3.0 is totally brutal and only slightly faster than via the network. The SSD's are a mix of Intel OEM 540/545s drives and Micron 1100/1300 OEM drives, depending on the vendor. HP seems to use the Intel and Dell the Micron's. They're such shit all around drives for my job, but as you can imagine the users don't care because they're writing maybe a few GB a day via Outlook OST caching and general paging in Windows.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now