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
Average Data Rate
Average Latency Average Read Latency Average Write Latency
99th Percentile Latency 99th Percentile Read Latency 99th Percentile Write Latency
Energy Usage

The SK hynix Gold P31 doesn't set any performance records for TLC drives on The Destroyer, but it does deliver top-tier scores on every performance metric—competitive with drives like the Samsung 970 EVO Plus and WD Black SN750.

The energy usage by the P31 is unprecedented: it beats even low-power SATA and DRAMless NVMe drives. The P31 uses 30% less energy over the course of the test than the WD Black SN750, our previous record-holder for most efficient high-performance NVMe SSD. Meanwhile, most of the other fastest drives require two to three times the energy to complete The Destroyer.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy

Our Heavy storage benchmark is proportionally more write-heavy than The Destroyer, but much shorter overall. The total writes in the Heavy test aren't enough to fill the drive, so performance never drops down to steady state. This test is far more representative of a power user's day to day usage, and is heavily influenced by the drive's peak performance. The Heavy workload test details can be found here. This test is run twice, once on a freshly erased drive and once after filling the drive with sequential writes.

ATSB Heavy
Average Data Rate
Average Latency Average Read Latency Average Write Latency
99th Percentile Latency 99th Percentile Read Latency 99th Percentile Write Latency
Energy Usage

The Gold P31 has great performance on the Heavy test, especially on the full-drive test run where it maintains fast read latencies better while most of the TLC competition falls behind by at least a little bit.

The energy usage of the Gold P31 is again in a different league from other high-end NVMe drives. The Toshiba/Kioxia BG4 is narrowly ahead on this measure, but that's the slowest NVMe drive in this batch. As with The Destroyer, the WD Black's previously class-leading efficiency is beat by at least 30%.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Light

Our Light storage test has relatively more sequential accesses and lower queue depths than The Destroyer or the Heavy test, and it's by far the shortest test overall. It's based largely on applications that aren't highly dependent on storage performance, so this is a test more of application launch times and file load times. This test can be seen as the sum of all the little delays in daily usage, but with the idle times trimmed to 25ms it takes less than half an hour to run. Details of the Light test can be found here. As with the ATSB Heavy test, this test is run with the drive both freshly erased and empty, and after filling the drive with sequential writes.

ATSB Light
Average Data Rate
Average Latency Average Read Latency Average Write Latency
99th Percentile Latency 99th Percentile Read Latency 99th Percentile Write Latency
Energy Usage

The SK hynix Gold P31's overall performance on the Light test is just a few percent slower than the first-place drives, but as with the Heavy test we see the P31 handling the full-drive test run better than the competition. This time, the P31 doesn't quite manage to beat the energy usage scores from the Toshiba/Kioxia BG4 or its SATA sibling the Gold S31, but compared to the rest of the NVMe drives the story remains the same: the P31 sets a new power efficiency goal for the competition to aim for.

Cache Size Effects Random Performance
Comments Locked

80 Comments

View All Comments

  • MrCommunistGen - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link

    Truly impressive drive! I'm glad you were able to confirm that the power efficiency numbers held up and weren't the result of some kind of measurement error. When the Platinum P31 comes out I'll probably snag a 2TB model to upgrade my 1TB XG6 in my main ITX rig.

    Interesting that you mentioned the SN520. I needed a 2242 or 2230 SSD for a project I'm working on and was trying to decide between a BG4 and the SN520. I was able to refer to the previous Anandtech 1TB BG4 review but even then, I'm looking at either a 128GB or 256GB drive as that's what's available 2nd hand on eBay and the 1TB drive's performance isn't going to really represent the smaller drives.

    On the other hand I've found exactly nothing on the SN520.

    They're cheap enough so I decided to just buy one of each and test them both and see how they compare.
  • Luminar - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link

    The 2280 form factor SN500s/SN520s are more common than the 2242s and 2230s.

    I would buy a 2280 SN520 and just Dremel it down to a 2242 form factor. It's been proven to work. As Anandtech wrote in their review, the electronics are only in the first 30mm of the PCB.
  • MrCommunistGen - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link

    For the heck of it I decided to buy a bunch of different 2230 and 2242 SSDs on eBay to test. I was surprised to find 6 different models, 5 of which are from well-known brands. They all seem to be OEM drives pulled from laptops.

    I skipped any of the no-name, known garbage drives.
  • lilkwarrior - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link

    Why was the 970 plus in the benchmarks, but not the 970 Pro?
  • MrCommunistGen - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link

    If you really want to compare the performance of the P31 and the 970 Pro, you can look up the results in the "Bench" section of the website:
    https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2627?vs=24...

    To answer your question directly:
    I'd imagine that's because for a lot of client workloads the performance of the 970 Pro is relatively similar to the 970 EVO Plus. The Pro definitely has lower latency, particularly write latency -- but again -- in most client workloads that isn't going to translate into very noticeable differences.

    However, the Pro is SO much more expensive. Realistically, someone shopping for a fast consumer SSD who is looking at the P31 isn't going to also be considering the 970 Pro.

    FWIW, at the 1TB capacity the 970 Pro seems to be selling for ~$320, the 970 EVO Plus for ~$190, and the P31 for $135.

    If the idea is to compare to the highest performing non-volatile storage available today, that's probably what the Optane 905P results are for.
  • PaulHoule - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link

    It is as if Taiyo Yuden started making writable DVD's under its own name.
  • nirolf - Friday, August 28, 2020 - link

    Ha ha! Good one!
  • jyotaro - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link

    Any plans for a 500gb review of this product?
  • Billy Tallis - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link

    Not at the moment. I'll try to get them to cough up a sample of that one when the Platinum P31 is released so I can compare across the full range of capacities, but I don't know how likely it is that they'll agree. This is still a pretty new relationship between us and SK hynix PR.
  • ozzuneoj86 - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link

    Maybe I missed it, but does the high efficiency of this drive translate to significantly less heat output? Seems like it should. Some kind of thermal test would be useful for choosing a mobile SSD especially.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now