AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer

The Destroyer is an extremely long test replicating the access patterns of heavy desktop usage. A detailed breakdown can be found in this review. 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 BX100's performance on The Destroyer isn't dead last, but it underperforms for its capacity.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

Average service time is startlingly high and is close to a hard drive's seek time.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

The frequency of performance outliers is in line with the other two low performers on this test, indicating that the BX200's performance doesn't stutter any more often, but it pauses for longer periods of time when it does stutter.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Power)

Higher power consumption is to be expected from a drive using TLC NAND, but the BX200 consumed more than twice the energy over the duration of The Destroyer than any of the other drives, and more than five times as much as the BX100. The BX200 didn't take vastly more time to complete The Destroyer, so it was clearly not making good use of idle time.

Performance Consistency AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
POST A COMMENT

85 Comments

View All Comments

  • paulgj - Tuesday, January 26, 2016 - link

    I see the MU02 firmware for this drive is out, are there any plans to retest? Reply
  • LarsBars - Tuesday, February 2, 2016 - link

    The BX200's are getting cheap now, and they have a new firmware update, MU02. Any chance that you could re-run the BX200's through the tests and see if anything is improved? Thanks! Reply
  • Amoro - Monday, April 11, 2016 - link

    I don't see the point since it only states stability/reliability improvements and doesn't mention anything about performance.

    Release Date: 1/12/2016

    Corrected SMART attribute threshold values
    Improved general reliability and stability
    Minor Bug Fixes and general reliability and stability Improvements
    Reply
  • freddell - Saturday, July 2, 2016 - link

    I dont know how your IO tests throughput numbers are so high compared to MX100 or MX200. As soon as I tried to clone a 1TB drive for my wifes laptop the write speed dropped to 60 MB/s or less, clearly slower than the HDD it was meant to replace. BX is a truly horrible drive for write performance, I will not recommend to anyone. I dont know why it was not highlighted in your review. Reply
  • dh33r4j - Thursday, August 25, 2016 - link

    I got the 480GB for £73 ($95) during lightning sale from Amazon. When the price is right, I think it becomes worth it. For someone moving from a HDD to SSD, I coudn't say no to the offer. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now