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 (Data Rate)

The Toshiba XG5's average data rate on the Heavy test is not quite competitive with the Samsung 960 EVO and also trails behind Toshiba's OCZ RD400, but it ties or beats several MLC SSDs and fares far better than the WD Black and Intel 600p. The XG5 does suffer a relatively large performance hit when the test is run on a full drive, but even in that case it is still substantially faster than the SSDs that it beats when the test is run on an empty drive.

ATSB - Heavy (Average Latency)ATSB - Heavy (99th Percentile Latency)

When the Heavy test is run on an empty drive, the XG5's average and 99th percentile latency are just shy of Samsung's NVMe SSDs and ahead of the Intel SSD 750. When the test is run on a full drive the latencies are increased significantly, but this still leaves the XG5 ahead of the slowest MLC-based NVMe SSDs.

ATSB - Heavy (Average Read Latency)ATSB - Heavy (Average Write Latency)

Separating the average read and write latencies shows that the XG5 performs well with both types of operation. The full-drive penalty affects writes more than reads, but the overall wider spread of write latencies means the XG5 still isn't close to the bottom of the charts for that test.

ATSB - Heavy (99th Percentile Read Latency)ATSB - Heavy (99th Percentile Write Latency)

The 99th percentile read latencies show one of the XG5's greatest strengths with a clear advantage over Samsung's best SSD when the test is run on an empty drive, but the full-drive penalty is acute and pushes the 99th percentile latency 2.5 times higher. The Samsung 960 EVO performs poorly here with scores worse than most MLC NVMe SSDs and just ahead of the Intel 600p.

The 99th percentile write latencies paint a very different picture. Only a few drives have trouble keeping write latency under control, and the XG5 clearly isn't one of them, even when full.

ATSB - Heavy (Power)

The Toshiba XG5's energy usage on the Heavy test is again much better than any previous PCIe SSD. There's a clear increase in energy consumption when the test is run on a full drive, but the effect is much smaller than the performance impact and is not enough to knock the XG5 out of first place.

For context, the energy usage of the XG5 is on par with the most efficient SATA SSDs based on planar TLC, but is not competitive with SATA SSDs using MLC or 3D NAND. Those SATA results are not shown here because they were recorded on our earlier 2015 testbed running Windows 8.1, but they should be quite similar to how those drives will perform on the new 2017 testbed.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer AnandTech Storage Bench - Light
POST A COMMENT

29 Comments

View All Comments

  • drajitshnew - Thursday, August 3, 2017 - link

    Disappointing, samsung is becoming the new Intel. Reply
  • ddriver - Thursday, August 3, 2017 - link

    Don't worry, sammy is in a process of wing clipping. Reply
  • Babar Javied - Thursday, August 3, 2017 - link

    What do you mean? Can you please elaborate on this 'wing clipping'.

    As for the this SSD, it all comes down to price, which unfortunately we do not know because it's an OEM product. It's true that I personally would get a Samsung SSD for myself, but if the price is right, this would most certainly be a consideration where speed is not of absolute importance, as is usually the case in home environments.
    Reply
  • ddriver - Thursday, August 3, 2017 - link

    I mean downsizing, samsung has become too good for its own good, or more like for the good of the contemporary geopolitical agenda. The problem is not that much with how big and influential samsung is, but with how they become a threat to certain US corporations, whose competition is seen as a threat to the US national security. Reply
  • euler007 - Thursday, August 3, 2017 - link

    Samsung is heavily supported by the government of South Korea, which depends on the US government now more than ever. They have to be careful not to hurt American businesses to preserve their relationship. Reply
  • ddriver - Thursday, August 3, 2017 - link

    A.D.O.Y :) But let's be honest and admit SK is a puppet state. They did however come a long way from having the bulk of their economy be from sex slavery to US military occupation forces. That last part was not a joke (I wish it was), look it up. Reply
  • The_Assimilator - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link

    You're a vilely offensive piece of shit on so many levels. Reply
  • Hurr Durr - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link

    Oy vey, muh hurt burger feelinz, dey haet us fo da freedumb. Even ddriver can be right sometimes, and this time he is. Reply
  • ddriver - Friday, August 4, 2017 - link

    Yeah, I am bad for condemning sex slavery, shame on me! Or were you simply talking to a mirror just now? Reply
  • Samus - Thursday, August 3, 2017 - link

    That is some extreme conspiracy theory, not to mention a violation of free market principles. Samsung is not heavily supported by any government, and Samsung doesn't give a fuck about hurting american businesses anymore than Apple gives a fuck about hurting Korean businesses. These companies are at war for your money, and that's good for everyone. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now