The Toshiba XG6 1TB SSD Review: Our First 96-Layer 3D NAND SSD

Mixed Random Performance

Our test of mixed random reads and writes covers mixes varying from pure reads to pure writes at 10% increments. Each mix is tested for up to 1 minute or 32GB of data transferred. The test is conducted with a queue depth of 4, and is limited to a 64GB span of the drive. In between each mix, the drive is given idle time of up to one minute so that the overall duty cycle is 50%.

The mixed random I/O performance of the Toshiba XG6 jumps by about 47% compared to the XG5, making it competitive with most current high-end TLC drives.

Power Efficiency in MB/s/W	Average Power in W

Thanks to the big performance boost at almost no cost in added power consumption, the Toshiba XG6 takes an 11% lead over the nearest competition in power efficiency on this test.

Toshiba XG6 1TBToshiba XG5 1TBIntel Optane SSD 800P 118GBIntel SSD 760p 512GBKingston A1000 960GBMyDigitalSSD SBX 512GBToshiba RC100 480GBIntel SSD 660p 1TBHP EX920 1TBOCZ RD400 1TBPatriot Hellfire 480GBPhison E12 960GBPlextor M9PeGN 1TBSamsung 960 PRO 2TBSamsung 970 EVO 1TBSilicon Motion SM2262EN 2TBWD Black 1TB (3D NAND)Crucial MX500 1TB

The Toshiba XG6 is able to increase performance throughout the test as more writes are added to the workload, with much more performance growth than the XG5 showed. The performance growth falters a bit near the end of the test but the XG6 still delivers the expected performance spike with the final phase of the test as the workload shifts to pure writes.

Mixed Sequential Performance

Our test of mixed sequential reads and writes differs from the mixed random I/O test by performing 128kB sequential accesses rather than 4kB accesses at random locations, and the sequential test is conducted at queue depth 1. The range of mixes tested is the same, and the timing and limits on data transfers are also the same as above.

The mixed sequential I/O performance of the XG6 is a bit faster than the XG5, but not enough to boost it up to the top tier of drives. The relatively poor QD1 sequential performance compared to the competition is holding back the XG6 here.

Power Efficiency in MB/s/W	Average Power in W

In spite of mid-tier performance, the XG6 still manages very good power efficiency that is a bit better than the XG5 and not too far behind the WD Black. However, the XG6 will also soon be beat by numerous upcoming Phison E12 drives even if the latter are still using the older 64-layer Toshiba 3D TLC.

Toshiba XG6 1TBToshiba XG5 1TBIntel Optane SSD 800P 118GBIntel SSD 760p 512GBKingston A1000 960GBMyDigitalSSD SBX 512GBToshiba RC100 480GBIntel SSD 660p 1TBHP EX920 1TBOCZ RD400 1TBPatriot Hellfire 480GBPhison E12 960GBPlextor M9PeGN 1TBSamsung 960 PRO 2TBSamsung 970 EVO 1TBSilicon Motion SM2262EN 2TBWD Black 1TB (3D NAND)Crucial MX500 1TB

Slow QD1 read speeds are the main factor keeping the XG6 from matching the overall performance scores of the top tier of drives. The XG6 also shows a bit of performance variation during the second half of the test due to garbage collection or a full SLC cache, but the impact is not severe.