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 ADATA SX6000 Pro has decent overall performance on the Heavy test for an entry-level NVMe SSD, and its full-drive performance is the best for this market segment. The Mushkin Helix-L and Intel 660p both use Silicon Motion controllers that offer better peak performance for the empty-drive test runs at the expense of worse full-drive performance (even the high-end SMI-based drives are a bit slower when full than the SX6000 Pro).

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

The average and 99th percentile latency scores for the SX6000 Pro are fine: all significantly faster than a mainstream SATA drive, with no huge latency spikes from running the test on a full drive.

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

The average latencies from the SX6000 Pro are higher than most NVMe SSDs but still better than SATA. For writes, the SX6000 Pro gets close to some high-end NVMe drives.

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

The 99th percentile read latency is the first sign that the SX6000 Pro has some difficulty with handling the Heavy test on a full drive, but the read QoS in that case is still better than the SATA drives. The 99th percentile write latencies are good whether the test is run on a full or empty drive.

ATSB - Heavy (Power)

The efficiency scores for the SX6000 Pro are in line with most high-end NVMe SSDs, but the other DRAMless NVMe drives again use half the energy to provide similar performance.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer AnandTech Storage Bench - Light
Comments Locked

36 Comments

View All Comments

  • Billy Tallis - Wednesday, December 18, 2019 - link

    My mindset is that your complaint isn't specific to the SX6000P; it's true of the entire category of "low-end NVMe" drives, so I don't want to single out the SX6000P for suffering from the same problem that all of its closest competitors also suffer from. It's halfway-decent at what it's trying to be, but it's trying to compete in a niche that barely exists in the first place.

    At least for the retail SSD market. The most popular retail NVMe SSDs are all high-end drives, so they get economies of scale that the low-end models don't, and that's why E12 and SM2262 drives can be priced so close to low-end NVMe. But in the OEM market, low-end NVMe drives do have a more compelling value proposition, and that's where the controller vendors make the real money.

    That in turn influences what kind of drive designs the SSD vendors have on hand to readily convert into a retail product. The best example of this is the WD Blue SN500/SN550 series, which existed as an OEM product for a year before it came to retail. There's also Toshiba's BG series, which has been through four generations and they only bothered to do a retail release of one of them.
  • Great_Scott - Wednesday, December 18, 2019 - link

    The SSD market is and has been monstrously compressed.

    The difference between performance tiers for SATA is frequently $10/tier. (excepting the occasional Samsung drive.)

    I don't see that anything is substantially different for NVMe. This is a good, maybe great, budget drive. The problem being that you can spend $10 for a far better one.

    At some point in the future where price isn't entirely dictated by Flash BoM this might change, but for now it only makes sense to get the best drive in a category since they all cost about the same.
  • Freeb!rd - Thursday, December 19, 2019 - link

    My thoughts also... I was looking at NVMe Gen4x4 drives at around $200 for 1TB, but then saw the EVO 970 Plus was out performing them, almost bought that on Monday for $199, but saw a Sabrient Gen4 for $168 with $11 coupon on Amazon and went with that... NOW Amazon has the EVO 970 Plus for $169... which ever way the wind blows is the best value it seems. Although, Amazon has those "morphing" prices that seem to change often, probably based on your search habits. $169 for the EVO 970 Plus 1TB vs. $539 for the 2TB? Maybe Amazon tells vendors where the majority of sales volume is coming (ie 1TB) and competitors are getting more sales through via a certain price and miraculously the Samsung EVO price drops to match in a few days!! I'm sure Amazon analytics provided to their vendors play a part, probably be back to $239 after Xmas.
  • Freeb!rd - Thursday, December 19, 2019 - link

    FYI, so the Sabrient Gen4 was $157.xx after coupon, still a great deal on a Gen4x4 drive for my new X570 motherboard.
  • HarryVoyager - Thursday, December 19, 2019 - link

    The pricing is what makes all of this somewhat nuts. When I rebuilt my machine a month or so ago I ended up going with the 660p because I could get the 2TB version for around $170.

    While it isn't near the top of the heap for the destroyer, I don't do transfers of much more than a few GB at a time, and those are limited more by my Internet connection than by the drive.

    I've also got a professional grade SATA SSD, and despite its synthetic benchmarks being an order of magnitude lower than the 660p, I honestly can't tell a difference between what's installed on which. And I'm a heavy gamer who runs stuff that is notorious for slow load times and heavy RAM usuage. Even there, I'm not usually pulling more that 20Gb of data in a set, so it's just not a big difference.
  • dragosmp - Thursday, December 19, 2019 - link

    QLC was supposed to help with this segmentation. Hard to make a low end drive much cheaper just by not adding a 2$ DRAM chip and some PCB traces.

    Crucial P1 tends to kinda fulfill the QLC promise. It is sometimes at or around 80$ on offer for 1TB, has good warranty and performs quite well:
    https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2533?vs=22...
  • tlmiller76 - Saturday, December 21, 2019 - link

    I gotta disagree with the P1. I have one (1TB), and to be honest, I hate it. It's just...garbage in every way. I actually HAD an SX6000 Pro 1TB (unfortunately forgot to swap it out before I sold the laptop it was in) and it was so much better than the P1 they weren't even in the same zip code.
  • zmatt - Saturday, December 21, 2019 - link

    IMO low end NVMe drives aren't worth considering at all. If you dont have the money for a Samsung Evo then dont both because you aren't really seeing the benefits. Obviously this doesn't apply in the case of a laptop or SFF where you may not have a choice.
  • TheUnhandledException - Wednesday, December 18, 2019 - link

    It would be nice is low end NVMe drives were significantly cheaper but at least right now they are not. I don't really see the rationale for paying 2% less and getting 40% lower performance.
  • sean8102 - Monday, February 3, 2020 - link

    I upgraded from a 256GB SATA Samsung 840 Pro (my first SSD ever) to the HP EX 920 1TB and love it. Never thought I'd end up going with a HP SSD but their EX 9x0 product line is great. Thinking of getting another NVME drive just for games and going with the EX 950.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now