The Toshiba OCZ VX500 (256GB, 512GB, 1024GB) SSD Review
by Billy Tallis on September 13, 2016 9:00 AM ESTAnandTech 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.
When starting from an empty drive, the VX500 delivers a great average data rate on the Heavy test, second only to Samsung's 850 EVO and 850 Pro. When starting from a full drive, the VX500 suffers greatly as its SLC caching is not well-tuned for this kind of abuse.
The average service times of the VX500 aren't the best in the empty-drive case, but aren't anything to complain about. The penalty from running the test on a full drive is extremely clear as latency is roughly doubled.
The percentage of high-latency operations shows once again that stressing the SLC cache and garbage collection with a full drive causes trouble, but the performance for the more common case of a lightly-used drive with ample spare area is fine.
Energy efficiency is once again a strength of the VX500, even for the full-drive tests—it runs slower in that case, but doesn't drag out the test for so long that the faster but higher power drives come out ahead for total energy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
29 Comments
View All Comments
Lolimaster - Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - link
LOL $337? You can get 1TB and 1 500GB Crucial MX500 with just a few more bucks.Lolimaster - Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - link
MX3002016, still no edit button, GG.
sonicmerlin - Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - link
Feels like SSD prices/GB have been pretty stagnant the last couple years.rhysiam - Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - link
They have dropped significantly. Check out the price table from the 850EVO launch review which was less than two years ago. Cheapest $/GB drive was the 240GB ARC 100 @ 42c/GB. That table in this article has a bunch of drives cheaper than that, and it's mid-range SATA drives. There are entry level 480GB drives going today that are only $10 more than the budget 240GB drives from less than two years ago.I'd call that pretty reasonable progress on the $/GB front.
rhysiam - Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - link
Here's the table from the 850EVO launch review: http://www.anandtech.com/show/8747/samsung-ssd-850...sonicmerlin - Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - link
The EVO was always higher priced. Look at the average prices:https://pcpartpicker.com/trends/price/internal-har...
They've come down, but not as dramatically as before. I remember well over a year ago being able to buy a SDD for 25 cents/GB on a good deal, and now it's about 20 cents/GB. Perhaps it's because of the slow transition to 3D NAND, but I'm hoping the pace picks up again.
Hiniberus - Wednesday, September 21, 2016 - link
When will these go on sale? I'm curious about them but I can't find any store that has them in stock!superunknown98 - Friday, September 23, 2016 - link
I don't really understand the final words giving the drive praise. It didn't seem to perform that much better compared other drives, including it's predecessor. Even in ATSB-Destroyer it had middling performance with good power consumption.cargostud - Thursday, February 2, 2017 - link
I had a VTR1-25SAT3-512G with a 5 year Warranty. It has 4k Random Write: 95K IOPS; 4k Random Read: 100K IOPS according to the specs. It died a few weeks ago and it is being replaced with a VX500. It has a spec of 4k Random Write: 64K IOPS; 4k Random Read: 92K IOPS. The replacement drive is slower than the one I had before. Wouldn't a more fair replacement be a VT180? 4k Random Write: 90K IOPS; 4k Random Read: 90K IOPS