Mixed Random Read/Write Performance

Mixed read/write tests are also a new addition to our test suite. In real world applications a significant portion of workloads are mixed, meaning that there are both read and write IOs. Our Storage Bench benchmarks already illustrate mixed workloads by being based on actual real world IO traces, but until now we haven't had a proper synthetic way to measure mixed performance. 

The benchmark is divided into two tests. The first one tests mixed performance with 4KB random IOs at six different read/write distributions starting at 100% reads and adding 20% of writes in each phase. Because we are dealing with a mixed workload that contains reads, the drive is first filled with 128KB sequential data to ensure valid results. Similarly, because the IO pattern is random, I've limited the LBA span to 16GB to ensure that the results aren't affected by IO consistency. The queue depth of the 4KB random test is three.

Again, for the sake of readability, I provide both an average based bar graph as well as a line graph with the full data on it. The bar graph represents an average of all six read/write distribution data rates for quick comparison, whereas the line graph includes a separate data point for each tested distribution. 

Iometer - Mixed 4KB Random Read/Write

The Vector 180 does better in mixed 4KB random IO than the 850 Pro, but it's a bit slower than the rest of the drives.

Iometer - Mixed 4KB Random Read/Write (Power)

Fortunately the power consumption is still excellent.

Samsung SM951 512GB

Vector 180's problem is its low random read performance because the performance gets better as more writes are thrown into the mix. 

Mixed Sequential Read/Write Performance

The sequential mixed workload tests are also tested with a full drive, but I've not limited the LBA range as that's not needed with sequential data patterns. The queue depth for the tests is one.

Iometer - Mixed 128KB Sequential Read/Write

In mixed sequential tests the Vector 180 does slightly better in the sense that the difference between drives in the order of 10% when excluding the 850 Pro.

Iometer - Mixed 128KB Sequential Read/Write (Power)

Similar to what we saw in the sequential tests, the write power consumption is fairly high, which also increases the average power consumption and the Vector 180 no longer enjoys an advantage over the other drives.

Samsung SM951 512GB

Vector 180's "bathtub" curve is pretty average, but as we can see here the power scales as soon as the portion of writes is increased, which isn't unique but for instance the 850 Pro and Extreme Pro don't exhibit such behavior.

Sequential Performance ATTO & AS-SSD
Comments Locked

89 Comments

View All Comments

  • LB-ID - Thursday, March 26, 2015 - link

    Looks like an overpriced product that doesn't stack up against competition in the same price range. Given OCZ's extensive track record of failures and attempts to use their user base as unpaid beta testers I can understand their desire to include a feature to give more peace of mind, but in reality it's just not that useful and certainly insufficient to overcome years of accumulated ill will.
  • serndipity - Thursday, March 26, 2015 - link

    The specifications say it all.

    On a $, performance, reliability, endurance, warranty basis, the OCZ 180 falls significantly short of even the consumer grade competition (e.g. Crucial or Samsung).

    Unfortunately, the OCZ story when from deceiving investors, to customers, ending in bankruptcy.

    Sadly, the same management etc., remains in place

    Be smart and avoid OCZ
  • ocztosh - Monday, March 30, 2015 - link

    Hi LB-ID, thank you for your feedback. We have shipped countless Barefoot 3 based drives across multiple series products and never once had to rev silicon. We have made updates to firmware to continually improve our products. The addition of the PFM+ feature was a decision to support customers that are really on the edge of enthusiast and workstation. This is a required feature for many enterprise drives and we felt there was a value to including this feature into our Vector 180 Series. We agree that not every customer necessarily needs this feature, and for those customers across the client spectrum we have other BF3 based drives that do not include the additional circuitry, but for those customers that really would like that extra layer of protection we were able to integrate this feature without a price premium over our previous Vector 150 Series. We have already received a very positive response from some users but will continue to offer a range of drives to meet the needs of different user applications.
  • voicequal - Friday, March 27, 2015 - link

    Wow, great review and a ton of new tests and data. The bathtub curve on the mixed sequential read/write performance will be very interesting to compare to forthcoming NVMe drives. I was surprised by how much the IOPS were reduced by commingling of sequential reads/writes. Seems to be room for improvement in this area.
  • Ethos Evoss - Saturday, March 28, 2015 - link

    The worst company of SSD's some OCZ or OWC or PVC .. jeez trash.. it's been sold to toshiba anyway ..
  • ocztosh - Monday, March 30, 2015 - link

    Hello Ethos Evoss. We are sorry that you feel this way and/or if you had a negative experience in the past. We are indeed now part of Toshiba and OCZ Storage Solutions is a very different organization as a subsidiary of Toshiba. Toshiba has provided the ability to vastly enhance resources for product development as well as given us complete access to their premium NAND. We certainly will continue to strive to meet the high expectations of you, our valued customers. Thank you again for your input.
  • daerron - Tuesday, May 26, 2015 - link

    Nice in depth analysis Anandtech! Read the article as I'm receiving a new Vector 180 240GB drive this week as my original Vector bricked itself earlier this month after around 2 years of service. I have to say that I'm really impressed with OCZ's customer service as I couriered the drive last week and will be receiving a brand new and latest SSD in return this week. Fortunately I had my data backed up as it really just died without any warning. Based on the analysis I was also thinking this would be a killer laptop drive, till I saw the lack of slumber support which is a bit of a disappointment and opportunity missed. Still the PFM+ and low power usage is also most welcome in my workstation PC. We have regular power cuts in my country so its great to have that extra peace of mind.
  • bogdan_kr - Thursday, December 17, 2015 - link

    Hello guys. I would like to ask how exactly this Storage Bench - Light is designed. The description says it is designed to be an accurate illustration of basic usage with Total IO Operations 832,339, Total GB Read 17.97 and Total GB Written 23.25.
    With its 23 GB of writes it should account for roughly two or three days of average usage (i.e. 7-11GB per day).

    How long (typically) does it take to finish this bench?
    Is it designed to last for few hours (which would account for a typical daily use) or is it designed to finish as fast as possible, in few minutes perhaps?
  • bogdan_kr - Saturday, January 23, 2016 - link

    I am aware that most likely it is a rhetorical question but can anyone from AnandTech answer it, please? I just wanted to be sure about that benchmark.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now