ADATA XPG SX930 (120GB, 240GB & 480GB) SSD Review: JMicron JMF670H Debuts
by Kristian Vättö on July 16, 2015 10:00 AM ESTMixed Random Read/Write Performance
For full details of how we conduct our Iometer tests, please refer to this article.
The 480GB and 120GB do fairly well in mixed performance, but the 240GB is behind its peers. Although it is worth noting that the 480GB does also consume twice the power, making it not very efficient for use in battery driven platforms.
There is nothing spectacular in the scaling graphs. The performance scaling could be more aggressive with writes, but the SX930 doesn't have good write performance to begin with.
 |
|||||||||
Mixed Sequential Read/Write Performance
The SX930 does well in mixed sequential performance and the power efficiency is good for this test.
The reason lies in good read-centric performance, which is surprising given that sequential read performance is the Achilles' heel of the SX930. Despite this it performs well with writes thrown into the mix, although again the performance when the distributions become write-heavy are nothing to write home about.
 |
|||||||||
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
67 Comments
View All Comments
Oxford Guy - Friday, July 17, 2015 - link
We'll just pretend that the 840 EVO had not been heavily hyped by commentators like you all over the net for quite a long time as well as by review sites. We will also just pretend that it did not have very heavy sales figures. Instead because Samsung put out with a new drive that you want to push we will just pretend that anyone who bought the previous generation drives were idiots.Oxford Guy - Friday, July 17, 2015 - link
Plus, it was Samsung who decided to stick with the EVO name.sonny73n - Saturday, July 18, 2015 - link
@Oxford Guy,I couldn't agree more with you. Thank you for explaining things clearer than I ever could have.
sonny73n - Friday, July 17, 2015 - link
@Stochastic840 EVO sequential read at ~100MB/s. My 5900RPM Seagate 2TB HDD is at ~135MB/s. Lol
leexgx - Friday, July 17, 2015 - link
what about random data speeds (as that's more the problem with HDDS)sonny73n - Saturday, July 18, 2015 - link
What about a product that doesn't meet advertised specs? "Fool me once, shame on you..." I'll make sure the second line of that saying won't apply to me.leexgx - Saturday, July 18, 2015 - link
if you're using a 840 EVO you can update the firmware to restore the drive to more so normal performance (unless your on linux or OSX then best not) even so without the firmware update compared to a HDD the 840 evo SSD is overall fastersonny73n - Saturday, July 18, 2015 - link
By the way, I'm still rocking my i5-2500K system OCed @4.5GHz. I always had an SSD for boot drive (C:) and 2 HDD drives for storage since the beginning. Why should there be problems with the HDDs as they're just storage drives? Damn why did I feel the urge to explain to a 5th grader?bill.rookard - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
I was never crazy about the TLC premise either. I prefer the 830's for boot drives since they're very reliable and have a more proven track record. I think the 850's with the 3D NAND should be pretty durable as well. In my servers I have the Crucial MX100's (a pair of 256Gs - one for data, one for sync, but -not- raided) and they're solid drives and have not had a single spot of trouble with those.fokka - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
after the 840 evo fiasko i'm reluctant to put my trust in samsung, especially when there are perfectly capable, performant and affordable SSDs like the bx100 available. 3d nand is nice and all, but for me crucial just seems like the safer bet right now.