ADATA XPG SX930 (120GB, 240GB & 480GB) SSD Review: JMicron JMF670H Debuts
by Kristian Vättö on July 16, 2015 10:00 AM ESTFinal Words
To be frank, reviewing a SATA MLC SSD has gotten rather unexciting over the past year or so. On the performance side there are barely any areas where one can get enthusiastic about because the SATA 6Gbps interface and AHCI driver stack are both so saturated. It feels like the purpose of my testing is mostly to make sure that someone didn't totally screw up the product design because other than that the performance differences between modern SATA 6Gbps controllers are getting negligible. Only Samsung and SanDisk can provide performance that's distinguishably better than others, which leaves JMicron, Silicon Motion and Phison based drives fighting over the value segment.
This brings us to the SX930 and JMF670H. If I had to pick one word to describe the two, that would be 'average'. There is nothing that truly separates the SX930 and JMF670H from the drives and controllers that are already available. Performance wise the JMF670H is fairly similar to Silicon Motion's SM2246EN, but at the end of the day the SM2246EN wins in both performance and power efficiency, which makes it difficult for ADATA and JMicron to compete in areas other than price or features.
While utilizing higher binned MLC NAND (or "enterprise-grade" as ADATA calls it) could be considered as a differentiating feature, I don't consider NAND endurance to be a significant issue for client usage, so even though the NAND is likely higher quality than what you would find inside a BX100 for instance, it's not going to have any impact on the end-user. A five-year warranty is definitely a welcome addition, but that alone doesn't provide enough value to make the SX930 stand out, especially with Samsung offer a five-year warranty for the 850 EVO.
| Amazon Price Comparison (7/16/2015) | |||
| 120/128GB | 240/250/256GB | 480/500/512GB | |
| ADATA XPG SX930 (MSRP) | $80 | $110 | $200 |
| ADATA Premier SP610 | $60 | $100 | $188 |
| Crucial MX200 | - | $103 | $180 |
| Crucial BX100 | $66 | $90 | $178 |
| OCZ Trion 100 | $60 | $90 | $180 |
| OCZ ARC 100 | $54 | $89 | $170 |
| OCZ Vector 180 | $80 | $130 | $250 |
| Samsung 850 EVO | $72 | $98 | $178 |
| Samsung 850 Pro | $97 | $140 | $251 |
| SanDisk Ultra II | $63 | $95 | $182 |
| SanDisk Extreme Pro | - | $135 | $220 |
| Transcend SSD370 | $58 | $90 | $176 |
Since the SX930 is ADATA's high-end drive, the prices aren't exactly cheap. You are looking at about $20 premium over the BX100, which is hard to justify given that the BX100 actually provides better performance. While street pricing tends to be lower than MSRPs, it's clear that the SX930 needs to be about $20 cheaper to be competitive. At equal pricing with the BX100, I might lean towards the SX930 and take a marginal hit in performance for two years of additional warranty, but I wouldn't pay $20 for the warranty alone because of the rapid developments in SSD performance and prices dropping about 20% year over year.
I did let JMicron know about my performance concerns when I tested the JMF670H reference design samples because sequential read performance in particular was below the average. JMicron promised an improvement through an upcoming firmware update and told me that the initial firmware mostly focused on optimizing performance for benchmarks such as CrystalDiskMark and AS-SSD, which typically use higher IO sizes and queue depths to extract the maximum performance out of an SSD. With a firmware better optimized for low queue depths and real world workloads, I see potential in the SX930 and JMF670H, but nevertheless it still needs to be more competitive in price in order to tackle the BX100 and 850 EVO.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
67 Comments
View All Comments
Impulses - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
The 500GB EVO has actually been $164 at Amazon for like a week, making it the cheapest one on the chart lol... Not sure why they list it at $178.The 1TB just went back down to $340 too... I want two in the long run, trying to decide whether to grab just one now and wait for better BF pricing or just grab both now.
MrSpadge - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
Yes, it's called the BX100. ARC100 is pretty decent, too.zodiacfml - Friday, July 17, 2015 - link
Nothing till other manufacturers release their 3D NAND versions. Don't forget about pricing too. ADATA couldn't compete because they don't design controllers or manufacture chips. They buy parts and assemble them, making it costly.Samus - Saturday, July 18, 2015 - link
Considering the MX100 is cheaper and more reliable with about the same performance, I think I just answered your question.Samsung TLC drives can not be trusted, specifically the 840 EVO and 850 EVO.
Flunk - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
When it comes to budget drives right now, if it's not cheaper than a Samsung 850 EVO I'm not even going to look twice. The EVO is much faster in most reasonable workloads than any of the other discount drives so I can't see paying more for less.MrSpadge - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
I don't see the EVO being "much faster" than a BX100 or ARC100. I'd rather say they're about on par.Uplink10 - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
"initial firmware mostly focused on optimizing performance for benchmarks such as CrystalDiskMark and AS-SSD, which typically use higher IO sizes and queue depths"I do not believe what am I reading. They are optimizing firmware so it will look good on charts but are not optimizing the firmware for all uses that the users will perform.
Components for a PC are used in a lot of ways and optimizing the component for just a few uses that are similar as known benchmark software is wrong. The way I see it they are trying to sell the drive by optimizing the performance that will look good in known benchmark software. That is wrong!!!
Kristian Vättö - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
It certainly is sad and unfortunately that is more or less the state of the whole component industry (smartphones having "Turbo" modes to exceed the TDP for improved benchmark scores). It's surprising how some SSD companies have very little understanding of real world client workloads and all they see is the few benchmark scores, which frankly are not even relevant to end-users.We are trying to fight the fight and convince manufacturers to focus on areas that matter. Getting JMicron to develop a new firmware just based on our feedback (they honestly had no idea why we are even testing low queue depth performance before I explained it to them) is a sign that companies value our input and expertise, which I think is ultimately a win-win for everyone.
Impulses - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
And we users thank ya for it. AT has been instrumental in providing valuable feedback to SSD manufacturers since the early days, regardless of who was doing the writing.Maybe it's time for Kristian's own "SSD Anthology"... :p Seems people keep asking everywhere whether M2/PCI-E or NVMe drives are worth it for them, I know the stock answer is "if you gotta ask..." but still.
Maybe a one time revisit of some real world testing? HDD vs SATA SSD vs etc one last time to reassess how far the gaps have grown and whatnot.
ggathagan - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link
" (they honestly had no idea why we are even testing low queue depth performance before I explained it to them)"That's a scary confession. Makes you wonder if they should find another area of endeavor and leave this market to those who *do* understand.