Random Read Performance

For full details of how we conduct our Iometer tests, please refer to this article.

Iometer - 4KB Random Read

Random read performance is quite average and only Samsung has a notable advantage in this field, which is partly due to 3D V-NAND and its lower latencies. 

Iometer - 4KB Random Read (Power)

Power consumption is on par with the BX100 and even though the BX100 has a slight performance advantage, the SX930 is very power efficient in random reads.

ADATA XPG SX930

Performance scaling could be a little more aggressive especially at QD4 and QD8, but overall random performance appears to be suited for the product.

Random Write Performance

Iometer - 4KB Random Write

Random write performance is mediocre and especially the 480GB SKU could use a boost to be more competitive. Fortunately power consumption is quite low, so the overall efficiency is decent.

Iometer - 4KB Random Write (Power)

Given the pseudo-SLC cache, one would expect performance scaling to be more aggressive from low to high, especially at QD4 and above, but there leaves an element of wanting compared to other high-end drives on the market.

ADATA XPG SX930
AnandTech Storage Bench - Light Sequential Performance
Comments Locked

67 Comments

View All Comments

  • MrSpadge - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link

    Kristian.. that's so shocking to hear! It's the same attitude which gave us the poorly performing JMicron controllers in the first years of SSDs. Was it 2009? It took Anand to explain them why their drives optimized for sequential performance s*cked in the real world. Did they learn nothing during all those years?
  • zodiacfml - Saturday, July 18, 2015 - link

    True yet both has a point. Even if they optimized for low queue depths, real world client workloads wouldn't change much such as booting Windows or loading some games or programs though benchmarks would show the improvements. I would like to see better random performance in all SSDs in the future but it's rare to have that kind of workload in clients and usually it is done so quickly.

    They listened though because Anandtech is already respected when it comes to these.
  • bug77 - Friday, July 17, 2015 - link

    But can you really blame them? Even Anandtech runs the standard benchmark battery and throws you some number. They don't test real-world scenarios, so why would manufacturers optimize for that?
  • leexgx - Friday, July 17, 2015 - link

    maybe you should be looking at the AnandTech Storage Bench part of the reviews
  • ZeDestructor - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link

    No Intel 730/S3500 in the comparisons? :(
  • frenchy_2001 - Thursday, July 16, 2015 - link

    Completely different market segment (medium SATA SSD vs premium PCIe/NVMe).
    You can still compare them with BENCH if you want to see what you get for your $$
    (hint: lots if you need it, little in client usage)
  • DigitalFreak - Friday, July 17, 2015 - link

    So JMicron is still crap after all these years. At least they're consistent.
  • Oxford Guy - Saturday, July 18, 2015 - link

    Not everyone can have a drive that slows down to 30 MB/s on reads like Samsung.
  • The_Assimilator - Sunday, July 19, 2015 - link

    Samsung has made 1 slip-up that was fixed with a firmware update, JMicron makes controllers that are consistently awful. Which one deserves more of your vitriol?
  • DigitalFreak - Sunday, July 19, 2015 - link

    He's mesmerized by the flames on the box.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now