ADATA XPG SX930 (120GB, 240GB & 480GB) SSD Review: JMicron JMF670H Debuts
by Kristian Vättö on July 16, 2015 10:00 AM ESTSequential Read Performance
For full details of how we conduct our Iometer tests, please refer to this article.
Sequential read performance is surprisingly marked down. While we are only talking about a 10-20% difference, given the longevity of the push towards sequential data rates, I wouldn't expect any modern controller to have trouble with sequential read performance anymore.
Power is also low, though, resulting in efficient, yet a bit low performance.
 |
|||||||||
The reason for the poor sequential read performance lies in very poor performance scaling. Typically all modern drives reach ~550MB/s at QD2, but the JMF670H requires QD8 to reach its maximum performance. This has a knock on effect for any non-prosumer or gaming scenario which is where the SX930 series is aimed at.
Sequential Write Performance
Sequential write performance is a bit better and here the SX930 is a quite average drive, although the 480GB model should again be faster since it's slightly behind its competitors.
Scaling with queue depth is minimal, which is normal for low capacity drives but at 240GB and 480GB there should be enough NAND bandwidth available for higher throughput which we don't see here, perhaps indicating some of the limitations of the controller.
 |
|||||||||
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
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 reviewsZeDestructor - 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.