Final Words

The SanDisk X400 is intended to be a high-end TLC SSD, and there aren't many of those to compare against. The Samsung 850 EVO is without question the fastest SATA SSD using TLC NAND, and for the most part it ranks as a high-end drive even when compared with SATA SSDs in general, not just drives with TLC NAND. Aside from that, most TLC SSDs are value-oriented SSDs that sacrifice much to reach the lowest possible prices. The SanDisk X400 is not one of those products.

On almost every test the SanDisk X400 is considerably faster than the next fastest drive with planar TLC NAND. The few occasions where the OCZ Trion 150 beats the SanDisk X400, in write performance, they are balanced by several tests where the X400 ties or beats MLC drives like the Crucial MX200 or OCZ Vector 180. The only notable performance weakness is sequential write speed, but this is not a severe handicap.

In addition to raising the bar for planar TLC performance, the SanDisk X400 sets a new standard for power efficiency of drives using TLC NAND. It routinely ties or beats at least a few MLC SSDs for power efficiency, especially when its performance is not lagging far behind.

With solid performance and power efficiency and a 5-year warranty on a generous write endurance rating, the SanDisk X400 has every right to ask a higher price than any other planar TLC SSD. The warranty and endurance rating also exceed that of some low-end MLC drives that don't have much performance advantage over the X400.

At the moment the SanDisk X400 is priced at or below the OCZ Trion 150 for most capacities, especially the 512GB that is one of the cheapest SSDs in its capacity class. At 1TB perhaps the most interesting comparison is against the Mushkin Reactor, still by far the cheapest 1TB MLC SSD. The Reactor is about $25 cheaper but only has a 3-year warranty and less than half the write endurance rating. Supply of the Crucial MX200 is drying up in advance of the MX300 launch, so there are not a lot of MLC drives priced close to the X400. Overall the X400 is a reasonable step up from the cheapest budget SSDs and priced far enough below drives like the Samsung 850 EVO to not be overshadowed.

SSD Price Comparison
Drive 960GB
1TB
480GB
512GB
240GB
256GB
120GB
128GB
OCZ Trion 150 $243.49 $129.98 $59.99 $43.74
SanDisk Ultra II $225.25 $120.99 $73.48 $54.60
SanDisk X400 $244.95 $113.99 $78.93 $46.99
SanDisk Extreme Pro $348.99 $184.20 $108.00  
Crucial MX200 Sold Out $139.00 $81.72  
PNY CS2211 $289.99 $139.99 $69.99  
Mushkin Reactor $219.99 $149.99 $79.99  
Samsung 850 EVO $324.99 $149.99 $90.19 $66.75

It is refreshing to see a TLC drive that provides progress on something other than price. The X400 is a credible mid-range SSD that achieves SanDisk's goals and proves that even planar TLC NAND can compete for the mainstream segment.

ATTO, AS-SSD & Idle Power Consumption
Comments Locked

41 Comments

View All Comments

  • Margalus - Friday, May 6, 2016 - link

    It uses less power than some, and is priced lower. But it seems performance is severely lacking..
  • jabber - Friday, May 6, 2016 - link

    This just shows what a fantastic budget SSD the BX100 was. Crucial were stupid to dump it.
  • Mixal11 - Sunday, May 8, 2016 - link

    Exactly, for me it's v300 for low end desktop, BX100 for laptops (hard to get over time) and Sandisk Extreme Pro or 850 Pro for high end. I avoid TLC, because of experience with Dell Samsung 841oem. Who knows if I can read data from it after year or two. TLC drives are great to reduce ssd prices.
  • jabber - Sunday, May 8, 2016 - link

    Yeah everyone moaned about the V300's back in the day but they are perfect SSDs for putting in SATA II kit as they push 285+MBps all day long...plus they are the cheapest you can buy usually. Also I have bought dozens of them and not one has yet failed. They are a solid tough little SSD. I shall be sorry when they go.
  • jhh - Friday, May 6, 2016 - link

    I wonder if they have included any of the increased endurance technology from their Smart Storage (formerly part of Smart Modular) acquisition. The idea behind the technology was that most cells didn't need full current to program, and when programmed with less than full current, that the cell would allow more write/erase cycles.
  • Michael Bay - Friday, May 6, 2016 - link

    Goddamn it, one more terabyte.
    Just one.
  • Samus - Friday, May 6, 2016 - link

    I think if I were shopping for a TLC drive I'd stick with Sandisk too. I haven't had any issues with their Ultra II's, although many people have. I have, however, had two ADATA SP550's fail (a 120GB and 240GB) one during a power failure in a laptop (BSOD) which a secure erase recovered usability of the drive, and another within an hour of installation - cloning about 100GB of data to it killed it an no longer detects by BIOS.

    I have 5 or so other SP550's in the field running fine though, but none of them have suffered the "abuse" of the above cases.

    I have dozens of Mushkin drives out there, even ECO2's, all running incredibly well. I have a few ECO3 TLC drives in house about to go out, but I've been avoiding them because the ECO2 is still available.

    On a side note, I still have 840EVO's coming in at least bi-weekly with basically unusable performance. Samsung is hell to deal with for RMA (a stark contrast to, say, OCZ that actually sends you an advanced replacement!) and nothing I can do revives performance in these drives. Secure erase, fill and trim, etc, nothing works. Even after a fresh OS install they read at half the speed they write. It's crazy, slower than a 2.5" hard disk.
  • ladder_to_heaven - Friday, May 6, 2016 - link

    Win 8.1 - STILL? -

    For the love of god WHY?
  • Billy Tallis - Friday, May 6, 2016 - link

    Switching to Windows 10 would require re-testing a lot of drives, monopolizing the testbed for a month. It'll probably happen at some point this year, but I'll need to put together a second system for it (hopefully a Skylake system with working PCIe power management).
  • jabber - Saturday, May 7, 2016 - link

    Yeah no rush, after all 85% of 10's code is...8.1.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now