The Toshiba OCZ RD400 (256GB, 512GB, 1TB) M.2 PCIe SSD Review
by Billy Tallis on May 25, 2016 8:02 AM ESTSequential Read Performance
The sequential read test requests 128kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test spans the entire drive, and the drive is filled before the test begins. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.
The RD400 delivers sequential read speeds on par with other PCIe 3 drives and almost three times the speed possible from a SATA drive.
The RD400 draws slightly more power than the Samsung 950 Pro. The higher performance of the PCIe drives makes them much more efficient than any of the SATA drives.
 |
|||||||||
The 256GB RD400 jumps in performance between QD 4 and QD 8 where it tops out at the advertised speed, while the larger models show more modest increases during the second half of this test.
Sequential Write Performance
The sequential write test writes 128kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test spans the entire drive, and the drive is filled before the test begins. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.
The RD400 tops the charts for sequential write speed with a substantial advantage over both Intel and Samsung PCIe SSDs.
Unsurprisingly, the high performance comes with high power consumption as the 512GB and 1TB models both draw over 6W.
 |
|||||||||
The 256GB RD400 shows constant performance across queue depths while the larger models show a slight increase from QD1 to QD2. The 1TB model wavers later in the test as thermal throttling occasionally kicks in, but even so it stays much faster overall than any competitor.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
40 Comments
View All Comments
AnnonymousCoward - Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - link
What about boot time. Is it slow like the Intel card?mervincm - Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - link
Intel 750 SSD isn't slow at boot anymore. Later SSD firmware and NVME drivers have really helped my boot performance.Yregister - Thursday, November 3, 2016 - link
But that's on Windows, correct? I read that the 750 doesn't work on a Mac, not bootable...moheban79 - Saturday, November 12, 2016 - link
Thats not true. I got my Intel 750 booting up my hackintosh. Should be doable.adamto - Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - link
Why there is no 2T or even 4T M.2 SSD?Silma - Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - link
Because there isn't enough place on the stick. One would need to develop much denser NAND.Billy Tallis - Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - link
A double-sided M.2 2280 can usually fit four packages of flash, each containing a stack of up to 16 dies that are typically 128Gb (16GB). That multiplies out to a practical limit of 1024GB for now. Newer 3D NAND such as Micron's will be available in 256Gb MLC dies, enabling 2TB M.2 2280 drives (or 3TB with TLC).Dr.Neale - Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - link
Don't you mean 4 TB with TLC?Billy Tallis - Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - link
We're not quite there yet. Micron's 3D TLC is 384Gb and everybody else seems to be going for a 256Gb TLC that will be a smaller die than their 256Gb MLC. A 4TB M.2 would require either a 512Gb die or denser packaging.Chaser - Wednesday, May 25, 2016 - link
"Upgrading from a mechanical hard drive to a SSD alleviates a major performance bottleneck but the experience of moving from SATA SSDs to PCIe SSDs is not as revolutionary. I suspect most consumers would be better served with a larger SSD of moderate performance than a cramped but blazing fast PCIe drive," Thank you!