Power Management

Real-world client storage workloads leave SSDs idle most of the time, so the active power measurements presented earlier in this review only account for a small part of what determines a drive's suitability for battery-powered use. Especially under light use, the power efficiency of a SSD is determined mostly be how well it can save power when idle.

SATA SSDs are tested with SATA link power management disabled to measure their active idle power draw, and with it enabled for the deeper idle power consumption score and the idle wake-up latency test. Our testbed, like any ordinary desktop system, cannot trigger the deepest DevSleep idle state.

Idle power management for NVMe SSDs is far more complicated than for SATA SSDs. NVMe SSDs can support several different idle power states, and through the Autonomous Power State Transition (APST) feature the operating system can set a drive's policy for when to drop down to a lower power state. There is typically a tradeoff in that lower-power states take longer to enter and wake up from, so the choice about what power states to use may differ for desktop and notebooks.

We report two idle power measurements. Active idle is representative of a typical desktop, where none of the advanced PCIe link or NVMe power saving features are enabled and the drive is immediately ready to process new commands. The idle power consumption metric is measured with PCIe Active State Power Management L1.2 state enabled and NVMe APST enabled.

Active Idle Power Consumption (No LPM)Idle Power Consumption

Updated February 1, 2018: The first time we ran the Intel SSD 760p through our idle power tests, it didn't go so well. The active idle power improvement brought by the SM2262 controller was clear, but when all the deeper idle power states were re-enabled the 760p actually started using more power. We haven't been able to fully determine what went wrong with that test run, but further investigation has revealed at least one apparent but minor bug in how the 760p handles the NVMe APST feature.

After turning off APST (and PCIe ASPM) to get the active idle power reading and a baseline for the idle wake-up latency, our test script re-enables APST and ASPM then give the drive a few minutes to settle down into its deepest sleep state before recording the idle power measurement. From what we have observed, this is not sufficient to actually get the 760p to its lowest power level. Enabling PCIe ASPM saves significant power, but the drive remains in power state 0 (active) even after APST is turned back on. The drive doesn't drop down to power states 3 or 4 (idle) until it receives at least one more command, after which it will start using the lower power states.

During ordinary real-world usage, APST will either be off (many desktops) or on (most laptops) full-time, and this particular bug would never be triggered even momentarily. To work around this bug, we've adjusted the idle power test scripts to poke the drive with one extra command after re-enabling APST, and that has resulted in the 760p setting a new record for PCIe SSD power savings. Since we haven't re-tested all of our M.2 PCIe SSDs with our new Quarch programmable power module yet, we aren't 100% certain that the 760p is the lowest-power NVMe drive out there, but it looks likely. The deepest idle state of the 760p also compares favorably against 2.5" SATA SSD in slumber state, the deepest achievable on desktop systems. SATA SSDs in laptops that can make use of the DEVSLEEP state may beat the 760p's deepest idle state, but we aren't set up to measure that.

Idle Wake-Up Latency

The excellent power savings in the deepest idle state provided by the Intel SSD 760p comes at the cost of a relatively sluggish 60ms wake-up latency. The 760p is still much quicker to wake up than the 600p was, and it is worth keeping in mind that not every transition out of idle will be this slow—the 760p has an intermediate idle state where it draws about 31mW and wakes up 1.8ms. During shorter idle periods, the 760p will be in this intermediate state that still offers an excellent balance of power and performance.

Mixed Read/Write Performance Conclusion
Comments Locked

51 Comments

View All Comments

  • Makaveli - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    Its not on the charts because this is a review of budget drives.

    There would be no point to adding it to this review its in a different performance segment.
  • emvonline - Tuesday, January 23, 2018 - link

    and you cant put it in a notebook
  • iwod - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    I think we have come a long since the first SSD review on Anandtech. And we still have yet to determined the one benchmarks that is representative of real world usage.

    With these sort of SSD performance I wondered if we are still bottlenecked by IO at all.

    The Intel 512GB is now under $200 for MSRP, I bet street price will be even lower, and $100 cheaper then Samsung. While the 128GB and 256GB is much closer, mainly because the cost of controller is fixed, contributing to the bottom line pricing.

    Which is why I am sadden, and a little angry, how Apple in 2018, being one of the largest NAND buyer and has an economy of scale, their own SSD Controller, is STILL shipping a HDD on iMac.
  • xchaotic - Wednesday, January 24, 2018 - link

    So why would I want this over the slightly faster and cheaper 960 EVO? (espeically at 256GB it's faster)
  • solar75 - Tuesday, January 30, 2018 - link

    Dear BILLY, could you please test several NVME drives in several laptop models to see which ones provide the best speed? I think this will be a very popular review.
  • Shirley Dulcey - Friday, August 31, 2018 - link

    Half a year later we can see where the pricing has gone, and it's in a pleasant downward direction.

    I recently bought a 256GB 760p for a lower-end build (Ryzen 5 2400G, also a bargain at $110) and it's performing very well in that application. It was $60 that day ($65 right now), making it the least expensive option at that capacity other than the store brand drive. The 512GB is $125, but in that capacity class the Crucial MX500 is even more aggressively priced at $100. All in all a great time to be buying an SSD and CPU, but still a lousy one for RAM.
  • andras1 - Friday, February 8, 2019 - link

    So is the 500 GB Intel 760p better in every single aspect (including latency, power, and small random writes/reads) than the 500 GB SATA Samsung 860 EVO?
  • andras1 - Saturday, February 9, 2019 - link

    How about full throttle maximum write/read speed power consumption?
    In which applications is 60ms wake up latency typically a problem? What does this translate to for the average user? Using Visual Studio for programming? Gaming? Internet? Video watching? Handling files?
  • FastCarsLike - Friday, May 24, 2019 - link

    I don't get it, how is it still "TBD", this has been out for almost a year now.
  • ktan112 - Tuesday, July 23, 2019 - link

    Is my Intel 760p dying, I'm getting less than half the performance of your results from testing:
    https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/18676663#DRI...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now