Power Management Features

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.

For many NVMe SSDs, the closely related matter of thermal management can also be important. M.2 SSDs can concentrate a lot of power in a very small space. They may also be used in locations with high ambient temperatures and poor cooling, such as tucked under a GPU on a desktop motherboard, or in a poorly-ventilated notebook.

Samsung 970 EVO
NVMe Power and Thermal Management Features
Controller Samsung Phoenix
Firmware 1B2QEXE7
NVMe
Version
Feature Status
1.0 Number of operational (active) power states 3
1.1 Number of non-operational (idle) power states 2
Autonomous Power State Transition (APST) Supported
1.2 Warning Temperature 85°C
Critical Temperature 85°C
1.3 Host Controlled Thermal Management Supported
 Non-Operational Power State Permissive Mode Not Supported

The Samsung 970 EVO bumps the supported NVMe spec version to 1.3, compared to the 1.2 feature set supported by the PM981 and 960 series. The 970 EVO implements the Host Controlled Thermal Management feature, allowing operating systems to configure the drive to throttle at a lower temperature than it normally would. The (optional) non-operational power state permissive mode feature is not included, so the 970 EVO is not supposed to do background tasks like garbage collection when it is in idle power states (unless they can be done within the power constraints of the idle states, which is unrealistic).

Samsung 970 EVO
NVMe Power States
Controller Samsung Phoenix
Firmware 1B2QEXE7
Power
State
Maximum
Power
Active/Idle Entry
Latency
Exit
Latency
PS 0 6.2 W Active - -
PS 1 4.3 W Active - -
PS 2 2.1 W Active - -
PS 3 0.04 W Idle 0.21 ms 1.2 ms
PS 4 0.005 W Idle 2 ms 8 ms

Note that the above tables reflect only the information provided by the drive to the OS. The power and latency numbers are often very conservative estimates, but they are what the OS uses to determine which idle states to use and how long to wait before dropping to a deeper idle state.

Idle Power Measurement

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 if supported.

Active Idle Power Consumption (No LPM)Idle Power Consumption

Active idle power draw of the 970 EVO seems to be about 20% higher than the preceding generation of Samsung drives, but the low-power idle we measured is about the same as most other high-end NVMe drives.

Idle Wake-Up Latency

The idle wake-up latency of the 970 EVO is more than twice that of its predecessors and also significantly higher than that of the Samsung PM981. This ~14ms latency exceeds the 8ms that the drive itself claims as its latency to wake up from its deepest sleep state.

Mixed Read/Write Performance Conclusion
Comments Locked

68 Comments

View All Comments

  • jjj - Wednesday, April 25, 2018 - link

    The conclusion was shocking, nowadays when nobody has ethics and they just try to sell and sell and sell. What you did there is like telling people that a 500$ GPU is nuts and really, I have zero expectations for anyone to say something like that anymore. Today is all about manipulating people into being stupid and buying a politician or a product.
    You should make your own site, would be the only honest hardware review site on the planet. People are getting worse and worse in managing their money and parents, schools, the press are not doing anything about it.

    Congrats and thanks, I've missed seeing some sanity in a review.
  • peevee - Monday, April 30, 2018 - link

    Yep. Now if only they would start including any real-life test. Recoding a large video. Compilation of a software package. Decompressing a zip archive. I suspect they don't do it because they need to sell ads from large-margin manufacturers like Samsung.
  • hansmuff - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link

    If only you'd read the article properly and see what the Destroyer etc tests actually ARE.. they're explained in great detail. Follow the links. All of those things ARE IN THERE.
  • Urbanos - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Its annoying that your charts seem to have little consistency, from chart to chart one can't easily follow the comparison part for part. Older Anandtech articles never had this problem.
  • mapesdhs - Sunday, May 6, 2018 - link

    Billy, I think it would worth adding something in the article somewhere to explain why in several cases the 950 Pro still shows so strongly after all this time. I'm intrigued. I knew it could beat the 960 EVO, but even so, sometimes it's above the 970 and other unexpected newer models.

    Ian.
  • Stephan0711 - Thursday, May 10, 2018 - link

    960 pro 512 TB or 970 evo 500TB for desktop use / gaming? What do you guys think?
    Which benchmark represents this kind of usage?
  • ETHANH - Friday, May 11, 2018 - link

    My friend just got a 970 pro 1TB yesterday, after we tried it out. I like my HP EX920 better, similar performance, much cheaper prices.
  • Abad - Saturday, May 19, 2018 - link

    Hi Friends,
    My pocket allows for the 512GB only and I was waiting results from the 970 and the EX920 before I write this: Toshiba RD400 512GB is the one to go for. If you factor in: price, performance and warranty, its unbeatable. To see 2016 MLC technology competing with Q2 2018 tech and winning must ring bells. Its no rocket science. The RD400 uses the more expensive and faster MLC cells, but because it comes from 2016, it is selling same price as the cheaper and slower TLC cells used in today's SSDs. You can't have a safer bet, can you?
    But then, I heard some talk that OCZ SSDs go south but even that wont deter me from going for the RD400. What do you think?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now