The ADATA XPG SX8200 & GAMMIX S11 NVMe SSD Review: High Performance At All Sizes
by Billy Tallis on July 25, 2018 11:00 AM ESTMixed Random Performance
Our test of mixed random reads and writes covers mixes varying from pure reads to pure writes at 10% increments. Each mix is tested for up to 1 minute or 32GB of data transferred. The test is conducted with a queue depth of 4, and is limited to a 64GB span of the drive. In between each mix, the drive is given idle time of up to one minute so that the overall duty cycle is 50%.
The mixed random I/O performance of the ADATA XPG SX8200 and GAMMIX S11 is a little bit slower than the fastest flash-based SSDs, but is still quite fast, especially given the lower drive capacities.
 |
|||||||||
| Power Efficiency in MB/s/W | Average Power in W | ||||||||
The power efficiency of the SX8200 is about par, a product of above-average performance combined with slightly above average power draw.
 |
|||||||||
The ADATA XPG SX8200's performance during the mixed random I/O test starts off fairly flat with little impact from a few writes being added to the mix. As the portion of writes increases, the SX8200's performance accelerated to end up with very good performance near the end of the test. However, in the final phase when the workload shifts to pure writes, the SX8200 doesn't show as pronounced a spike in performance as is typical for high-end SSDs.
Mixed Sequential Performance
Our test of mixed sequential reads and writes differs from the mixed random I/O test by performing 128kB sequential accesses rather than 4kB accesses at random locations, and the sequential test is conducted at queue depth 1. The range of mixes tested is the same, and the timing and limits on data transfers are also the same as above.
The SM2262 drives including the newer generation from ADATA cannot quite match the performance of the best from Samsung or WD on the mixed sequential workload test, but they otherwise perform quite well for their capacity, and are about twice as fast as the older SX8000.
 |
|||||||||
| Power Efficiency in MB/s/W | Average Power in W | ||||||||
The average power consumption of the SX8200 during the mixed sequential I/O test is rather high at about 4W compared to 3W for the preceding generation drives. However, the performance increase is more than enough to justify the power increase, and overall power efficiency is pretty good.
 |
|||||||||
The performance of the SX8200 during the mixed sequential I/O test exhibits a classic bathtub curve, with a steep decline as writes are first introduced, very flat performance through the middle of the test with a minimum in the 7-800 MB/s range, and a bit of a performance rebound at the end of the test. Most other drives in this class aren't quite as consistent through the middle of the test and tend to continue slowly losing performance until turning around in the second half.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
19 Comments
View All Comments
Pewzor - Tuesday, May 14, 2019 - link
FuzeDrive (aka Virtual SSD) is used by Dell EMC data center, people saying you lose FuzeDrive you lose everything is just full of it. FuzeDrive is just Virtual SSD (by Enmotus) rebranded for AMD use.It works like Intel Rapid Storage except VSSD is data center proven.
There's a very little chance for total catastrophic failure to happen, which could happen to IRST as well.
You will lose your data when multiple drives fail at the same time, which is true even for raid 1 and raid 5.
VSSD/FuzeDrive when it pushes data across different devices it creates a mirror in (duplicates in shadow file), and the duplicates are not purged until after the data is verified to complete copying to the new destination drive.
Only time this happens is when file is copied the destination drive fails the instant the copy is verified then the source device fails and breaks the shadow image.
Technically even a 3 drive raid 5 array could fail catastrophically if all 3 drives failed.
eddieobscurant - Thursday, July 26, 2018 - link
I think the drives deserved an award.Samus - Thursday, July 26, 2018 - link
Double sided :(Would be good for a notebook considering the power profile and price. The 980 EVO is just dangerous in a mobile device so I've been sticking to the WD Black, which is still pretty expensive.
wolve - Thursday, July 26, 2018 - link
FYI this SSD is on sale for $100 on Rakuten. Got it a few weeks ago when they had a similar deal.https://www.rakuten.com/shop/adata/product/ASX8200...
SanX - Saturday, July 28, 2018 - link
This drive was completely destroyed by the Destroyer still the author and the crowd sing the Dithyrambs to it.gglaw - Saturday, August 11, 2018 - link
the vast majority of home users could not even emulate the Destroyer tests if they tried and it has no bearing on the actual user experience. It is there mostly for academic purposes - did you even read the details of what the Destroyer test runs? For even an advanced home techie, this drive's price/performance is most likely the best that currently exists, especially when it goes on sale for $95 for the ~500GB model. That's not much higher than a budget SATA drive for identical performance to a 970 EVO or WD Black for home use. It's been on sale for $95-$100 3X now that I'm aware of, not only should the author give it a positive review, for the segment it addresses I feel it should be even given Editor's Choice. And yes I have 2 of these so not just making up opinions based on reading tests that I don't understand. There is absolutely no visible difference between this, the 960 EVO and 970 EVO which I have all running in the same LAN room.Wolfclaw - Tuesday, July 31, 2018 - link
Based on review, I purchased the 240GB SX8200 for new Ryzen build, it came yesterday, now just waiting for the motherboard ... running out of patience :(Wolfclaw - Saturday, August 4, 2018 - link
OK, got one for my x470 and it is fast, would I notice the difference to say a Samsung, I doubt it. 4 seconds form boot to W10 desktop, I have a large Outlook data footprint and it opens and is ready a lot quicker than my old SSD, Visual Studio is extremely responsive with it.a_pete - Friday, August 31, 2018 - link
I think there's an issue in the power consumption information for the Optane 800p.It's being listed here (and on other charts) as using 0.8W while active, but on the review page it was actually using 3.5W active. This is messing up all the Power efficiency charts.
Thanks!