Mixed I/O Performance

Our tests of mixed read/write IO vary the workload from pure reads to pure writes at 10% increments. Each mix is tested for up to 1 minute or 32GB of data transferred. The mixed random IO test uses a queue depth of 4 while the mixed sequential IO test uses a queue depth of 1. The tests are confined to a 64GB span of the drive, and the drive is given up to one minute of idle time in between each mix tested.

Mixed IO Performance
Mixed Random IO Mixed Sequential IO

The mixed sequential IO performance of the TeamGroup L5 LITE 3D is as good as any other SATA drive, and on the mixed random test it's only slightly slower overall than the Crucial MX500, the fastest TLC SATA drive in this bunch.

Mixed IO Efficiency
Mixed Random IO Mixed Sequential IO

The power efficiency of the L5 LITE 3D during the mixed IO tests is average or slightly better. In both cases there's a TLC SATA drive with a substantial efficiency advantage, and the Samsung 860 PRO sets a high bar for efficiency.

Mixed Random IO
Mixed Sequential IO

The performance profiles for the L5 LITE 3D on the mixed IO tests are both fairly typical for mainstream SATA drives. The random IO performance is fairly flat until the workload is at least 70% writes, then it starts to pick up the pace. The sequential IO performance is more of a gradual decline as the workload shifts more toward writes.

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.

Note: We recently upgraded our power measurement equipment and switched to measuring idle power on our Coffee Lake desktop, our first SSD testbed to have fully-functional PCIe power management. The below measurements are all new, and are not a perfect match for the older measurements in our previous reviews and the Bench database.

Idle Power Consumption - No PMIdle Power Consumption - DesktopIdle Wake-Up Latency

The active idle power consumption of the TeamGroup L5 LITE 3D is higher than most SSDs, but not by much. Unfortunately, enabling power management barely has any effect. The L5 LITE 3D doesn't appear to have functional SATA Link Power Management. The only upside here is that without working power management, there's no extra latency when waking up. (It's possible that DevSleep power management might work on the L5 LITE 3D, but that feature cannot be tested on a desktop system.)

Synthetic Benchmarks, Part 2 Conclusion
Comments Locked

42 Comments

View All Comments

  • eek2121 - Thursday, September 26, 2019 - link

    Because anonymous user reviews on the internet are meaningless? I've purchased products with 1% 1-star reviews that were complete turds (last one was a USB drive claiming to be a terabyte. Knew it was fake, but I bought it anyway and returned it so Amazon would damn the seller to hell, which they did).

    User reviews are meaningless these days.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Friday, September 20, 2019 - link

    Spend the extra $5 and get the Crucial MX line instead, with Power Off Protection and higher NAND and controller quality.
  • Billy Tallis - Friday, September 20, 2019 - link

    The MX500 uses literally the same controller, albeit with custom firmware (which is where most of the partial power loss protection comes from).

    And since apparently today is one of the days that the L5 LITE 3D is on sale (it wasn't yesterday when I checked), the price difference is more than $15 for the 480/500GB drives. The Crucial MX500 is 30% more expensive at the moment.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Friday, September 20, 2019 - link

    And yet, despite using the same controller, that custom firmware makes ALL the difference. Just take a look at team SSD failure rates VS crucials.

    It doesnt matter if the team drives are $10-15 cheaper. Skip a single meal at your prefered fast food joint of choice and get a drive that is going to actually work properly.
  • kpb321 - Friday, September 20, 2019 - link

    ALL drives can and WILL eventually fail and if you don't have a proper back up you are just gambling that it doesn't happen while you still care about what's on the drive. If you do have a proper backup a drive failure is just a minor inconvenience and proof that your backup process works. I have a 240gb version of this drive installed in my wife's laptop to upgrade her from the 120gb drive that came in it and I'm not worried about it at all. If the drive dies I'll simply restore the nightly backup from the NAS to a new drive and she's back up and running with minimal data loss and downtime. I'd rather spend money on a NAS and a proper back than on a "better" ssd to gamble that the better drive won't fail on me.
  • eastcoast_pete - Friday, September 20, 2019 - link

    Partially agree. However, it's not just about the direct cost of a drive. Even if the PC is just used for web browsing and entertainment, I still have to spend time and effort on replacing the drive, installing the OS and software etc. Thus, spending a few dollars more for a more reliable drive might well be worth it.
  • Death666Angel - Friday, September 20, 2019 - link

    "spending a few dollars more for a more reliable drive might well be worth it" - the thing is, as many don't seem to understand, that we can't measure reliability in any useful way right now. All data we have is incomplete. Basing any kind of decision on that data means that decision is either good, neutral or bad and no one will know.
  • Samus - Sunday, September 22, 2019 - link

    It isn't the controller, it's the quality of the NAND. Crucial uses excellent quality NAND.
  • lightningz71 - Friday, September 20, 2019 - link

    This can't possibly be any crummier than the EDGE drives I purchased at work a few years ago. I purchased a batch of twenty 512GB SATA SSDs through Amazon, and EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM failed between 13 and 17 months from the day that they were first installed. Standard desktop usage on PCs that were nowhere near considered write heavy was their environment. Just terrible in every way.
  • Scott_T - Friday, September 20, 2019 - link

    With 240gb drives being so cheap I'm surprised anyone would come out with a new 120gb drive these days.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now