Power Consumption and Concluding Remarks

Bus-powered devices can configure themselves to operate within the power delivery constraints of the host port. While Thunderbolt ports are guaranteed to supply up to 15W for client devices, USB 2.0 ports are guaranteed to deliver only 2.5W (500mA @ 5V). In this context, it is interesting to have a fine-grained look at the power consumption profile of the various external drives. Using the Plugable USBC-TKEY, the bus power consumption of the drives was tracked while processing the CrystalDiskMark workloads (separated by 5s intervals). The graphs below plot the instantaneous bus power consumption against time, while singling out the maximum and minimum power consumption numbers.

CrystalDiskMark Workloads - Power Consumption
TOP: BOTTOM:

The Gen 2x2 Extreme PRO v2 has a peak power consumption of around 7.23W, and idles at around 3W. It does go to sleep after around 20 minutes, dropping down to 0.91W. The X6 on the other hand has a peak power consumption of 2.95W. The idling power is around 0.75W. The drive didn't go to a lower power state below the 0.75W mode - in fact, after some idling time, it appears that some sort of garbage collection / moving of data from SLC to QLC takes place that causes significant power spikes.

Final Words

The preceding sections took a detailed look at two 4TB external SSDs - the SanDisk Extreme PRO Portable SSD v2 focusing on no-holds barred performance, and the Crucial X6 Portable SSD targeting the mainstream market with affordability as its primary focus.

Western Digital/SanDisk has taken the highest-performing USB bridge chip in the market, and coupled that with their highest performance SSD sporting full compatibility with that bridge chip. One could argue that a Thunderbolt 3 SSD would exhibit better performance, but the counter for that involves two different aspects - getting a Thunderbolt 3 SSD to work with USB hosts is necessary for wider compatibility, particularly for the Extreme PRO v2's target market. This involves integrating a USB bridge chip as well as a separate Thunderbolt 3 device controller on the board, increasing BOM cost and complexity. Additionally, Windows appears to treat Thunderbolt 3 SSDs as internal PCIe SSDs - when coupled with the default write caching disabled state, the write performance of Thunderbolt 3 SSDs becomes abysmal compared to even USB 3.2 Gen 2 (10 Gbps) SSDs. As seen in the benchmark numbers, the Extreme PRO v2 handily surpasses all Thunderbolt 3 SSDs in write-intensive workloads.

Crucial has gone in for aggressive optimizations in terms of platform cost. The product comes with a single Type-C to Type-C cable, and the Type-C to Type-A adapter is a separate purchase. Almost all modern PCs come with Type-C ports, so this might not be a concern for most consumers, but it does allow Crucial to push the pricing down further for the base SKU. The company has also not pursued any IP-rating for the device (the Extreme PRO v2 is IP55-rated). And unlike the Extreme PRO v2, the X6 doesn't feature hardware encryption. While the previous X6 had flash chips, a SATA SSD controller, and a bridge chip, the 4TB SKU comes with the flash chips and a native UFD (USB flash drive) controller. Coupling that with the use of QLC NAND (compared to Western Digital's 3D TLC in the Extreme PRO v2) means that the X6 offers the same storage capacity at a price point that is around half that of the SanDisk Extreme PRO v2.

Both SSDs support TRIM and S.M.A.R.T pass through, which are essential for keeping the drive healthy and monitoring it. Content creators and power users will definitely appreciate the SanDisk Extreme PRO v2 for its combination of features and performance. That great performance does come at a price, however, and after launching at $750 back in January, the drive now retails for $900. Despite the premium, it is likely that there is a significant market for the drive given how little competition there is within its performance class. The only downside for Western Digital is that USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 (20 Gbps) is yet to gain widespread traction, but that seems to be slowly changing.

 

Casual users will find the Crucial X6 at $480 fitting their requirements quite well. Though based on QLC NAND, with almost 800GB of SLC cache, most users are unlikely to run into the abysmal 75 MBps and 50 MBps writes. The drive also seems to be aggressive about moving data from the SLC buffer to its final place within the QLC NAND, and hence it is bound to regain performance quite quickly. At lower capacities, QLC could be quite problematic even for mainstream use-cases, but at 4TB – and with almost 20% of the capacity configured as SLC – it shouldn't matter. If better performance is desired, one has to be ready to fork out more – Western Digital has a host of 4TB 3D TLC options ranging from $680 to $900.

 
Worst-Case Performance Consistency
POST A COMMENT

20 Comments

View All Comments

  • arashi - Friday, August 20, 2021 - link

    That's for the 4TB one, but for the 1TB variant it's still 200GB, which is plenty big. Reply
  • repoman27 - Thursday, August 19, 2021 - link

    @ganeshts why aren’t the results from your recent review of the Silverstone MS12 and Yottamaster HC2-C3 USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 20Gbps enclosures included in these charts?

    I’d be very interested to see how a roll your own solution with SK hynix Gold P31 fares against the SanDisk Extreme V2 and Extreme PRO V2. This would be especially useful at the 2TB capacity level, as WD seems to be charging a $100 premium for the 4TB models, and the Gold P31 maxes out at 2TB now.
    Reply
  • ganeshts - Thursday, August 19, 2021 - link

    Yes, valid question. I thought about it a bit while preparing the graphs, and finally felt that the gulf in the capacity points (1TB vs. 4TB) could lead to readers misunderstanding the relative merits of the two platforms. So, decided to focus on the 'high-capacity' aspect alone.

    I do have the review of the Seagate FireCuda Gaming SSD (20Gbps) 1TB coming up soon, will be including the storage bridge results in that for comparison.

    As you mention, 2TB is fast becoming the mainstream offering in terms of capacity as 3D NAND layer counts keep going up. I will try to add the new testbed results from the old 2TB samples in future reviews.
    Reply
  • flgt - Thursday, August 19, 2021 - link

    I’ve been really happy with my 2TB SanDisk. It breathed new life into my Xbox One X when I realized I’d be stuck with it for the foreseeable future. Reply
  • COtech - Thursday, August 19, 2021 - link

    How often do these portable SSDs need to be powered to reliably retain data ?

    Are they a good archive solution?
    Reply
  • Tams80 - Thursday, August 19, 2021 - link

    Unless you're moving them at lot (or will take them on a rough journey), then I think it's a toss-up.

    As always, redundancy is important and for that Blu-ray archival disks are a great choice as one of the back-ups.
    Reply
  • data21 - Tuesday, September 14, 2021 - link

    Nicely written blog on SanDisk Extreme PRO and Crucial X6 4TB Portable SSDs comparisions. for data recovery related issued in SSD can reach out to lifeguard data recovery services Reply
  • jabakobob - Wednesday, November 3, 2021 - link

    I'd like to correct a major error in this review: The X6 does not have 800GB of SLC cache.

    Instead, it just uses empty QLC cells as cache and writes only 1 bit to them instead of 4. So it effectively has a big SLC cache as long as it is <20% full. But the fuller it gets, the less cache it has!

    So basically it's a nice and fast drive as long as you only use 800GB. If you use more than that, performance craters.

    If you buy this drive to store a lot of data, it will never perform as well as in the tests. I assume most of the tests (except the worst case test) were done with an empty drive, so they are pretty much useless. It would be interesting how the drive would perform if it is 50% full or 80% full.

    If you actually need 4TB of capacity, don't buy this drive.

    Source: https://www.computerbase.de/2021-03/crucial-x6-por...
    Reply
  • chemist1 - Friday, August 26, 2022 - link

    In order to make these tests as real-world as possible, you should first add files to the disks until they are about 50%-60% full (as opposed to running them on empty disks). Do you do that? Reply
  • yifu - Monday, October 10, 2022 - link

    I bought the x6 2tb last month, a return item for 110€. Some 500gb write on disk.
    I loved it. It Use very little power. I don’t think you test on the new firmware. Plugged in iPad Pro all day forgot to unplug. Didn’t even use 1% of batterie. I guess host device sleep, x6 drove no power. Great product for its targeted users environment.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now