AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer

The Destroyer is an extremely long test replicating the access patterns of very IO-intensive desktop usage. A detailed breakdown can be found in this article. Like real-world usage and unlike our Iometer tests, the drives do get the occasional break that allows for some background garbage collection and flushing caches, but those idle times are limited to 25ms so that it doesn't take all week to run the test.

We quantify performance on this test by reporting the drive's average data throughput, a few data points about its latency, and the total energy used by the drive over the course of the test.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Data Rate)

The WD Blue fails to keep up with the competition on The Destroyer, trailing behind everything except the Crucial BX200. Where the SanDisk X400 was one of the fastest TLC SSDs, the WD Blue is merely acceptable.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

The average service time of the WD Blue is only slightly worse than the SanDisk X400, and still clearly better than the OCZ Trion 150. This suggests that the WD Blue's lower average data rate is due to it being uniformly a bit slower, and that it isn't experiencing any severe stalling.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

The WD Blue does not suffer from any more high-latency outliers than other TLC drives at the 100ms threshold, but at the 10ms threshold it is worse than average where the X400 exceeded expectations.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Power)

The WD Blue thankfully shows no regression in power efficiency and falls in the second tier of drives with energy usage, on par with the SanDisk X400.

Performance Consistency AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
POST A COMMENT

77 Comments

View All Comments

  • TheinsanegamerN - Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - link

    it's an interesting drive, but why buy these when the likes of the mushkin reactor are $60 cheaper for the 1TB varient? sata III drives have peaked performance wise.

    OTOH, cant wait to see what the WD black SSDs look like. 4TB? M.2 PCIE?
    Reply
  • dave_the_nerd - Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - link

    The Reactor 1TB was a clone of the BX100... which outperformed the WD Blue in a lot of tests here. Getting harder to find them though.

    Hopefully the street price of this will be more in-line with the rest of the market, price/performance wise.
    Reply
  • TheinsanegamerN - Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - link

    the only thing this WD drive does better is write endurance. 400TB, or even 320TB for the sandisk version, is a heck of a lot better then the 144TB of the 1TB reactor drive. Reply
  • ammacdo - Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - link

    The thing I like most about this review is seeing how well my BX100 still holds up, and I paid the same MSRP this one is going for over a year ago. Reply
  • paulgj - Monday, October 31, 2016 - link

    I agree, I bought half a dozen BX100's when they went on sale. Excellent MLC SSDs. Reply
  • Bullwinkle J Moose - Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - link

    It depends on the consistency of performance and not the peak

    The concern I have is Sandisk consistency of performance which cannot be checked using a single test drive

    I have 3 of the Sandisk Extreme Pro thumbdrives that are Windows to Go compatible as they are "Fixed Disks"

    One of them is completely unusable after a week, one is so-so and one is very good (performance wise)

    The only thing that will return the speed to "Like-New" condition is using Killdisk over the entire drive

    The CrapCleaner Drive wipe utility does not return full performance, and the new Defraggler SSD Optimizer does not return full performance

    I have not found any method other than Killdisk to temporarily regain full disk performance

    Of course, not having Trim or Garbage collection exacerbates the problem which then accelerates the thermal throttling issue

    Mushkin also has a bad rep for thermal issues on their Win2Go compatible thumbdrives

    The new Corsair GTX beats them all hands down for Windows to go and since my test machine is an older Sandy Bridge for XP compatability, the corsair is actually faster on the USB3 port than my Samsung 850 Pro is on the SATA2 ports

    I hope Anandtech can address consistency between identical drives at some point
    Reply
  • Bullwinkle J Moose - Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - link

    Corsair GTX Thumb drives seem VERY Consistent between drives as well Reply
  • Wwhat - Sunday, October 30, 2016 - link

    You seem to be a pretty unique case and not an average user in any way.
    But it's still an interesting comment I feel. Or I should say 'because of that' rather than 'still'.
    Reply
  • Bulat Ziganshin - Saturday, October 15, 2016 - link

    they can't build Black from air. sandisk best ssd is extreme pro, so Black will be updated version of it Reply
  • nathanddrews - Tuesday, October 11, 2016 - link

    Does this WD SSD come with software to clone/shrink your existing drive to the new SSD? I have an older SiliconEdge Blue 64GB SSD (still working well) and WD offers a utility on their website to do just that, but only if there is a WD drive attached to the machine. I assume this utility would work with this SSD? Not sure if you image your test drives using different tools or what.

    Samsung has another great utility that comes with a slick SATA-to-USB 3.0 dongle (free in the box) that will clone/shrink any drive to a target Samsung SSD. They go above and beyond the capabilities of Windows volume shrink by a lot.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now