The ADATA Ultimate SU800 SSD Review (128GB, 256GB, 512GB)

Random Read Performance

The random read test requests 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test spans the entire drive, which is filled before the test starts. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.

Random read performance on the SU800 is typical for budget SSDs, with only the Samsung 750 EVO standing out from the crowd.

Power consumption during this test is a bit higher than the competition, making the SU800 a relatively inefficient drive, though it's not a severe problem.

ADATA Ultimate SU800 128GBADATA Ultimate SU800 256GBADATA Ultimate SU800 512GBADATA Premier SP550 120GBADATA Premier SP550 240GBADATA Premier SP550 480GBADATA XPG SX930 120GBADATA XPG SX930 240GBADATA XPG SX930 480GBCrucial MX300 525GBIntel SSD 540s 480GBOCZ Trion 150 240GBOCZ Trion 150 480GBPNY CS1311 120GBPNY CS1311 240GBPNY CS1311 480GBSM2258 240GB 3D TLCSamsung 750 EVO 120GBSamsung 750 EVO 250GBSamsung 850 EVO 120GBSamsung 850 EVO 250GBSamsung 850 EVO 500GB

With only three flash chips, it's no surprise that the 128GB SU800 shows very little performance increase from higher queue depths in the second half of the test. The larger capacities show more normal scaling behavior.

Random Write Performance

The random write test writes 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test is limited to a 16GB portion of the drive, and the drive is empty save for the 16GB test file. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.

As with the long-running random write consistency test, the Samsung and Crucial drives show the best random write speeds, but the SU800 outperforms most of the planar TLC competition.

Unlike the random read test, the SU800's power consumption on the random write test is relatively good, though its efficiency is still well behind the Crucial MX300.

ADATA Ultimate SU800 128GBADATA Ultimate SU800 256GBADATA Ultimate SU800 512GBADATA Premier SP550 120GBADATA Premier SP550 240GBADATA Premier SP550 480GBADATA XPG SX930 120GBADATA XPG SX930 240GBADATA XPG SX930 480GBCrucial MX300 525GBIntel SSD 540s 480GBOCZ Trion 150 240GBOCZ Trion 150 480GBPNY CS1311 120GBPNY CS1311 240GBPNY CS1311 480GBSM2258 240GB 3D TLCSamsung 750 EVO 120GBSamsung 750 EVO 250GBSamsung 850 EVO 120GBSamsung 850 EVO 250GBSamsung 850 EVO 500GB

The graphs of performance over the course of this test clearly show performance of the smaller two capacities dropping as the SLC cache is filled, and flat performance thereafter. The 512GB SU800's performance in the second half of the test is quite variable due to the garbage collection cycles but on average is decent and certainly better than the planar TLC competitors.