AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer

The Destroyer has been an essential part of our SSD test suite for nearly two years now. It was crafted to provide a benchmark for very IO intensive workloads, which is where you most often notice the difference between drives. It's not necessarily the most relevant test to an average user, but for anyone with a heavier IO workload The Destroyer should do a good job at characterizing performance. For full details of this test, please refer to this article.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Data Rate)

Despite the lack of IO consistency, the BX100 does very well in our heaviest The Destroyer trace. It's easily faster than the MX100 and quite close to the higher-end SSDs as well in both data rate and latency.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

The share of high latency IOs is very reasonable too, suggesting that the consistency is fine under real-world workloads.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Power)

And finally the power consumption where the BX100 shines in. Even though it's not the fastest drive on the market, it's by far the most power efficient and the difference to the MX100 is nearly twofold. 

Performance Consistency AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
POST A COMMENT

67 Comments

View All Comments

  • Hulk - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link

    Wow, that validates all of the other reviews I've been reading about this drive. Great performance, great value, and no TLC NAND worries. I'm getting one for my new laptop. Reply
  • Uplink10 - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    If you want a great value you better wait for a few months (maybe more than a few) till 3D NAND drives are going to come out from SanDisk, Micron, Intel, Toshiba. Then Samsing will not be the only company with 3D NAND drives and prices will probably going to come down. Reply
  • Harry_Wild - Saturday, April 25, 2015 - link

    Thanks for the info! I will wait it out to get the best 3D NAND drives. Reply
  • Hace - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link

    I'm kinda surprised you didn't draw more attention to the 850 EVO as a competitor, which is neck-in-neck with pricing. Reply
  • digiguy - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link

    Yes, similar value for the money, and definitely more than the 840 EVO.... Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link

    I have to admit that I totally overlooked the 850 EVO as I was kinda assuming that its price would be higher. I put this review together on a very short notice as Ryan couldn't get the MacBook review finished for today, hence my mistake of not paying enough attention to the prices (even though I updated the table today...). Anyway, I've updated the conclusion to take the 850 EVO into account because as you said, the pricing is very close and it does provide a little higher performance. Reply
  • Hulk - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link

    While the 850EVO is definitely a competitor for the BX100 the fact that it uses TLC NAND vs. MLC for the BX100 is a big deal for many people who aren't as yet convinced the 850EVO won't be affected by the read issue that is still a problem with the 840EVO. I realize the cell size for the 850 EVO's 3D NAND is much greater but as I wrote above many people, myself included, don't see the need to roll the dice on the 850EVO when the BX100 will provide basically similar performance. Reply
  • just4U - Friday, April 10, 2015 - link

    The 850Evo is $20-$50 more on all models here in Canada. Not sure what stateside or Euro Pricing is like. Reply
  • Margalus - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    I just bought a 1TB EVO for $350 on Amazon, USA Reply
  • repoman27 - Saturday, April 11, 2015 - link

    Kristian, hopefully you'll be helping Ryan with that MacBook review by covering the NVMe(!) SSD it ships with in depth. Looks to be a PCIe 2.0 x4 connected device dubbed "AP0256H", so possibly a semi-custom Apple controller based on the Marvell 88SS1093. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now