AnandTech Storage Bench - Light

Our Light storage test has relatively more sequential accesses and lower queue depths than The Destroyer or the Heavy test, and it's by far the shortest test overall. It's based largely on applications that aren't highly dependent on storage performance, so this is a test more of application launch times and file load times. This test can be seen as the sum of all the little delays in daily usage, but with the idle times trimmed to 25ms it takes less than half an hour to run. Details of the Light test can be found here. As with the ATSB Heavy test, this test is run with the drive both freshly erased and empty, and after filling the drive with sequential writes.

ATSB - Light (Data Rate)

The ADATA XPG SX950 continues the trend of being reasonably fast when fresh, but much slower when full. Its average data rate on the Light test is almost as fast as the Samsung 850 Pro when the test is run on an empty drive, but when the drive is full it returns the lowest average data rate score in its class.

ATSB - Light (Average Latency)ATSB - Light (99th Percentile Latency)

There usually isn't much to look at in the latency results for the Light test; most SATA drives perform very similarly. The ADATA SX950 is normal when the drive is fresh, but when the drive is filled before running the test, the results are very unlike any other SATA SSD we've tested. With a 99th percentile latency of over 30ms (dwarfing the Crucial MX300's 6.5ms), it's clear the SX950 does not manage its background processing properly.

ATSB - Light (Average Read Latency)ATSB - Light (Average Write Latency)

The Light test is easy enough that the average read latency of the SX950 is normal whether or not the drive was filled before running the test. The average write latency is still several times higher in the full-drive case, and is twice that of the next-slowest drive in this bunch.

ATSB - Light (99th Percentile Read Latency)ATSB - Light (99th Percentile Write Latency)

As with the average latency results, the 99th percentile read latency of the SX950 is not appreciably higher than normal when the Light test is run on a full drive, but on the write side latency is out of control. The Crucial BX300 has a substantially higher 99th percentile write latency when the test is run on an empty drive, but it doesn't go to pieces when the test is run on a full drive.

ATSB - Light (Power)

Energy usage by the ADATA SX950 is again quite good when the test is run on an empty drive. When the drive is full, the energy usage still falls within the acceptable range, but is unimpressive.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy Random Performance
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • CheapSushi - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link

    Next year with QLC it'll change. SATAIII is will still be useful for bulk drive SSDs coming. Yeah sure, if you're JUST a gamer and want only ONE drive for everything, it's a no-brainer on what direction to go. If you want just TWO drives, similar. But if you have more than that basic setup, SATAIII QLC SSDs are going to be perfect for bulk storage, while you have your OS and other main programs/software on an NVMe drive(s).
  • MrSpadge - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link

    Billy, you need to be less honest with your titles if you want people to actually read your review ;)
  • RaistlinZ - Monday, October 9, 2017 - link

    "In Search of Adequate"
  • Lolimaster - Tuesday, October 10, 2017 - link

    Years later and still nothing can compete with the 850 EVO 500GB
  • mapesdhs - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link

    This is how the exchange should go down when storage techs come up with a new SSD design and want approval to proceed:

    Tech: "We've designed a new SSD!"
    Manager: "Is it better than the 850 EVO?"
    Tech: "Umm, no."
    Manager: "Go away."

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now