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, 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. These AnandTech Storage Bench (ATSB) tests do not involve running the actual applications that generated the workloads, so the scores are relatively insensitive to changes in CPU performance and RAM from our new testbed, but the jump to a newer version of Windows and the newer storage drivers can have an impact.

We quantify performance on this test by reporting the drive's average data throughput, the average latency of the I/O operations, and the total energy used by the drive over the course of the test.

ATSB - The Destroyer (Data Rate)

The Toshiba/Kioxia BG4's overall performance on The Destroyer is pretty good for an entry-level NVMe SSD; it clearly outperforms the Intel 660p and the Phison E8-based Kingston A1000, and is several times faster than the BG3-based RC100. The Host Memory Buffer feature doesn't have much impact on the BG4's performance, reflecting the fact that this test touches a lot of data without much locality.

ATSB - The Destroyer (Average Latency)ATSB - The Destroyer (99th Percentile Latency)

The BG4 doesn't have the latency troubles that other low-end SSDs present. Both the average and 99th percentile latency scores for the BG4 are better than the Crucial MX500 mainstream SATA drive, and the average latency also beats the Kingston A1000.

ATSB - The Destroyer (Average Read Latency)ATSB - The Destroyer (Average Write Latency)

The average write latency for the BG4 during The Destroyer is clearly much higher than for the typical high-end NVMe drive, but is decent compared to other entry-level NVMe drives. For average read latency, the gap between the BG4 and high-end drives is quite a bit smaller.

ATSB - The Destroyer (99th Percentile Read Latency)ATSB - The Destroyer (99th Percentile Write Latency)

The BG4 turns in good scores for both 99th percentile read and write latencies. The write score in particular is a huge improvement over the BG3/RC100's terrible worst-case performance.

ATSB - The Destroyer (Power)

The Toshiba BG3/RC100 had pretty low power consumption, but took forever to complete The Destroyer and its total energy usage ended up being quite high. The BG4 doesn't have the performance problems, and as a result it comes away with a record-low energy usage score. Even fast and notably efficient drives like the XG6 and WD Black don't come close.

Cache Size Effects AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • MrCommunistGen - Friday, October 18, 2019 - link

    I recently picked up a Dell Optiplex 3070 Micro for a family member, and it shipped with a 128GB BG4. Performance of the 128GB model is going to obviously be much lower than the 1TB model tested here.

    From my anecdotal experience, performance is acceptable, but could easily be better. I replaced it with a 1TB XG6 (~$120 from eBay) - mostly for capacity, but the performance uplift was (understandably) noticeable.
  • abufrejoval - Friday, October 18, 2019 - link

    Nice review for a solid product: Thanks!

    While I guess it reduces the worries about a soldered down SSD somewhat, I just hope they'll continue to sell even ultrabooks with M.2 or XFMExpress: Just feels safer and helps reducing iSurcharges on capacity.
  • Targon - Friday, October 18, 2019 - link

    Agreed. If the motherboard fails, being able to remove the SSD for data recovery SHOULD be seen as essential by most people.
  • Wheaties88 - Friday, October 18, 2019 - link

    I don’t see why most manufacturers wouldn’t see it as useful as well. Surely it would allow for less replacement motherboards needed if they could simply change the drive size. But what do I know.
  • kingpotnoodle - Monday, October 21, 2019 - link

    Nobody considers it essential because relying on removing your SSD for data recovery if the motherboard fails is a deeply flawed strategy and not applicable to the vast majority of people who wouldn't even consider opening their laptop nevermind knowing how to remove the drive and access it outside the laptop.

    The same thing that saves you if your SSD fails will also save you if anything else makes the machine unbootable - a proper backup.
  • Targon - Monday, October 21, 2019 - link

    You haven't had people come to you because their laptop has died but they need their data? Consumers may not be ready or able to get data from a dead laptop that has a drive you can remove, but the places they turn to SHOULD be able to.

    Tell me, can you recover data from a dead Macbook(dead motherboard) these days with the storage on the motherboard yourself? If the motherboard in your own personal laptop failed, wouldn't YOU want to be able to pull the drive if you needed data from it?
  • abufrejoval - Friday, October 25, 2019 - link

    Those who know me well enough to entrust me with their computer, know me well enough not to come close with a Macbook.

    And I am not even all *that* prejudiced. I loved my Apple ][ (clone), went for the PC because even my 80286 already ran Unix and I was a computer scientist after all.

    I keep doing Hackintoshs every now and then, just to get an understanding of how a Mac feels and because it's a bit of a challenge.

    But it's seriously behind in just about every aspect important to me: The combination of Linux and Windows gives me much more in any direction, for work and for fun. And mixing both is much less of a technical issue than life-balance.

    And then the notion of having your most personal handheld computer managed by an external party is just so wrong, I am flabbergasted that Apple managers still walk free, when computer sabotage is a felony.

    The Apple ][ didn't even screw down the top lid. Swapping out components and parts, adding all sorts of functionality and upgrades made it great.

    This solid brick of aluminum, glue, soldered on chips and hapless keyboard mechanics they call an Apple computer these days is just so wrong, I'd throw it into recycling the minute I got one for free. I don't know if I could give an Apple notebook or phone even to a foe, let alone a friend.
  • domboy - Friday, October 18, 2019 - link

    Since Microsoft used this in the Surface Laptop 3, I wonder if they also used it in the Surface Pro X since that also has a removable SSD. I'll be interested to find out...
  • taz-nz - Friday, October 18, 2019 - link

    Now we just need them to apply this tech to a standard 2280 form factor and give us a 4TB m.2 SSD, doesn't have to have best in class performance just a consumer class 4TB m.2 SSD.
  • Death666Angel - Saturday, October 19, 2019 - link

    There already are Samsung and Toshiba 4TB M,2 drives.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now