AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy

Our Heavy storage benchmark is proportionally more write-heavy than The Destroyer, but much shorter overall. The total writes in the Heavy test aren't enough to fill the drive, so performance never drops down to steady state. This test is far more representative of a power user's day to day usage, and is heavily influenced by the drive's peak performance. The Heavy workload test details can be found here. This test is run twice, once on a freshly erased drive and once after filling the drive with sequential writes.

ATSB - Heavy (Data Rate)

After handling The Destroyer well, the Toshiba/Kioxia BG4's performance on the Heavy test is disappointing. It's moderately faster than the mainstream SATA drive, but actually a bit slower overall than the older Toshiba RC100.

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

The average and 99th percentile latencies from the BG4 during the Heavy test are acceptable but unimpressive. The BG4 does handle the full-drive test run better than most of the other low-end NVMe drives, and keeps latency from going sky-high.

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

The average read latencies for the BG4 are generally competitive with other NVMe drives. The average write latencies are a bit on the high side, but even when full the BG4 only scores a bit worse than the Crucial MX500, rather than seeing latency spike by a factor of 5 or more.

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

The 99th percentile read and write latency scores for the BG4 don't include any extreme outliers, but it is clear that the BG4 is still at a disadvantage relative to most of the drives that have their own DRAM.

ATSB - Heavy (Power)

The BG4 turns in another set of excellent energy consumption scores. It's not an outright record, but it's the best yet from a NVMe drive.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer AnandTech Storage Bench - Light
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • eek2121 - Sunday, October 20, 2019 - link

    There are a few 4 TB m.2 SSDs out there, they just sell out FAST so you typically won't even find them listed. You can still find plenty of 2 TB m.2 SSDs.
  • mxnerd - Saturday, October 19, 2019 - link

    Kioxia? Great product but what a bad brand name.
  • s.yu - Sunday, October 20, 2019 - link

    No surprise coming from Japanese manufacturers recently........
  • s.yu - Sunday, October 20, 2019 - link

    Looks like the takeaway from this is although Toshiba SSDs consistently fall behind Samsungs (the main reason they're regarded as the short straw in flash lottery), they may be more efficient, but hardly anybody tests for that.
  • discostrings - Sunday, October 20, 2019 - link

    The Toshiba BG4 is actually already available in the M.2 2242 format in retail channels as the Sabrent SB-1342-2TB, SB-1342-1TB, and SB-1342-512:

    Yes, that's right: there's a 2TB 2242 variant! I was hesitant to believe it was actually available in that capacity, as I didn't see any sort of announcement, but I received one on Thursday and I can confirm it's quite real.

    Unfortunately, these aren't useful for most current laptops with 2242 slots (that are primarily included for WWAN but which can also use NVMe drives like the RC100). As these SSDs use four PCIe lanes, they require the M key, while all laptops that I know of direct two (or less) PCIe lanes to the 2242 slot, and thus have a B key that prevents use of these drives.

    So there probably won't be much of a market for these until there are laptops out with M-keyed M.2 2242 slots. It would be great to see a 2-lane variant with a B key in the short term for use in current laptops.
  • discostrings - Sunday, October 20, 2019 - link

    I mixed terminology up a little bit in my prior post. The Sabrent drives use Toshiba BiCS4 NAND (which is also used by in the Toshiba BG4), but these are not rebranded variants of the same drive. Apologies for any confusion.
  • peevee - Monday, October 21, 2019 - link

    So they already have brands Toshiba, Lite-On and Plextor, all pretty valuable and respectable (esp Plextor I think), why do they feel like they need another one?
  • Billy Tallis - Monday, October 21, 2019 - link

    The decision to rebrand from Toshiba to Kioxia was made before the decision to buy Lite-On's SSD business. Continuing to use the Toshiba brand name long-term isn't an option since they aren't part of the Toshiba conglomerate anymore and need to IPO under a name they own. They don't get to use the Lite-On name either because they didn't buy the whole company, just the SSD portion. They might now own the Plextor brand.
  • Targon - Monday, October 21, 2019 - link

    If the laptop maker has a decent design, then it would make more sense to go with a small capacity SSD to keep the laptop price down and then put a better SSD in yourself. Get something with a normal 1TB hard drive but has the support for NVMe, and you then throw in a 1TB drive yourself. No need to feed the stupidity of people wanting a tiny machine that has a slow processor just to keep power demands low. Going with even a 35 or 45 watt CPU with a 15 inch display will give you a much more powerful laptop than these 15W CPU machines with a 11 inch screen designed for people who sit in meetings all day but have much lower performance.

    At least we are beyond the days of Intel Atom crap machines in that space.
  • MykeM - Thursday, October 31, 2019 - link

    You can actually get a external USB-C SSD that uses this particular Toshiba BG4 SSD. It’s made by CalDigit know for its excellent Thunderbolt 3 docks. It’s called Tuff Nano and at the moment only comes in the ½ terabyte capacity. The read speed is just over 1GB/s (if the device USB-C supports USB3.x Gen2). And it’s tiny:l:

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now