Mixed IO Performance

For details on our mixed IO tests, please see the overview of our 2021 Consumer SSD Benchmark Suite.

Mixed IO Performance
Mixed Random IO Throughput Power Efficiency
Mixed Sequential IO Throughput Power Efficiency

The Inland Performance Plus with the Phison E18 controller sets a new record for performance on our mixed sequential IO test, and it provides pretty good power efficiency on that test. It has somewhat disappointing performance on the mixed random IO test, with a few Gen3 TLC drives delivering better performance, and most of the 8-channel TLC drives delivering better efficiency.

Mixed Random IO
Mixed Sequential IO

On the sequential IO test, the Inland Performance Plus is a bit slow to start when the workload is very read-heavy, but quickly ramps up to about 6GB/s. Like many drives, performance is low to begin with as these drives aren't exactly optimized for juggling several parallel streams of sequential reads. Once the workload has shifted to include a significant amount of writes, caching makes things easier for the drives to manage and performance tends to improve. The E18 controller makes that transition early and with as big a performance gain as any drive, and things hold relatively steady around 6GB/s through the rest of the test.

On the random IO test, the Performance Plus is less consistent. After the typical initial performance drop that comes from adding the first bit of writes to the mix, the Performance Plus generally keeps slowing down but there's quite a bit of variability. The higher power consumption during phases where performance is lower indicates that there's background work to clean up the SLC cache interfering with benchmark performance. Things settle down during the last third of the test.

 

Power Management Features

Real-world client storage workloads leave SSDs idle most of the time, so the active power measurements presented earlier in this review only account for a small part of what determines a drive's suitability for battery-powered use. Especially under light use, the power efficiency of a SSD is determined mostly be how well it can save power when idle.

For many NVMe SSDs, the closely related matter of thermal management can also be important. M.2 SSDs can concentrate a lot of power in a very small space. They may also be used in locations with high ambient temperatures and poor cooling, such as tucked under a GPU on a desktop motherboard, or in a poorly-ventilated notebook.

Inland Performance Plus 2TB
NVMe Power and Thermal Management Features
Controller Phison E18
Firmware EIFM21.1
NVMe
Version
Feature Status
1.0 Number of operational (active) power states 3
1.1 Number of non-operational (idle) power states 2
Autonomous Power State Transition (APST) Supported
1.2 Warning Temperature 70 °C
Critical Temperature 110 °C
1.3 Host Controlled Thermal Management Supported
 Non-Operational Power State Permissive Mode Supported

The Phison E18 as used in the Inland Performance Plus supports the full range of NVMe power and thermal management features, but with the somewhat implausible 110 °C critical temperature threshold. The deepest idle power state also claims only a 30% reduction in power at the cost of much higher entry and exit latencies. Fortunately, as shown below the lowest idle power state saves a lot more power than indicated by this firmware information.

Inland Performance Plus 2TB
NVMe Power States
Controller Phison E18
Firmware EIFM21.1
Power
State
Maximum
Power
Active/Idle Entry
Latency
Exit
Latency
PS 0 8.8 W Active - -
PS 1 7.1 W Active - -
PS 2 5.2 W Active - -
PS 3 62 mW Idle 2 ms 2 ms
PS 4 44 mW Idle 25 ms 25 ms

Note that the above tables reflect only the information provided by the drive to the OS. The power and latency numbers are often very conservative estimates, but they are what the OS uses to determine which idle states to use and how long to wait before dropping to a deeper idle state.

Idle Power Measurement

SATA SSDs are tested with SATA link power management disabled to measure their active idle power draw, and with it enabled for the deeper idle power consumption score and the idle wake-up latency test. Our testbed, like any ordinary desktop system, cannot trigger the deepest DevSleep idle state.

Idle power management for NVMe SSDs is far more complicated than for SATA SSDs. NVMe SSDs can support several different idle power states, and through the Autonomous Power State Transition (APST) feature the operating system can set a drive's policy for when to drop down to a lower power state. There is typically a tradeoff in that lower-power states take longer to enter and wake up from, so the choice about what power states to use may differ for desktop and notebooks, and depending on which NVMe driver is in use. Additionally, there are multiple degrees of PCIe link power savings possible through Active State Power Management (APSM).

We report three idle power measurements. Active idle is representative of a typical desktop, where none of the advanced PCIe link or NVMe power saving features are enabled and the drive is immediately ready to process new commands. Our Desktop Idle number represents what can usually be expected from a desktop system that is configured to enable SATA link power management, PCIe ASPM and NVMe APST, but where the lowest PCIe L1.2 link power states are not available. The Laptop Idle number represents the maximum power savings possible with all the NVMe and PCIe power management features in use—usually the default for a battery-powered system but rarely achievable on a desktop even after changing BIOS and OS settings. Since we don't have a way to enable SATA DevSleep on any of our testbeds, SATA drives are omitted from the Laptop Idle charts.

Idle Power Consumption - No PMIdle Power Consumption - DesktopIdle Power Consumption - Laptop

The active idle power from the E18 drive is well under 1W, a clear improvement over other Gen4 drives and many of the top-performing Gen3 drives (note: all Gen4 drives are operating at Gen3 speeds during this test, because we can't get idle power management working properly on our Gen4 testbeds; on a Gen4 system we expect active idle power to be a bit higher). The desktop idle almost exactly matches what the drive claims, and lowest laptop idle power is great at just 3mW.

Unfortunately, wake-up times are a bit slow: wake-up from the desktop idle state is already 44ms and wake-up from the laptop idle state is a whopping 371ms, which is enough to cause noticeable delays if this power state is used frequently by the OS.

Idle Wake-Up Latency

Advanced Synthetic Tests: Block Sizes and Cache Size Effects Conclusion
Comments Locked

118 Comments

View All Comments

  • DominionSeraph - Thursday, May 13, 2021 - link

    Try an optimized OS like XP. There's really no difference.
  • philehidiot - Thursday, May 13, 2021 - link

    I do actually have windows 95 installed as a VM, running off an SSD. If you want to really understand how bloated and sluggish Windows 10 is, try using Windows 95 and see how far they have regressed in pursuit of looking pretty.
  • GeoffreyA - Friday, May 14, 2021 - link

    Even XP feels faster, on an older computer, than 10. Vista is where the sluggishness crept in.
  • GeoffreyA - Friday, May 14, 2021 - link

    Also, software in general has become more sluggish, owing to excessive use of abstractions, frameworks, and modern languages.
  • jospoortvliet - Friday, May 14, 2021 - link

    Software has become vastly more complex as users demand more and more features and slick interfaces. Also, platforms evolve faster and more need to be supported. Developers have less time per feature so more abstractions and higher level languages are needed. You can't write code in a browser that is as efficient as good old assembly as it has to run everywhere and even if you could you would lose to a competitor who wrote more features with less developers....

    So yeah, you are right but it is a trend that is hard to reverse.
  • GeoffreyA - Friday, May 14, 2021 - link

    Quite true, but one can't help feeling a pang of regret when looking at today's applications vs. those rare C/C++ Win32 ones that, as they say, just fly.
  • FunBunny2 - Saturday, May 15, 2021 - link

    "Quite true, but one can't help feeling a pang of regret when looking at today's applications vs. those rare C/C++ Win32 ones that, as they say, just fly."

    true fact. I used 1-2-3 pretty much from version 1, which is X86 assembler as was DOS. somewhere around 2.4 it was re-written in C (C++ didn't yet exist). the first time I fired up 2.4 1-2-3 (on a 640K 8088) what had been instant screen updates were now slow as molasses up hill in winter; you could see individual elements change, one by one.

    it appears to be the fact that the constant push and pull between node shrink, more transistors, phatter cpu, more memory on the one hand and software bloat on the other doesn't balance out. I've always been sceptical of ever-increasing number of 'tiers' in the memory hierarchy paired with load-store architectures. may haps persistent memory will give us a true Single Level Storage that's more performant than just virtual storage/memory. have to work out a new version of transaction control, though.
  • GeoffreyA - Saturday, May 15, 2021 - link

    Well, soon they'll need some big changes, when the quantum limits set by Nature are hit. As for the software, yes, it tends to get slower as time goes by. Any gains in hardware are quickly reversed. I think there's been a view inculcated against C++, instigated by Java perhaps, that it's not safe, it's bad, and so one needs to use a better, more modern language; or if C++, do things in an excessive object-oriented way, away from the lighter C sort of style. As in all of life, even "good" programming principles can be taken too far. So moderation is best.
  • FunBunny2 - Saturday, May 15, 2021 - link

    "if C++, do things in an excessive object-oriented way, away from the lighter C sort of style."

    C has been described as the universal assembler. pretty much true, esp. if you limit the description to the bare language w/o the many libraries. a C program can be blazingly fast, if the code treats the machine as a Control Program would. but that's how the PC World was nearly extinguished in the late 80s and early 90s by viruses of all kinds. I'm among those who spent more time than I wanted, editing with Norton Disk Doctor. not an era I miss.
  • GeoffreyA - Sunday, May 16, 2021 - link

    Oh, yes, programs were doing their own thing, till OS's began to clamp down. As years went by, security got more attention too, as it should, and newer languages guaranteed different types of safety. An important point in this era where so much of our information is handled electronically. Or portability made easier, or maintenance.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now