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 short duration and low write volume of our Light test don't help the Toshiba TR200 look any better than it did on the harder ATSB tests. The average data rates from the TR200s when the test is run on an empty drive are slower than most other SSDs when completely full. The HP S700 still does worse when full, as does the 256GB ADATA SU800. The Samsung 850 EVO is about twice as fast overall on the Light test.

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

The average latency of the TR200s on the Light test falls well outside the normally narrow range. A few other drives have exceptionally high latency when the test is run on a full drive, but otherwise nothing comes close to the TR200. By contrast, the 99th percentile latency of the TR200 is only modestly worse than other low-end drives, and the TR200 doesn't get massively worse when it is full.

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

The TR200 has some of the highest average read latency scores on the Light test, but it's not a serious outlier at any capacity. The average write latency is where the TR200's problems lie, as even the fastest 960GB model has twice the write latency of the next slowest drive.

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

The 99th percentile read latency scores of the TR200 are a modest improvement over its predecessors, and in line with contemporary competitors. The 99th percentile write latency is worse than the TR150 but not high enough to be a problem on this light workload.

ATSB - Light (Power)

The DRAMless SSDs are again the most energy-efficient despite their lower overall performance. The TR200 loses to the HP S700 when the test is run on an empty drive, but the TR200 takes a clear lead when the drives are full, using less than three quarters the energy of the next most efficient SATA drive.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy Random Performance
Comments Locked

50 Comments

View All Comments

  • lmcd - Thursday, October 12, 2017 - link

    Isn't BX300 NVMe? Or is it SATA? 850 Evo might be the best "compatibility" option if the former.
  • mapesdhs - Friday, October 13, 2017 - link

    Curiously though, the 850 EVO still has a very good reputation. But for the price, it would be my default recommendation.
  • sonny73n - Saturday, October 14, 2017 - link

    All three are SATA3.
  • takeshi7 - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link

    Anandtech reviewed the Crucial BX300 and it seems very good.
  • Samus - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link

    BX300 is the only competitive drive at the moment (mostly on price) but older MX200’s can occasionally be found cheap and they have the capacity advantage.
  • sonny73n - Thursday, October 12, 2017 - link

    Are you capable of using the search function on AT?
  • Ratman6161 - Thursday, October 12, 2017 - link

    Seriously dude, your mom densest want an SSD for Christmas.
  • HollyDOL - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link

    Hm, with given price the performance is really poor... Unless you absolutely need to cut power requirements down in mW scale for some reason, I can't imagine it being a good choice.
  • Valantar - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link

    If this does indeed signal the beginning of the end of the NAND shortage, that is more than welcome. If that happens, I also hope we see significant reductions below MSRP for this over time, to the tune of i being noticeably cheaper than DRAM-equipped drives. In the next year, I want cheap 250-500GB SSDs for my XBONE and PS4, and DRAM-less drives should fit that bill nicely (the USB interface will limit them already, so I don't see the value of springing for anything above bargain-basement as long as it significantly outperforms an HDD).
  • nathanddrews - Wednesday, October 11, 2017 - link

    With 100GB games already shipping, will 250-500GB cut it anymore?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now