ADATA XPG SX8200 240GB & 480GB M.2 NVMe PCIe SSD Review

70/30 Mixed Workload Test (Sledgehammer)

Version and / or Patch Used: Iometer 2014

Heavy Workload Model

This test hammers a drive so hard we've dubbed it "Sledgehammer". Our 70/30 Mixed Workload test is designed to simulate a heavy-duty enthusiast/workstation steady-state environment. We feel that a mix of 70% read/30% write, full random 4K transfers best represents this type of user environment. Our test allows us to see the drive enter into and reach a steady state as the test progresses.

Phase one of the test preconditions the drive for 1 hour with 128K sequential writes at QD32. Phase two of the test runs a 70% read/30% write at QD32, full random 4K transfer workload on the drive for 1 hour. We log and chart (phase two) IOPS data at 5-second intervals for 1 hour (720 data points). 60 data points = 5 minutes.

What we like about this test is that it reflects reality. Everything lines up, as it should. Consumer drives don't outperform Enterprise-Class SSDs that were designed for enterprise workloads. Consumer drives based on old technology are not outperforming modern Performance-Class SSDs, etc.

The SX8200 handles this brutal test surprisingly well. The 480GB model is second only to the 970 EVO, but we again believe that this is due to a huge capacity advantage. We believe that a 960GB SX8200 would easily beat the 1TB 970 EVO. We also like that SMI has tightened the variability significantly in comparison to the SM2260 powered SX8000. We would still like to see a tighter pattern, but the average is outstanding.

Sustained Sequential Write

Version and / or Patch Used: Iometer 2014

Heavy Workload Model

We write to the drive for 1 hour with 128K sequential writes at QD32. We log and chart megabytes per second data at 5-second intervals for 1 hour (720 data points). 60 data points = 5 minutes.

This test unmasks the sequential write performance of TLC flash arrays. The SX8200 is bringing up the rear at its respective capacity points. However, we will not hold this against the drive because it did very well with our transfer test, and because sustained sequential writes of this nature are practically non-existent in the consumer space. We only run this test to unmask a TLC drives native sequential write performance.