512GB Class Performance Testing
We pulled a wide range of 512GB class SATA SSDs to compare to the new Lexar NS200. The drive's most obvious competition is the popular MX500 and seemingly timeless 860 EVO.
Sequential Read Performance
Top SATA SSD speeds have topped out long ago so in the first two tests we don't see a lot of variation between the drives.
Sequential Write Performance
There is a bit more in the write tests but for the most part, the sequential write performance is within 10%, and most users wouldn't notice the difference transferring data.
Sustained Sequential Write Performance
Writing a lot of data to the drives allows us to further separate the products by performance. The Lexar NS200 performs really well in this test and meets the best SATA SSDs at the top for most of the user capacity. The NS200 does show the largest drop in performance after the SLC buffer fills.
Random Read Performance
The low queue depth random read performance is what we wanted to see most of all in the early synthetic testing. This is what makes a drive feel fast in your PC and where the SMI SM2258 with Micron 64L TLC dominates the SATA SSD industry.
The Lexar NS200 joins the Crucial MX500 with nearly 12,000 random read IOPS at queue depth (QD) 1. The drive scales really well and surpasses 22,000 IOPS at QD 2.
Random Write Performance
The random performance similarities don't stop with the reads. The NS200 random write performance curve is nearly identical to the MX500's.
70% Read Sequential Performance
We see the most separation between the products in performance when mixing reads and writes in our test. The 70% read workload is the industry standard test and leans closer to workstation workloads.
The Lexar NS200 performs well in this test but can't muster the high sequential peaks provided by the Samsung 860 EVO and Toshiba VX500.
70% Read Random Performance
Moving over to random mixed data, the NS200 again joins the MX500 away from the other products at low queue depths.