SSD TIER LIST

[hojnikb]

Honestly, anything using phison controllers shouldn't be on any high tier list.

 

Their controllers (especially lower end ones like S11) are truly terrible as far as reliability is concerned.

[Juular]

2 minutes ago, VEXICUS said:

Based off its controller, warrenty, nand type. Will update it when the reviews come out.

What warranty has to do with SSD performance ? Nand type are QLC obviously, controller are hardly going to change that, i'd expect it to have the same terrible level of write performance as other QLC drives.

Just now, hojnikb said:

Honestly, anything using phison controllers shouldn't be on any high tier list.

 

Their controllers (especially lower end ones like S11) are truly terrible as far as reliability is concerned.

And where do you see S11 based SSDs anything high ? E12 based SSDs are very fast and have insane durability rating, see reviews. S11 are old controller, it's no surprise that it's inferior. It's the same as saying, 'honestly all Ford cars shouldn't considered for buying because Ford Model T are very slow and you can't find parts for it'.

[VEXICUS]

2 minutes ago, Juular said:

What warranty has to do with SSD performance ? Nand type are QLC obviously, controller are hardly going to change that, i'd expect it to have the same terrible level of write performance as other QLC drives.

IT AFFECTS THE DWPD OF THE DRIVE.

[Juular]

2 minutes ago, VEXICUS said:

IT AFFECTS THE DWPD OF THE DRIVE.

I don't see neither it's DWPD nor TBW listed anywhere. And it's based more on the NAND type than controller.

[hojnikb]

11 minutes ago, Juular said:

What warranty has to do with SSD performance ? Nand type are QLC obviously, controller are hardly going to change that, i'd expect it to have the same terrible level of write performance as other QLC drives.

And where do you see S11 based SSDs anything high ? E12 based SSDs are very fast and have insane durability rating, see reviews. S11 are old controller, it's no surprise that it's inferior. It's the same as saying, 'honestly all Ford cars shouldn't considered for buying because Ford Model T are very slow and you can't find parts for it'.

It's not just about performance. It's their reliability (especially with firmware). S5, S10 and S11 come to mind; were all riddled with catastrophic firmware bugs.
How can one trust a company, that employs monkies as firmware devs?

[Juular]

1 minute ago, hojnikb said:

It's not just about performance. It's their reliability (especially with firmware). S5, S10 and S11 come to mind, were all riddled with catastrophic firmware bugs

And still, neither of SSDs based on those controllers are anything high in this tier list, as far as there are no issues with other Phison controllers there are no reason to detier hem.

[trevb0t]

@VEXICUS Thanks for compiling!

I'd like to see some drop downs with a bit on the methodology of part placement! (I think that would alleviate some of the backlash here.)

I do appreciate the notation of the controllers and the NAND type!

[VEXICUS]

Just now, trevb0t said:

@VEXICUS Thanks for compiling!

I'd like to see some drop downs with a bit on the methodology of part placement! (I think that would alleviate some of the backlash here.)

I do appreciate the notation of the controllers and the NAND type!

Alright, working on it already....

[trevb0t]

@VEXICUS Looking at the PNY CS900: Does the black color denote something? And it lacks an asterisk, confirming that's got DRAM cache?

[VEXICUS]

30 minutes ago, trevb0t said:

@VEXICUS Looking at the PNY CS900: Does the black color denote something? And it lacks an asterisk, confirming that's got DRAM cache?

Basically, that drive has very less reviews out on the internet. It has a phison S11 controller. 3D TLC NAND and DRAM-less.

[PowerBaller]

Should intel octane belong to its own tier? 

[Juular]

2 hours ago, PowerBaller said:

Should intel octane belong to its own tier? 

We discussed that a few pages back already. It outclasses pretty much everything except Samsung 970 Pro that still barely beats it in some metrics so it doesn't really belong in any of current tiers. There are no other SSDs like it and it costs a fortune, so why make a new tier just for Intel Optane alone if average user of this tier list wouldn't even consider buying it ?

[PowerBaller]

43 minutes ago, Juular said:

We discussed that a few pages back already. It outclasses pretty much everything except Samsung 970 Pro that still barely beats it in some metrics so it doesn't really belong in any of current tiers. There are no other SSDs like it and it costs a fortune, so why make a new tier just for Intel Optane alone if average user of this tier list wouldn't even consider buying it ?

Given that samsung 980 Pro is about to launched, the 900P could still be compariable to 980 pro performance and cost wise, as long as the user have enough pcie lanes

[NewMaxx]

On 1/13/2020 at 2:30 AM, Juular said:

There are no reviews on Sabrent Rocket QLC yet, how did you tier it ? I wouldn't expect it to be any better than Intel\Micron just because of different controller.

On my guides I currently have the Rocket Q in the "Moderate NVMe" category which is in-between Budget NVMe (e.g. SN550) and Consumer/Performance NVMe (e.g. SX8200 Pro). I won't speak for the tiering process here, but I've presented an analysis of this drive on Reddit in the past based on a few assumptions. Maybe some people read it, maybe some didn't.

 

First, let's start with the controller. We can see here that it has the same layout of the "new" Rocket - a smaller E12 with metal IHS to compensate, known as the "E12S." We can also see the DRAM package which is likely the same 512MB found on the Rocket. So right off the bat we have a more powerful controller than that found on the Intel 660p - dual-CPU (w/coprocessors) design versus dual-core - but also twice the DRAM (256MB on the 660p). This controller has a cutdown four-channel variant on the Toshiba RC500 (the RD500 has the eight-channel version with metal IHS); what this means is that by the performance specs of the 1TB Rocket Q it must be the regular eight-channel E12S. Again, versus the four-channel SM2263 on the 660p (which is basically a cutdown SM2262EN).

 

In any case, we move next to the flash which we know is QLC. Again based on the performance specs at 1TB we know there must be 8 dies, so this is 1Tb/die QLC - must be Intel because Toshiba is 768Gb (64L) and 1.33Tb (96L). Likewise interleaving at 2TB hits the highest writes (2x8 = 16 dies). But we know the 660p never hits 2000 MB/s even with interleaving, but the 665p does, so likely this is Intel's new 96L QLC. This bumps up endurance 50% and performance 10%, give or take. So that means the flash is superior to the 660p/P1 in the very least as well.

 

Lastly, SLC cache design. While the 660p has dynamic that shrinks from 25% to 75% usage (then all static) the 665p shrinks 50% to 75% - this isn't a huge factor but people tend to say these drives perform poorly after 75% (which is not really true, but that's another post). Most likely the Rocket Q's cache is the same as the Rocket's which would be 24GB, which would be more than the 1TB 660p's 12GB static and roughly similar to the 2TB 660p's 24GB. So on the whole, comparable, but drive consistency will be superior on the Rocket Q due to no reliance on a gigantic dynamic cache when less full. You're not converting to/from SLC/QLC in that zone.

 

So that brings me to the last point. In order to maintain performance, Intel always goes to the SLC cache first (folding out) which is why you get that terrible post-cache performance. Note the 665p is a bit faster both in and outside the cache due to the 96L QLC. In any case, it's highly likely the Rocket Q's graph would be closer to something like the P34A80 in terms of response, albeit significantly lower speeds (it's still QLC). Nevertheless this means better performance in this scenario, likely significantly so. For all these reasons it should be above the 660p but below the TLC Rocket.

[VEXICUS]

3 hours ago, NewMaxx said:

For all these reasons it should be above the 660p but below the TLC Rocket.

That's why it is in tier c.

[SSD Sean]

17 hours ago, PowerBaller said:

Should intel octane belong to its own tier? 

People here don’t believe intel optane SSDs are for consumers or prosumers. They think they are only server SSDs, which the 90x series is not. I know, it’s funny.

[anticeon]

I really want to buy LEXAR NS100 1tb bcus its so cheap. do you think its realiable ?

[Giorno Giovanna]

i bought my adata su656 for 20 bucks so its fine to me,boots win 10 in lke 3-4 seconds,sad to see its in okayish territory 

[VEXICUS]

1 hour ago, anticeon said:

I really want to buy LEXAR NS100 1tb bcus its so cheap. do you think its realiable ?

It would be fine for day to day tasks. But this drive would struggle while transferring large amount of data, due to lack of DRAM cache.

[PianoPlayer88Key]

So what are some factors that influence what drive goes in what tier?

 

For example, how much of a factor are the various aspects of performance?  I'm guessing advertised sequential reads/writes doesn't matter much, but what about random access, or large writes (like filling an entire drive in one operation)?

 

About that "filling entire drive at once" ... I have a couple old hard drives (like an 8.4GB PATA or so from Q4 1998 with, IIRC (not hooked up or powered on right now), still zero reallocated sectors or uncorrectable errors, as well a 20GB or 40GB (forget which) PATA) that can write their entire capacity in about 14 to 15 minutes or so.  My 8TB and 10TB SATA HDDs take pretty much a full day, possibly longer, to fill up.

I think some even older drives, like when they were 5.25" form factor and no more than 5, 10, 20, 30, or maybe 40 MEGAbytes capacity, could write the entire drive in under a minute or so.  (I'd like to get my hands on a 40MB or smaller PATA drive sometime (preferably one made when it was the largest capacity available, or nearly so, on the market at the time) and benchmark it.  I just don't want to pay the exorbitant eBay prices.  Or maybe someone has one, or an MFM drive, and could benchmark it?)

What modern SSDs would beat that performance?  I'd love to be able to see, for example, an 8TB or 16TB drive that could fill up faster than a ST-506, or even ST-412, ST-225, ST-251, ST-157A, etc.  (I wonder if @seagate_surfer could possibly have one of those laying around and a way to benchmark it...)

 

 

Actually, one factor that would be pretty important to me is endurance / longevity, possibly even more important than performance.  For example, if possible, I prefer drives that have at least a PB or two of endurance per TB of capacity.  Also actual endurance would be pretty important as well. My laptop only has 64 GB RAM, and I've maxed it out a few times. (I recently saw about 110 GB or so "committed" in Windows 10 task manager's memory section of the performance tab.)  My pagefile is on a SATA SSD (250GB Crucial MX200, want to move it to a 1TB Samsung 970 Evo sometime), and I'm sure all that swapping negatively affects an SSD's lifespan.

 

Techreport several years ago did an SSD endurance test.  If the tier list existed then, I would have rated the drives higher that lasted longer.

There was a 256GB Samsung 840 Pro that lasted like 2.4 PB, and on the other end a 240GB Kingston HyperX 3K and Intel 335 drives croaked around 728 and 750 PB.  A 240GB Corsair Neutron GTX didn't even get a single reallocated sector or other errors until after 1 PB of writes, then 3 sectors at 1.1 PB (but got like 3500 reallocations after that and died by 1.2 PB), and another Kingston HyperX 3K only got 2 reallocated sectors between 900 TB and 1 PB.  (This one was fed with compressible data, the rest were incompressible.) The Samsung 840 (not Pro; the only TLC drive in the test, the rest were MLC), OTOH, started getting reallocated sectors around 100 TB.  The 840 Pro started reallocating after about 500 TB.  (If you want to read more, the final article in the series is linked above, or the first article is here, which has links at the bottom to the other articles in the series.)

 

Also speaking of endurance, I've heard of a few old Seagate MFM drives, like a ST-412 or ST-225, still being functional after about  ... ... 30 YEARS! I'm guessing no SSD has yet lasted that long.  Also they'd likely be replaced long before then in favor of higher capacity and performance drives.

Generally, if drive failure hasn't made me upgrade sooner, I like to upgrade when I can fit the capacity of several (like 6 to 10 or so) smaller / older drives onto a single larger / newer drive - preferably for no more $ for that new drive than I had paid for a single smaller drive several years earlier when it was new.  (For example, for me a couple years ago, a single 10TB HDD effectively replaced an 80GB, 250GB, 2x 750GB, 1TB, and 2x each 1.5TB & 2TB drives, dating from 2001 to 2014.)

[seagate_surfer]

 

On 1/30/2020 at 3:07 PM, PianoPlayer88Key said:

-I'd love to be able to see, for example, an 8TB or 16TB drive that could fill up faster than a ST-506, or even ST-412, ST-225, ST-251, ST-157A, etc.  (I wonder if @seagate_surfer could possibly have one of those laying around and a way to benchmark it...)-

 

I would also love it but this is almost impossible considering that we are talking about equipment that started the mass storage device industry...

[trevb0t]

@VEXICUS curious about this TC Sunbow unit:

https://www.amazon.com/TCSUNBOW-240GB-Desktop-MacPro-2280mm/dp/B077TRW2B8/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=tcsunbow%2Bssd&qid=1586654256&sr=8-9&th=1

[Juular]

12 minutes ago, trevb0t said:

@VEXICUS curious about this TC Sunbow unit:

https://www.amazon.com/TCSUNBOW-240GB-Desktop-MacPro-2280mm/dp/B077TRW2B8/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=tcsunbow%2Bssd&qid=1586654256&sr=8-9&th=1

@NewMaxx

[NewMaxx]

27 minutes ago, trevb0t said:

@VEXICUS curious about this TC Sunbow unit:

https://www.amazon.com/TCSUNBOW-240GB-Desktop-MacPro-2280mm/dp/B077TRW2B8/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=tcsunbow%2Bssd&qid=1586654256&sr=8-9&th=1

Can clearly see all the details on that one, if the images are accurate. SMI SM2256K which is the precursor to the SM2258/SM2259 (MX500, SU800, etc). Might have migrated or been updated to the SM2258G by now (i.e. AliExpress lists it with the SM2258G). Has DRAM (you can see the package on the back side), would remain with the SM2258. Not sure on the flash, it would be 2D/planar (e.g. ADATA SP550) most likely but possibly updated to 3D TLC here (possibly second-rate 48L/64L Samsung). So pretty typical "Chinese" SSD along the lines of the X3. Can't tell SLC design but generally these use a small static cache. So hardware-wise not far off from the newer/current SU800, although likely with a different cache design and of course weaker support. (static cache would be out-run more easily, but is more consistent on the whole)

[andrija777]

On 8/9/2019 at 8:17 AM, VEXICUS said:

Patriot - Burst* (Phison S11)

why is there asterisk next to Burst, it DOES have a DRAM cache, not much, but it got some as least for 240GB+, maybe 120GB don't have it?