AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy

Our Heavy storage benchmark is proportionally more write-heavy than The Destroyer, but much shorter overall. The total writes in the Heavy test aren't enough to fill the drive, so performance never drops down to steady state. This test is far more representative of a power user's day to day usage, and is heavily influenced by the drive's peak performance. The Heavy workload test details can be found here. This test is run twice, once on a freshly erased drive and once after filling the drive with sequential writes.

ATSB - Heavy (Data Rate)

The Plextor M9Pe offers fairly low average data rates on the Heavy test, by the standards of contemporary high-end SSDs. However, it doesn't lose too much performance when full, which allows the 512GB model to score a win over the 500GB Samsung 970 EVO.

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

The average latency scores from the M9Pe place it at the bottom of the NVMe segment, but still ahead of the SATA drives. The 99th percentile scores of the 1TB model are worse than the other 1TB NVMe drives but not too bad overall, while the 512GB M9Pe is nearly tied with the Crucial MX500 SATA drive.

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

The average read latency scores from the Plextor M9Pe show an unusual inversion, with better performance when the drive is full. Anomalies like this are often an artifact of the drive lying about when it's done with a secure erase operation, leading to the empty-drive test run starting too soon. Even discounting those results, the M9Pe doesn't look competitive. The average write latency scores look more sensible, but are also bad news for the M9Pe's aspirations to high-end status.

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

None of the 99th percentile read or write latency scores from the Plextor M9Pe are actually good by the standards of a current-generation high-end SSD, but the M9Pe does avoid the problems that befall some of the drives when they're full.

ATSB - Heavy (Power)

Energy usage from the M9Pe again falls between the results from its MLC and TLC based predecessors, and aren't great overall. The 500GB Samsung 970 EVO also requires a lot of energy, while its larger counterpart does quite well when its SLC cache isn't filled.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer AnandTech Storage Bench - Light
Comments Locked

15 Comments

View All Comments

  • Drazick - Friday, May 25, 2018 - link

    I can see why you model Windows compatibility as a moving target.

    But in that case I think I read somewhere it was a known issue of the drives.

    Would you approach Microsoft and find out?
    It would be only fair before making assumptions.
  • DigitalFreak - Thursday, May 24, 2018 - link

    I wish HP would hurry up with the 2TB version of the HP EX920.
  • shabby - Thursday, May 24, 2018 - link

    The ADATA XPG SX8200 uses the same controller but with more provisioning, a bit less space though, but it gives it a bit of a boost compared to the ex920. Review is on tomshardware for both.
  • peevee - Wednesday, May 30, 2018 - link

    Why does not AT review EX920? Beats overpriced Samsungs they are pushing all the time?
  • asava - Thursday, June 21, 2018 - link

    Hello,
    Any chance you could provide the identify namespace information for this drive? Under linux that would be by "nvme id-ns /dev/nvme0n1".
    Thanks!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now