The Western Digital WD Blue SN500 SSD Review: Moving The Mainstream To NVMe
by Billy Tallis on April 19, 2019 9:30 AM ESTAnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer
The Destroyer is an extremely long test replicating the access patterns of very IO-intensive desktop usage. A detailed breakdown can be found in this article. Like real-world usage, the drives do get the occasional break that allows for some background garbage collection and flushing caches, but those idle times are limited to 25ms so that it doesn't take all week to run the test. These AnandTech Storage Bench (ATSB) tests do not involve running the actual applications that generated the workloads, so the scores are relatively insensitive to changes in CPU performance and RAM from our new testbed, but the jump to a newer version of Windows and the newer storage drivers can have an impact.
We quantify performance on this test by reporting the drive's average data throughput, the average latency of the I/O operations, and the total energy used by the drive over the course of the test.
The average data rate of the WD Blue SN500 on The Destroyer puts it in a tie with the ADATA SX8200 and ahead of other entry-level NVMe drives. The 250GB SN500 outperforms even the 1TB SATA WD Blue SSD and the 1TB QLC-based Intel 660p. Samsung's 970 EVO Plus is significantly faster overall, but that's to be expected considering there is no more high-end option in this capacity class.
The great average and 99th percentile latency scores from the WD Blue SN500 on The Destroyer make it easy to forget that the SN500 is designed to be an entry-level NVMe drive, not a flagship high-end product (to the extent that such a thing is possible with TLC NAND in such small quantities).
The average read latency of the WD Blue SN500 on The Destroyer is faster than any other drive in its capacity class, and only 60% slower than the Intel Optane 800p. The average write latency doesn't stand out much from the competition, but the SN500 is still behaving more like a high-end drive rather than showing any of the acute weaknesses often found in entry-level products.
The 99th percentile read and write latency scores from the SN500 are similarly excellent, and better than can reasonably be expected from a DRAMless SSD that we know is doing a lot of background garbage collection during this test.
The WD Blue SN500 was quite power efficient during The Destroyer; despite being significantly slower overall than the WD Black SN750, the SN500 used a bit less energy in total. The other drives in its capacity class all used at least 50% more energy to complete this test, and the Toshiba RC100 despite seeming most similar at a high level (DRAMless, TLC, NVMe) took several times longer to run the test and used several times the energy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
50 Comments
View All Comments
kpb321 - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
A lot of people don't need much space. I just upgraded my wife from a 128gb SSD to a 256gb SSD. The 128GB SSD was getting a little full because of pictures of our son and I was occasionally having to free up space for Windows update etc. We could have stuck with the 128gb and migrated her entire picture collection to the NAS or kept freeing up space when needed but a 256 SATA SSD is so cheap I figured why not upgrade. Her old 128gb got stuck in my in-law's computer to replace the old slow 500gb hd they had in the system. They are using less than half the space on that SSD so should be fine for a long time and if really needed I can always setup the 500gb hd as a secondary storage drive for them. The old days of 32/64gb SSD being barely adequate are passed. Windows + a decent selection of apps is fine on a 128gb SSD and 256gb gives even more head room.jabber - Saturday, April 20, 2019 - link
Been running my work laptop on a 64GB SSD for several years now. Some of us don't need to keep masses of data on a device that goes out and about. Sometimes carrying masses of data is a liability.RealBeast - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
Don't know about mainstream, but no way that I would waste precious M.2 slots on some small slow drive like this one.Sure a .5-2TB, but not really a 660P for me (they should be on SATA ports at my house). I use those ports for fast drives.
beginner99 - Saturday, April 20, 2019 - link
In a laptop you might have a point but in a desktop? Put the OS on it and the most used apps like browser. If you don't game you are already set. For games you can use a hdd or a large cheap sata ssd as it doesn't really matter much what you use.stephenbrooks - Sunday, April 21, 2019 - link
If you have a lot of games you'll want both large capacity and fast access.But other than capacity, this "low end" NVMe drive looks great. It's clearly possible for them to do 1TB+ versions in the future too, in one way or another.
Korguz - Sunday, April 21, 2019 - link
fazalmajid you may not see it.. but others do.. for me.. i usually use a small drive for my C drive, aka windows drive, before it was 120, now.. as 120 gig drives have next to vanished, im using 250 gig drives, with other bigger drives for other things.. so when it come times for format, and install fresh.. instead of having to move and then redo a big drive.. all i have to deal with, is a small drive with little to no " i want to keep this so i need to move it to another drive " swapping...stephenbrooks - Sunday, April 21, 2019 - link
I found Windows wants to put "User" data and "Program Files" on the same primary drive, so it can grow in size and even end up containing data I want to keep, even if I try to separate the two.Korguz - Monday, April 22, 2019 - link
i check those 2 directories as part of the " i want to keep this so i need to move it to another drive " searching, and then moving... :-)tipoo - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
I'd still be interested in seeing a T2 SSD (Apple) put through these paces. Usually they did great in sequential tests but not so much in 4k randoms, so I wonder how it would do on, say, Destroyer.kpb321 - Friday, April 19, 2019 - link
This drive did exceed my expectations for a x2 pci-e lanes with no Dram and no HBM but the pricing is going to be key. The SM2262 drives have gotten pretty inexpensive and don't leave a lot of room for a drive like this even as good as it may be for what it is. I just recently picked up the ADATA version of the HP EX920 @ $73 for the 480gb drive. That a x4 drive with dram on it and should beat this drive pretty consistently. Personally this drive would need to be down around $60 before I'd consider the price difference meaningful enough to consider this drive.