Conclusion

The ADATA XPG Gammix S50 Lite is the first SSD of its kind: a PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD aimed at the mid-range mainstream segment of the consumer SSD market. Most Gen4 SSDs on the market were designed to go after the high end space, though the earliest such examples have now effectively been pushed down to mid-range by the arrival of a second wave of even faster Gen4 drives. By aiming for a more mainstream (and less expensive) role, the S50 Lite doesn't even try to make full use of the bandwidth offered by PCIe Gen4, and at its best it can only use a little bit of the extra speed over PCIe Gen3.

In fact, the S50 Lite is best understood by almost completely ignoring the fact that it supports PCIe Gen4; that feature can be viewed as simply a side-effect of the S50 Lite being a fairly modern design, so of course it should support the current IO standards. At heart, the S50 Lite is designed to be an affordable mainstream drive with the same general performance that required a high-end drive two or three years ago.

The S50 Lite is built around Silicon Motion's SM2267, their first PCIe Gen4 controller and the smaller, cheaper member of what is planned to be a broader family of Gen4 SSD controllers. We had originally hoped that SM2267 would allow drives like the S50 Lite to follow in the footsteps of the SK hynix Gold P31, bringing the benefits of a thoroughly modern 4-channel NVMe SSD to a broader audience. But the SM2267 only gets halfway there: it provides most of the performance we expect from a high-end 8-channel Gen3 drive, but since it's still a 28nm part we don't see the astounding power efficiency advantages that SK hynix delivered.

The S50 Lite also doesn't include the full amount of DRAM that high-end NVMe drives use, which hurts its performance on some heavier workloads. But that's more acceptable these days, since users with such workloads should be moving on to today's high-end Gen4 drives. (Side note: if ADATA is equipping the 1TB model with the same 1GB of DRAM that our 2TB sample gets, then the 1TB model probably avoids some of these performance pitfalls.) The result is that the SM2267 controller should be seen more as a reduced-cost replacement for the SM2262 family, and drives like the S50 Lite are aiming for a slightly lower market position than something like the SK hynix Gold P31.

Given the choice between the S50 Lite's nominal support for PCIe Gen4, or a well-rounded Gen3 drive, the answer is clear. Gen4 support on its own does not make a drive better, and there are plenty for Gen3 drives that offer better real-world performance and efficiency than the S50 Lite. In addition to the relative paucity of DRAM, the S50 Lite also suffers from small SLC cache sizes when the drive is mostly full. The fact that the S50 Lite supports a PCIe Gen4 host interface is almost completely irrelevant: at best it's barely able to exceed Gen3 performance, and it's unlikely to be used in systems providing a Gen4 x2 slot (which are likely to use even cheaper SSDs). It's good to see that SMI can ship a Gen4-capable controller, but the high-end SM2264 controller that we're still waiting for is the one that actually needs the Gen4 interface.

  480-512 GB 960 GB-1 TB 2 TB
ADATA XPG Gammix S50 Lite
Gen3, 4ch TLC
  $139.99
(14¢/GB)
$235.99
(12¢/GB)
Inland Premium
Gen3, TLC
$62.99
(12¢/GB)
$114.99
(11¢/GB)
$236.99
(12¢/GB)
Mushkin Pilot-E
Gen3, TLC
$67.99
(14¢/GB)
$114.99
(11¢/GB)
$219.99
(11¢/GB)
Samsung 970 EVO Plus
Gen3, TLC
$79.99
(16¢/GB)
$164.99
(16¢/GB)
$310.05
(16¢/GB)
SK hynix Gold P31
PCIe Gen3, 4ch TLC
$74.99
(15¢/GB)
$134.99
(13¢/GB)
 
WD Black SN750
Gen3, TLC
$69.99
(14¢/GB)
$144.80
(14¢/GB)
$309.99
(15¢/GB)
High-End PCIe Gen4:
ADATA XPG Gammix S70   $179.99
(18¢/GB)
$329.99
(16¢/GB)
Silicon Power US70   $159.99
(16¢/GB)
$319.99
(16¢/GB)
Samsung 980 PRO $129.99
(26¢/GB)
$199.99
(20¢/GB)
 
Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus   $199.98
(20¢/GB)
$399.98
(20¢/GB)
WD Black SN850 $129.99
(26¢/GB)
$199.99
(20¢/GB)
$379.99
(19¢/GB)

The pricing for the Gammix S50 Lite is unimpressive but also unsurprising. The drive has a bit of bling and can advertise PCIe Gen4 support, so it ends up priced close to the Gen3 drives from top-tier brands like SK hynix and WD, though with less of a premium on the 2TB capacity. It is at least clearly cheaper than the high-end Gen4 drives with 8-channel controllers, even the older Phison E16 models. Still, there are dozens of brands selling Phison E12S or SM2262EN-based Gen3 drives that will have equivalent or better real-world performance to the S50 Lite, but are more affordable. The cheapest of those models come with shorter 3-year warranties, which may not be worth the savings to some consumers.

 
Mixed IO Performance and Idle Power Management
Comments Locked

93 Comments

View All Comments

  • Oxford Guy - Friday, April 30, 2021 - link

    'At least'? QLC is a downgrade, not an upgrade.
  • Scour - Sunday, May 2, 2021 - link

    Never wrote that the A400 was upgraded ;)

    Sorry, I´m not a native english speaking person
  • Tomatotech - Friday, April 30, 2021 - link

    I've run an ADATA XPG SX8200 (non-pro) 1TB for the past 3+ years in my MacBook Pro as the system drive. Been very happy with it, and still blistering fast even now. Was approx 3x faster read & 4x faster write than the Apple OEM SSD, made a big difference to the feel of my MPB.

    As to changing components, not brilliant, but perhaps inevitable over the life of a long-lived model. Most SSD brands are not full-stack manufacturers, and supply / cost of sub-components is outside their control. As long as it meets the specs on the box and isn't crippled (like silently changing HDD models to HAMR mechanism without stating on the box).

    Anandtech was quite accepting of companies changing SSD components on their middle-low end lines in the last SSD roundup. The 8200 Pro launched around 3 years ago, and while it's still damn fast for most people, I'd call it middle of the road now that PCIe 4.0 is here.
  • Scour - Friday, April 30, 2021 - link

    I would prefer a new model-name if other components are used.
  • MrCommunistGen - Friday, April 30, 2021 - link

    +1

    They could easily have done this a number of ways:
    1. add a letter to the end of the model with each rev, SX8200A, SX8200B
    2. add Mk1, Mk2, etc.
    3. increment the model number by +1 every time, SX8201, SX8202, etc

    Each of these signify that it's still a related product aimed at the same market segment, while communicating that it isn't the exact same hardware that was reviewed when the product initially came out.
  • Scour - Sunday, May 2, 2021 - link

    I still think the main reason is to use a model name which had good reviews.

    And maybe it costs 10 cents more/piece if you order new packages with a new model number
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, April 30, 2021 - link

    And yet Intel, which was mentioned on the first page, has been at the forefront of pushing the anti-value QLC trash.

    Which would you rather choose? A company that is openly hostile to consume value or one that changes parts surreptitiously?

    Nvidia is reportedly going to surreptitiously sell some 3060s with its latest anti-mining thing, without bothering to let consumers know which type they're getting for their money. Things like that should be illegal but the world is not governed adequately. Caveat emptor rules. The panel lottery for TVs is a huge example of the surreptitiousness fraud.
  • bji - Friday, April 30, 2021 - link

    Holy crap man, will you get off of your anti-QLC rant already?
  • Oxford Guy - Friday, April 30, 2021 - link

    Ad hominem won't change reality. In reality, QLC offers only 30% more density for double the voltage states. That is diminished returns.

    Moreover, every dollar consumers spend on QLC reduces the price value of TLC by reducing TLC production.

    I'm not sorry that I'm ruffling the feathers of various QLC-peddling corporations by posting the truth. Being attacked for it is hardly unexpected. It's how business communication works.
  • FunBunny2 - Friday, April 30, 2021 - link

    "In reality, QLC offers only 30% more density for double the voltage states. That is diminished returns."

    IFF both TLC and QLC are on the same node size. moving back up to a larger node (and I know not whether that's happened) for QLC could (note the subjunctive) end up with an equivalent NAND density/bit. that, of course, should be the controlling factor.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now