The PNY CS1311 and CS2211 SSD Review: MLC vs TLC at 15nm
by Billy Tallis on April 15, 2016 8:00 AM ESTAnandTech Storage Bench - Light
Our Light storage test has relatively more sequential accesses and lower queue depths than The Destroyer or the Heavy test, and it's by far the shortest test overall. It's based largely on applications that aren't highly dependent on storage performance, so this is a test more of application launch times and file load times. This test can be seen as the sum of all the little delays in daily usage, but with the idle times trimmed to 25ms it takes less than half an hour to run. Details of the Light test can be found here.
The average data rates on the Light test don't show a clear separation between MLC and TLC drives; only a handful of drives stand out with particularly low performance, mostly due to being small TLC drives. Full drive performance reveals more interesting differences than the empty drive performance. The CS2211 pays one of the largest full-drive penalties among MLC drives. In the TLC segment, the OCZ Trion 150 holds that distinction, but it starts with high enough performance when empty that it generally remains faster than the CS1311.
The CS2211 again has the slowest average service times of all MLC drives, but with only a moderate gap between it and the others. The CS1311 is roughly tied with the ADATA SP550 and slower than the Trion 150.
The rankings of the PNY drives going by latency outliers are similar to the rankings for average service time. None of the drives are truly overwhelmed by the Light test, but the smaller capacities of the CS1311 do suffer significantly from a full drive.
The power consumption over the course of the Light test does little to distinguish any of the drives. On light workloads, the idle power will matter more than the figures reported here. That said, it is interesting that the 240GB CS2211 comes out slightly ahead despite being slower than the 480GB CS2211. The smaller 4-channel S10 controller may be saving a bit of power over the full size.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
43 Comments
View All Comments
alexdi - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
I read this with only one question in mind: does it beat the 850 Evo? Save for a few ticks in power usage, apparently not. The Evo is perpetually on sale. I've yet to see a compelling reason to opt for anything else on a desktop.ingwe - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
Completely agree. I am not tied to it, but I don't see any reason to recommend pretty much anything else.fierywater - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
The CS1311 gets marked down from time to time; I picked up my 480GB one for $100 while the Evo 850 500GB usually doesn't get marked down below $130 (and it was $150 everywhere when I picked up the CS1311). It's plenty fast for real world use, especially as a drop-in replacement for an HDD. I think there's a place for drives like it, although that applies less to the CS2211.lilmoe - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
For the performance and value you're getting with the EVO, $30 is well worth the extra, and hardly an amount worth saving going for the CS1311, or any other TLC drives at that. In the matter of fact, lots of the current consumer MLC drives don't compare to the value, performance, or in some cases, the endurance and features you're getting with the EVO.ATC9001 - Monday, April 18, 2016 - link
I agree from most "prosumers" which are frequent to read this article, but for the mainstream user, I don't think its worth it (spending the $30+). Any SSD is better than a HDD, but some garbage bargain bin SSDs aren't worth the cheap price (this being the first exception). I know most people (including myself) think the same thing alexdi posted when reading this....is this going to beat the evo? It doesn't, but at the same time it's not far off from it, and $30 bucks can cause it to break a price plane for some mid range users.Each person has there own utility curve or price performance idea, and for me, this is the first drive since the 840 EVO was released in which I would say it's not worth the x dollars to just get the evo!
Stuka87 - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
Having a quality, reliable drive is not reason enough for you? If you want to buy a drive that has a much shorter life span, go for it. But Anybody that cares about data, is not going to by a TLC drive over a MLC drive.lilmoe - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
FYI, TLC VNAND has better endurance than most 15nm MLC drives...Impulses - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
Define much shorter...You're talking in broad strokes about a bunch of different things in the same breath. Life span and reliability aren't necessarily the same thing, unless you need drives to be reliable for 15yrs...
15yrs ago I was wondering if I'd ever fill my 75GB Deathstar, I'm not sure I'd even keep a drive 5+ years. My 2x 850 EVO have been nothing but reliable since I bought them last year.
DanoSpumoni - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
Same here. the M.2 850 EVO 500GB is my go to SSD right now. They are in all my computers either in M.2 slots or M.2-> SATA sleds. The performance and reliability is hard to beat. I only buy M.2 SSDs now for future compatibility because they last so long I know they'll outlive the computers they inhabit right now. When the 1TB version drops to ~$150 I'll grab some more...Impulses - Friday, April 15, 2016 - link
I'm sitting on 2x 1TB, bought at like $310 & $330 IIRC, seen them for $260 lately... Waiting for the 2TB to drop lower and I might add one of those. :D