AnandTech 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 and unlike our Iometer tests, 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.

We quantify performance on this test by reporting the drive's average data throughput, a few data points about its latency, and the total energy used by the drive over the course of the test.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Data Rate)

The Q300's average data rate during The Destroyer was slightly better than the Trion 100 480GB, and puts the Q300 around the middle of the pack and well ahead of the Crucial BX200. It's also slightly ahead of the Plextor M6V, a drive that uses MLC flash and prioritizes power efficiency over performance.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

The average service time of the Q300 on The Destroyer is considerably worse than the Trion 100, and near the bottom of the chart. The performance consistency test showed the Q300 as significantly more variable than the Trion 100 before reaching steady state, so this result isn't inexplicable.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Latency)

The Q300 has more severe latency outliers than the Trion 100, though neither drive is great at limiting latency.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer (Power)

The Q300 shows improved power efficiency over the Trion 100, but the MLC drives are all better.

Performance Consistency AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • cbjwthwm - Monday, March 7, 2016 - link

    Yes that quote in the review is out to lunch, this drive had the same problems as the Trion 100 with launching on flawed firmware 11.1, which had major reliability bugs--hence the bad user reviews like the Trion 100. Toshiba's link to the updated 11.2 firmware (from late November) is here:

    The reviewer needs to at least search for an updated firmware version before writing such oblivious comments that make his review seem very badly researched right off the mark.
  • serendip - Friday, February 26, 2016 - link

    Big issue with the Q300 and its identical twin OCZ Trion 100 - they don't work with certain Nvidia chipsets, mainly those in Macbooks from 2010 and earlier. You can format the drive on a Macbook but read/write operations stall.

    OCZ are aware of the problem but have stated on their official forum that they can't do anything to avoid breaking support for newer chipsets. Toshiba haven't said a darn thing.
  • yuhong - Saturday, February 27, 2016 - link

    Is there any more technical details like which part of the SATA protocol the problems comes from?
  • serendip - Saturday, February 27, 2016 - link

    No idea, maybe some power management issues? I've tried Sandforce and Samsung 850 Evo drives on those older Macbooks and they work fine. It's the new Toshiba controller that doesn't play well with MCP79/89 chipsets. OCZ have known about this for 3 months and have told customers facing this situation to get a refund and buy another drive whereas Toshiba are keeping silent. Guess that OCZ acquisition hasn't streamlined corporate lines of communication.
  • Kristian Vättö - Sunday, February 28, 2016 - link

    From what I've heard it's a problem Apple would have to fix through a firmware update. OCZ/Toshiba can't fix it, or at least not without massive changes. In the end it's a relatively small niche anyway.
  • serendip - Saturday, February 27, 2016 - link

    It happens only under OSX, all versions, on the Nvidia MCP chipset platform. The Q300 works fine in Windows on those affected Macbooks.
  • cbjwthwm - Monday, March 7, 2016 - link

    The nVidia SATA compatibility problem lies with the drive's Phison S10 controller, and it affects all products using that controller from various manufacturers such as Patriot, Corsair, and Kingston lines using it. Since Phison has been sitting on their hands with this issue for around a year a half (its first use was the Neutron XT iirc), I doubt they're going to get their act together for OCZ but I suppose we can hope?
  • Harry Lloyd - Saturday, February 27, 2016 - link

    Still waiting for a decent 500 GB drive under 100 $. Near the end of this year, maybe?
  • dealcorn - Monday, February 29, 2016 - link

    I understand that you can not test Devslp. Does Toshiba represent that the Q300 supports Devslp?
  • watzupken - Monday, February 29, 2016 - link

    For me, planar TLC will never fly, especially after the Samsung EVO 840 fiasco. The combination of TLC with shrinking NAND size is a perfect recipe for disaster, not to mention that they are not significantly cheaper than their MLC counterpart. There are MLC SSDs out there that run on lesser known controllers, but for some brands I feel its more reliable than the TLC+planar NAND combination.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now