What's new
  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

G.Skill Phoenix Blade 480GB PCI-E SSD Review

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Due to their massive potential bandwidth and relatively compact form factor, PCI Express SSDs are becoming a big thing these days and G.Skill is the latest to take advantage of this growing market with their Phoenix Blade 480GB. We’ve already seen many examples from Intel that cater to datacenter-based applications and others like Plextor’s M6e and OCZ’s RevoDrive series which target more mass-market clientele. The Blade falls firmly into the latter category but has its roots firmly planted in the professional market as well.

Not that long ago, adding the Blade to their product stack would have been an impossibility for G.Skill. After being the first to offer a relatively affordable SSD and following up with several strong product ranges, they made the decision to temporarily pull out of the SSD market. That happened at a time when SSDs were a dime a dozen and it seemed like every company was jumping on the bandwagon with nearly identical products. Without any way of offering any form of differentiation, G.Skill took the time to reorganize their storage division and the first byproduct of that effort is the Phoenix Blade.

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/Phoenix_Blade_480GB/intro.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

By targeting the ultra high end market G.Skill is wading into a hotly contested area but the Blade 480GB’s specifications hold a ton of promise. Specifically this half height PCIe 2.0 x8 device is rated for 2000MB/s sequential read and write performance when dealing with uncompressed data, and a still respectable 1900/1050 MB/s when dealing when dealing with compressed data. Equally impressive is its rating of 90K/245K IOPS for small file performance abilities, which is great for workstation consumers. For those keeping track at home, those figures put it well in advance of OCZ’s Revodrive 350.

Another interesting aspect here is endurance which is rated for 1.68 petabytes of data or an MTBF of just over one million hours. Numbers like that allow the Phoenix Blade to bridge the gap between enterprise-class products like the Intel DC-P3700 and OCZ’s RevoDrive. This is backed by a 3-year warranty which is par for the course these days but it also gives G.Skill’s drive a sense of dual identity; is thisa workstation drive or one that targets gamers? The answer to that is “both”…..sort of which is why we'll be looking at both sides of the coin in this review.

Pricing is also an important aspect here and another factor that contributes to its slight identity crisis since, when compared against its closest competitors, the Blade is actually quite affordable for some users. At $700 for just 480GB of space it is far outside the reach of most gamers but buyers for workstation-class storage will be hard pressed to find a better value. Enthusiasts on the other hand will look at the RevoDrive’s higher cost versus its lower performance ratio and jump towards G.Skill’s offering.


In order to reach such high performance levels and yet keep the asking price within the realm of reasonable G.Skill has opted for slightly older technology. They are utilizing a PCI-E 2.0 interface rather than PCIe 3.0 like most new PCI-E based SSDs. This has led to the use of an x8 interface instead of x4 PCI-E 3.0 layout.

G.Skill’s chosen format may cause compatibility problems issue when used alongside dual GPU systems on many Z97 motherboards since they typically offer two PCI-E 3.0 slots alongside a very limited number of PCI-E 2.0 slots. One option is to forget about dual card setups on Z97 and install the Blade into the board’s secondary PCI-E 3.0 slot which will knock down the primary slot to x8 as well, potentially limiting GPU performance. Luckily X99 boards or Z97 boards equipped with PLX PCI-E lane multipliers won’t face these issues but they should still be taken into account before buying the Phoenix Blade.

ang2_sm.jpg

Even though the metal fascia is a touch more aesthetically pleasing than most, at its most basic the G.Skill Phoenix Blade is a fair representation of what many PCI-E based storage devices look like. It uses a half-height, single slot form factor and is about as long as your typical mid-range video card at about 6.75”.

ang4_sm.jpg

Lifting the external cover we can see that the Blade has a lot of components stacked closely together which tends to lead to a significant amount of heat buildup. Thankfully, G.Skill has limited the power draw to well below PCI-E levels and included large and robust heatsinks.

ang3_sm.jpg

Around back there’s a secondary heat spreader as well which should aid in dispersing any excess heat from the topside components.

ang5_sm.jpg

Once we removed the top fascia and those impressively large heatsinks, the actual design of this model was very, very familiar and hearkens back to the RevoDrive 350 in many ways. Unlike some of the competition, this is not a native PCIe device but rather an amalgam of multiple SATA SSDs, a RAID controller and a simple PCI-E bridge controller.

In this multi-board approach the main PCB consists of a large RAID controller, the PCI-E bridge controller IC, a connector for the daughterboard, two SATA SSD controllers and 16 NAND ICs. The smaller daughterboard has 16 more NAND ICs and two more controllers.

This setup in and of itself is not exactly cutting edge, but as the Intel 910 series proved it can be a very, very potent configuration. It really does come down to the components that G.Skill opted for and how they have configured the parts to work together.

ang6_sm.jpg

While there are some points of differentiation, G.Skill’s design is quite basic at its heart. Rather than looking towards Marvell or Samsung, or even Intel for their controllers we once again see the SandForce SF2281 rear its head. Each SF2281 controller uses 8 NAND ICs and for all intents which means there are four separate 120GB SATA drives that share a common PCB. As with most of these designs G.Skill has once again take a page directly from OCZ's RevoDrive series and made these four SF2281 controllers into one large RAID 0 pre-configured 480GB storage device.

Unlike some datacenter-centric devices in the PCI-E storage market, the G.Skill Phoenix Blade is bootable as long as you preload the drivers into the OS and it is TRIM enabled. The latter of which was very reassuring as it took OCZ many years before they made their SandForce-based RevoDrive series received TRIM support.

G.Skill has accomplished this via the use of custom drivers which does come at the expense of increased CPU overhead. In testing the overhead was approximately the same as most of the more expensive competition or between 2-8% on an eight-thread CPU. This is much higher than it would have been if G.Skill had gone for advanced native PCI-E aware SSD controllers, or better still NVMe controllers. However this choice ultimately made the Blade more affordable and modern CPUs do have cycles to burn unless you are spending your days rendering.

ang7_sm.jpg

We have to give credit where it is due since G.Skill has opted for the latest incarnation of the SF2281 and the 'new' VB2 stepping of this well respected controller. The VB2 iteration was released to address compatibility with newer NAND and is also known to be much more power efficient than previous generations. The addition of high end 19nm Toshiba NAND should also lead to some great performance.
 
Last edited:

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Test System & Methodology (Home Use & Workstation)

Testing Methodology


Testing a drive is not as simple as putting together a bunch of files, dragging them onto folder on the drive in Windows and using a stopwatch to time how long the transfer takes. Rather, there are factors such as read / write speed and data burst speed to take into account. There is also the SATA controller on your motherboard and how well it works with SSDs & HDDs to think about as well. For best results you really need a dedicated hardware RAID controller w/ dedicated RAM for drives to shine. Unfortunately, most people do not have the time, inclination or monetary funds to do this. For this reason our test-bed will be a more standard motherboard with no mods or high end gear added to it. This is to help replicate what you the end user’s experience will be like.

Even when the hardware issues are taken care of the software itself will have a negative or positive impact on the results. As with the hardware end of things, to obtain the absolute best results you do need to tweak your OS setup; however, just like with the hardware solution most people are not going to do this. For this reason our standard OS setup is used. However, except for the Windows 7 load test times we have done our best to eliminate this issue by having the drive tested as a secondary drive. With the main drive being an Intel DC S3700 800GB Solid State Drive.

For synthetic tests we used a combination of the ATTO Disk Benchmark, HDTach, HD Tune, Crystal Disk Benchmark, IOMeter, AS-SSD, Anvil Storage Utilities and PCMark 7.

For real world benchmarks we timed how long a single 10GB rar file took to copy to and then from the devices. We also used 10gb of small files (from 100kb to 200MB) with a total 12,000 files in 400 subfolders.

For all testing a Asus Z97 Deluxe motherboard was used, running Windows 7 64bit Ultimate edition. All drives were tested using AHCI mode using Intel RST 10 drivers.

All tests were run 4 times and average results are represented.

In between each test suite runs (with the exception being IOMeter which was done after every run) the drives are cleaned with either HDDerase, SaniErase or OCZ SSDToolbox and then quick formatted to make sure that they were in optimum condition for the next test suite.

Processor: Core i7 4770K
Motherboard: Asus Z97 Deluxe
Memory: 8GB Corsair Vengeance LP “blue”
Graphics card: Asus 5550 passive
Hard Drive: Intel DC S3700 800GB, Intel 910 800GB
Power Supply: XFX 850

SSD FIRMWARE (unless otherwise noted):

OCZ Vertex 2 100GB
: 1.33
Intel 520: 400i
SanDisk Extreme 240GB: R211
Corsair Neutron GTX 240GB: M206
Intel 335 180GB: 335
SanDisk Extreme 2 240GB: R1311
Seagate Pro 600: B660
OCZ Vector 150 240GB: 1.2
Angelbird Adler 640GB: AA3.15
Vertex 460 240GB: 1.0
ADATA SP920 512GB: MU01
Intel 7230 240GB: L2010400
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB:DXM06B0Q
Crucial MX100 512GB: MU01
Crucial M550 512GB: MU01
Plextor M6e 256GB: 1.03
Plextor M6s 256GB: 1.03
Kingston HyperX Fury 240GB: 5.60
AMD R7 240GB: 1.0
G.Skill Phoenix 480GB: 2.71

Samsung MDX controller:
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB- Custom firmware w/ 21nm Toggle Mode NAND

SandForce SF1200 controller:
OCZ Vertex 2 - ONFi 2 NAND

SandForce SF2281 controller:
Intel 520 - Custom firmware w/ ONFi 2 NAND
Kingston HyperX Fury 240GB - Custom firmware w/ 128Gbit ONFi 3 NAND
G.Skill Phoenix 480GB - Custom firmware w/ 128Gbit ONFi 3 NAND

LAMD controller:
Corsair Neutron GTX - Toggle Mode NAND
Seagate 600 Pro - Custom firmware w/ Toggle Mode NAND

Marvell 9183 controller:
Plextor M6e 256GB- Custom firmware w/ 21nm Toggle Mode NAND

Marvell 9188 controller:
Plextor M6s - Custom firmware w/ 21nm Toggle Mode NAND

Marvell 9187 controller:
Crucial M500 - Custom firmware w/ 128Gbit ONFi 3 NAND
SanDisk Extreme 2 - Custom firmware w/ 19nm eX2 ABL NAND

Marvell 9189 controller:
ADATA SP920 - Custom firmware w/ 128Gbit ONFi 3 NAND
Crucial M550 - Custom firmware w/ 128Gbit ONFi 3 NAND
Crucial MX100 - Custom firmware w/ 128Gbit ONFi 3 NAND

Barefoot 3 controller:
OCZ Vector 150 (M00) - 19nm Toggle Mode NAND
AMD R7 (M00) - 19nm Toggle Mode NAND

Novachips NVS3600A controller:
Angelbird Adler - ONFi 2 NAND

Intel X25 G3 controller:
Intel 730 - Custom firmware w/ ONFi 2 NAND



Steady-State Testing for Workstation Environments

While optimum condition performance is important, knowing exactly how a given device will perform after days, weeks and even months of usage is actually more important for most consumers. For home user and workstation consumers our Non-Trim performance test is more than good enough. Sadly it is not up to par for Enterprise Solid State Storage devices and these most demanding of consumers.

Enterprise administrators are more concerned with the realistic long term performance of any device rather than the brand new performance as down time for TCL is simply not an option. Even though an Enterprise device will have many techniques for obfuscating and alleviating a degraded state (eg Idle Time Garbage Collection, multiple controllers, etc) there does come a point where these techniques fail to counteract the negative results of long term usage in an obviously non-TRIM environment. The point at which the performance falls and then plateaus at a lower performance level is known as the “steady state” performance or as “degraded state” in the consumer arena.

To help all consumer gain a better understanding of how much performance degradation there is between “optimal” and “steady state” we have included not only optimal results but have rerun tests after first degrading a drive until it plateaus and reaches its steady state performance level. These tests are labelled as “Steady State” results and can be considered as such.

While the standard for steady state testing is actually 8 hours we feel this is not quiet pessimistic enough and have extended the pre-test run to a full ten hours before testing actually commences. The pre-test or “torture test” consists of our standard “NonTrim performance test” and as such to quickly induce a steady state we ran ten hours of IOMeter set to 100% random, 100% write, 4k size chunks of data at a 64 queue depth across the entire array’s capacity. At the end of this test, the IOMeter file is deleted and the device was then tested using a given test sections’ unique configuration.


Processor: Core i7 4770K
Motherboard: Asus Z97 Deluxe
Memory: 8GB Corsair Vengeance LP “blue”
Graphics card: Asus 5550 passive
Primary Hard Drive: Intel 520 240GB
Power Supply: XFX 850

Below is a description of each SSD configuration we tested for this review:

Intel 910 800GB (Single Drive) HP mode: A single LUN of the Intel 910 800GB in its High Performance Mode

Intel 910 800GB (Raid 0 x2) std mode: Two of the Intel 910 800GB SSD LUN's in Standard Mode Configured in RAID 0

Intel 910 800GB (Raid 0 x2) HP mode: Two of the Intel 910 800GB SSD LUN's in High Performance Mode Configured in RAID 0

Intel 910 800GB (Raid 0 x4) std mode: All four of the Intel 910 800GB SSD LUN's in Standard Mode Configured in RAID 0

Intel 910 800GB (Raid 0 x4) HP mode: All four of the Intel 910 800GB SSD LUN's in High Performance Mode Configured in RAID 0

Intel DC S3700 200GB: A single DC S3700 200GB drive

Intel DC S3700 800GB: A single DC S3700 800GB drive

Intel DC S3700 200GB (RAID 0): Two DC S3700 200GB drives Configured in RAID 0

Intel DC S3700 800GB (RAID 0): Two DC S3700 800GB drives Configured in RAID 0

Intel 710 200GB (RAID 0): Two 710 200GB drives Configured in RAID 0
 

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Home Use - Read / Write Performance

Home Use - Read Bandwidth


For this benchmark, HDTach was used. It shows the potential read speed which you are likely to experience with these hard drives. The long test was run to give a slightly more accurate picture. We don’t put much stock in Burst speed readings and thus we no longer included it. The most important number is the Average Speed number. This number will tell you what to expect from a given drive in normal, day to day operations. The higher the average the faster your entire system will seem.

read.jpg


Home Use - Write Performance


For this benchmark HD Tune Pro was used. To run the write benchmark on a drive, you must first remove all partitions from that drive and then and only then will it allow you to run this test. Unlike some other benchmarking utilities the HD Tune Pro writes across the full area of the drive, thus it easily shows any weakness a drive may have.

write.jpg

As you can see the level of sequential performance this drive does offer is substantial. Outside of some very niche scenarios we cannot foresee this amount of performance causing an issue - other than making the typical SATA drive seem slow in comparison.
 

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Home Use - ATTO Disk Benchmark

Home Use - ATTO Disk Benchmark


<i>The ATTO disk benchmark tests the drives read and write speeds using gradually larger size files. For these tests, the ATTO program was set to run from its smallest to largest value (.5KB to 8192KB) and the total length was set to 256MB. The test program then spits out an extrapolated performance figure in megabytes per second. </i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/Phoenix_Blade_480GB/atto_r.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/Phoenix_Blade_480GB/atto_w.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

ATTO has always 'enhanced' the SandForce SF2281's abilities, but even if some of this performance is artificial and unlikely to be encountered in real-world scenarios the G.Skill Phoenix Blade 480GB still posts some very exciting numbers. In fact, the performance of this drive is slightly better than the RevoDrive 350. Considering the Phoenix Blade 480GB is about $100 cheaper than OCZ's alternative that is indeed impressive.
 

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Home Use - Crystal DiskMark / PCMark 7

Home Use - Crystal DiskMark


Crystal DiskMark is designed to quickly test the performance of your drives. Currently, the program allows to measure sequential and random read/write speeds; and allows you to set the number of tests iterations to run. We left the number of tests at 5 and size at 100MB.

cdm_r.jpg

cdm_w.jpg



Home Use - PCMark 7


While there are numerous suites of tests that make up PCMark 7, only one is pertinent: the HDD Suite. The HDD Suite consists of numerous tests that try and replicate real world drive usage. Everything from how long a simulated virus scan takes to complete, to MS Vista start up time to game load time is tested in these core tests; however we do not consider this anything other than just another suite of synthetic tests. For this reason, while each test is scored individually we have opted to include only the overall score.

pcm7.jpg


The single queue depth performance of G.Skill's drive is decent but not as high as the IOPS specifications would lead you to believe. This is to be expected as while the Phoenix Blade is marketed towards home consumers, it is based off technology that was designed with the business user in mind. This means that the average home user will never tap the full potential of the Phoenix Blade. By the same token the results are still great, and are once again higher than the OCZ RevoDrive 350.
 

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Home Use - AS-SSD / Anvil Storage Utilities Pro

Home Use - AS-SSD


AS-SSD is designed to quickly test the performance of your drives. Currently, the program allows to measure sequential and small 4K read/write speeds as well as 4K file speed at a queue depth of 6. While its primary goal is to accurately test Solid State Drives, it does equally well on all storage mediums it just takes longer to run each test as each test reads or writes 1GB of data.

asd_r.jpg

asd_w.jpg



Home Use - Anvil Storage Utilities Pro


Much like AS-SSD, Anvil Pro was created to quickly and easily – yet accurately – test your drives. While it is still in the Beta stages it is a versatile and powerful little program. Currently it can test numerous read / write scenarios but two in particular stand out for us: 4K queue depth of 4 and 4K queue depth of 16. A queue depth of four along with 4K sectors can be equated to what most users will experience in an OS scenario while 16 depth will be encountered only by power users and the like. We have also included the 4k queue depth 1 results to help put these two other numbers in their proper perspective. All settings were left in their default states and the test size was set to 1GB.

anvil_r.jpg

anvil_w.jpg

Once again the large, medium, and even deep queue depth small file performance is exceptional, but the single queue depth results are merely OK. Overall, the performance of this drive is better than an OCZ RevoDrive 350 but as with that PCIe storage device, actual real world performance will largely depend on the type of data (compressible vs uncompressible) that it is dealing with.

This could have been avoided if G.Skill had opted for a different controller, but that would have increased the overall price of the device. As with most things in life this is delicate balancing act of trading off performance for lower asking price and considering it price is lower than the competition it looks like G.Skill has achieved their goal.
 

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Home Use - IOMETER

IOMETER


IOMeter is heavily weighted towards the server end of things, and since we here at HWC are more End User centric we will be setting and judging the results of IOMeter a little bit differently than most. To test each drive we ran 5 test runs per HDD (1,4,16,64,128 queue depth) each test having 8 parts, each part lasting 10 min w/ an additional 20 second ramp up. The 8 subparts were set to run 100% random, 80% read 20% write; testing 512b, 1k, 2k,4k,8k,16k,32k,64k size chunks of data. When each test is finished IOMeter spits out a report, in that reports each of the 8 subtests are given a score in I/Os per second. We then take these 8 numbers add them together and divide by 8. This gives us an average score for that particular queue depth that is heavily weighted for single user environments.

iom.jpg


IOMeter really does highlight an area where the G.Skill Phoenix Blade can show its true potential. Taking a closer look at the results we can see that G.Skill's take on the SF2281 drive is better than the company that actually made it popular (OCZ) and that is impressive to say the least. Honestly, we doubt many will be disappointed with this level of performance from their computer's latest storage upgrade, but we doubt many home users would ever fully see the Phoenix Blade in all its glory as deep queue depths are rarely seen outside the business environment.
 

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Home Use - Windows Startup Time / Adobe CS5

Home Use - Windows 7 Start Up w/ Boot Time A/V Scan


When it comes to hard drive performance there is one area that even the most oblivious user notices: how long it takes to load the Operating System. Where Windows 7 has become nearly ubiquitous for solid state drive enthusiasts we have chosen Windows 7 64bit Ultimate as our Operating System. In previous load time tests we would use the Anti-Virus splash screen as our finish line; this however is no longer the case. We have not only added in a secondary Anti-Virus to load on startup, but also an anti-malware program. We have set Super Anti-Spyware to initiate a quick scan on Windows start-up and the completion of the quick scan will be our new finish line.

boot.jpg


Home Use - Adobe CS5 Load Time


Photoshop is a notoriously slow loading program under the best of circumstances, and while the latest version is actually pretty decent, when you add in a bunch of extra brushes and the such you get a really great torture test which can bring even the best of the best to their knees. Let’s see how our review unit faired in the Adobe crucible!

adobe.jpg

In real world scenarios there is no ifs, ands, or buts about it: the G.Skill Phoenix Blade is sure to impress home consumers. Even if it never fully slips its leash inside a home users system, the amount of performance potential it has on tap is so high as to make it a non-issue. These drives simple blow past SATA devices and bring new meaning to the term 'fast'.
 

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Home Use - Firefox / Real World Data Transfers

Home Use - Firefox Portable Offline Performance


<i>Firefox is notorious for being slow on loading tabs in offline mode once the number of pages to be opened grows larger than a dozen or so. We can think of fewer worse case scenarios than having 100 tabs set to reload in offline mode upon Firefox startup, but this is exactly what we have done here.

By having 100 pages open in Firefox portable, setting Firefox to reload the last session upon next session start and then setting it to offline mode, we are able to easily recreate a worse case scenario. Since we are using Firefox portable all files are easily positioned in one location, making it simple to repeat the test as necessary. In order to ensure repetition, before touching the Firefox portable files, we have backed them up into a .rar file and only extracted a copy of it to the test device.</i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/Phoenix_Blade_480GB/ff.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>


Home Use - Real World Data Transfers


<i>No matter how good a synthetic benchmark like IOMeter or PCMark is, it can not really tell you how your hard drive will perform in “real world” situations. All of us here at Hardware Canucks strive to give you the best, most complete picture of a review item’s true capabilities and to this end we will be running timed data transfers to give you a general idea of how its performance relates to real life use. To help replicate worse case scenarios we will transfer a 10.00GB contiguous file and a folder containing 400 subfolders with a total 12,000 files varying in length from 200mb to 100kb (10.00 GB total).

Testing will include transfer to and transferring from the devices, using MS RichCopy and logging the performance of the drive. Here is what we found. </i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/Phoenix_Blade_480GB/copy_lg.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/Phoenix_Blade_480GB/copy_sm.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

As with the Adobe and Windows test results, we really do not have anything bad to say about the Phoenix Blade. It certainly would not replace higher end enterprise drives, but unless you have a couple grand burning a hole in your pocket the Phoenix Blade will make every other storage device you own look slow and do so without even breaking a sweat.
 

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Location
Montreal
Home Use - Partial & Full Drive Performance

Home Use - Partial & Full Drive Performance


While it is important to know how a drive will perform under optimal conditions, more realistic scenarios are just as important. Knowing if a solid state drive will behave differently when partially or even nearly full than when it is empty is very important information to know. To quickly and accurately show this crucial information we have first filled the drive to 50% capacity and re-tested using both synthetic and real world tests. After the completion of this we then re-test at 75% and 90% of full capacity.

Synthetic Test Results

For our synthetic testing we have opted for our standard PCMark 7 test.

data_pcm7.jpg


Real World Results

For a real world application we have opted for our standard Windows 7 Start Up with Boot Time A/V Scan Performance test.

data_boot.jpg


At the end of the day this is still a SandForce SF2281 based device and performance drops significantly when it gets full but that's in line with most other drives we've seen. Of course, even we 'slow' the Phoenix Blade is still very fast as it does have four controllers to help with load balancing.
 

Latest posts

Top