The Plextor M6V (256GB) SSD Review
by Billy Tallis on October 12, 2015 8:00 AM ESTMixed Random Read/Write Performance
Most real-world use consists of a mix of reads and writes, and interleaving the two often poses a particular challenge to drive controllers. This mixed random access test is conducted across a 16GB span of the drive, but on a full drive and with a queue depth of 3.
Once again the M6V is in the top performance tier, but is the slowest of that bunch. The SATA interface isn't even close to being a limitation here.
The slight degree to which the M6V lags behind the performance of the BX100 is made up for by the power savings.
 |
|||||||||
| Default | |||||||||
Performance is pretty flat across this test, and the power consumption grows slowly as more writes are thrown in to the mix. The OCZ Vector 180 pulls ahead on the strength of its performance in the 100% write test, while the Crucial BX100 and Samsung 850 EVO are helped by stronger performance in the read-heavy parts of the test.
Mixed Sequential Read/Write Performance
The queue depth of 3 is sufficient for many drives to perform very well at either end of this test, while testing 100% reads or 100% writes. In between, performance typically suffers greatly, and that's where the winners and losers of this test are determined. Anything that's duplicating duplicating or transforming a large amount of data on the drive will produce I/O patterns similar to this test. Creating a System Restore snapshot, backing up files to a different directory on the same drive, and file compression can all produce interleaved reads and writes of large blocks of data, though not necessarily fast enough to be limited by the drive's performance.
The Crucial BX100 performed very well on this test, but the M6V is only average here.
The M6V is once again solidly in the lead for power consumption, and is well ahead of even the BX100.
 |
|||||||||
| Default | |||||||||
The M6V drops just below 150MB/s during the worst parts of this test, then recovers well as the workload shifts toward pure writes. Its relatively low performance on the 100% read and 100% write portions of the test are keeping the average down.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
51 Comments
View All Comments
eek2121 - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
PCIE SSDs? Can you find me one with 500 gb storage for $169? The market isn't there yet. PCIE SSDs are in the minority and the price premium is still too high. The performance difference is minimal, especially for casual users.Denithor - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
How's $173? Amazon has the Crucial MX200 500GB drive at this price point. And if you had asked yesterday, it was on sale for $140.http://www.amazon.com/Crucial-MX200-500GB-Internal...
coolhardware - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
I believe he was referring to any type of PCIe SSDs such as http://amzn.to/1Naj0E2 (Intel 400GB) or a M.2 drive, not a SATA drive as per your link (Crucial 500GB).Luke212 - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
You mean in your circumstances. Most laptops dont support M.2 PCIe. So we are stuck buying M.2 Sata or 2.5" Sata.SmokingCrop - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
HDD is too slow for OS/programs and PCIe is too expensive.SATA SSD's is the sweet spot in between.
usernametaken76 - Thursday, October 15, 2015 - link
Some people have older systems and would like to freshen them without replacing the thing, you know? Not everyone can utilize PCIe storage (laptops for instance) and not everyone wants the drawbacks of spinning HDD storage. That's the nice thing about choice, dj_aris doesn't get to make the choice for everyone.Denithor - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
And today only (10/12) the Crucial BX100 250GB drive is on sale at Amazon for $64. So this could make the whole question of best value for price moot, if you move quickly.:)
coolhardware - Tuesday, October 13, 2015 - link
Ordered one myself! Currently Amazon's #1 selling SSD. http://amzn.to/1VPK7vk The 500GB drives are a nice price too.Just imagine, in a few years we should be able to get 2TB and 4TB+ for a fairly low price. That will be AWESOME.
nmm - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
I guess I can understand the compulsion to build a better SATA SSD if you're not already the market leader in SATA SSD's. It's much cheaper than plunging into uncharted territory. I do find it a little puzzling that there isn't more movement in the M.2/U.2 market. Seems like it would get tiresome constantly bumping up against the limits of the protocol for years on end.Gigaplex - Monday, October 12, 2015 - link
If these lower end SSD manufacturers targeted a faster protocol using tech that can't fully utilise SATA3, it's likely to be an uncompetitive product.