The Plextor M8Pe (512GB) SSD Review
by Billy Tallis on December 14, 2016 9:00 AM ESTRandom Read Performance
The random read test requests 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test spans the entire drive, which is filled before the test starts. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.
The Plextor M8Pe's random read speed cannot match Samsung's 3D MLC-based 950 Pro or 960 Pro, but it is otherwise very good. The 30% lead over the OCZ RD400 is particularly notable given that it uses the same NAND as the M8Pe.
Power consumption is again higher than the rest of the M.2 PCIe SSDs, but given the good performance it does manage to be more efficient than the OCZ RD400.
 |
|||||||||
It appears that there is a little bit of thermal throttling happening on the M8PeGN in the final phase of the test at QD32, but otherwise it scales well as queue depths increase. Samsung's SSDs mostly saturate at QD16 while the M8Pe continues to scale up, albeit with diminishing returns.
Random Write Performance
The random write test writes 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test is limited to a 16GB portion of the drive, and the drive is empty save for the 16GB test file. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.
The random write performance of the Plextor M8Pe is better than the Samsung 950 Pro but falls behind more recent MLC-based PCIe SSDs, and Intel's SSD 750 is still the best.
The M8Pe's power consumption is only slightly worse than the OCZ RD400, but its efficiency is still substantially worse. The Samsung 950 Pro had even higher power consumption and delivered what is now unimpressive random write performance, so the M8Pe isn't the least efficient of the MLC-based SSDs.
 |
|||||||||
Performance increases relatively slowly for the M8PeY in the second half of the test, and actually decreases for the M8PeGN, indicating thermal throttling as power consumption hits 4 W.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
64 Comments
View All Comments
The_Assimilator - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
Conclusion page: the paragraph "The performance differences between the Plextor M8Pe and the Toshiba OCZ RD400..." is repeated. BRO DO YOU EVEN EDITOR?Billy Tallis - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
I think the problem may have been too much editor. My browser was getting really laggy and unresponsive while I was finishing up the article and rearranging things.Threnx - Friday, December 16, 2016 - link
Whoa there are still readers here? hah, I was cleaning out my bookmarks and saw anandtech. You realize all the talent left ages ago right? This site is dead. They're just riding on the name now...cbrownx88 - Friday, December 16, 2016 - link
@Threnx - where do you go now since Anandtech is a shell of its former glory?TemjinGold - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
So... it basically loses across the board to the EVO but they want to charge more for it?Billy Tallis - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
Keep in mind that the 960 EVO results here are for the 1TB model, and that kind of capacity advantage usually brings some performance advantage, too. But yeah, once the 960 EVO is actually shipping in volume, a lot of prices will probably have to come down. Unless the 960 EVO price goes up.close - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
Prices for Samsung SSDs are rising due to the NAND shortage. If Plextor manages to resist this trend they might do well. After all most current workloads don't need anywhere near that kind of level of performance so a slight performance disadvantage is tolerable as long as it's reflected in the price.BrokenCrayons - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
I wasn't aware of a NAND shortage. Do you happen to know the cause?Samus - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
It's simply a supply and demand issue. Other causes are manufacturing process adjustments and lower yield issues often associated with transitioning to new processes.However, the shortage isn't as dire as 'close' makes it seem. Drive prices aren't necessarily increasing because of the shortage, but they aren't falling as they should be with the density improvements associated with TLC and widespread adoption of 3D VNAND. Samsung drives are increasing in price because vendors have noticed sharper demand for them than other drive, and I'm sure you can guess why based on this article alone...I'm not a Samsung fan, but they are currently the most balanced SSD products on the consumer market.
BrokenCrayons - Wednesday, December 14, 2016 - link
Ah that makes sense. Thanks!