Phison U18: A Strong Contender

Sabrent has carved out a strong reputation among tech enthusiasts with its robust lineup of internal and external SSDs. This popularity largely stems from their commitment to using cutting-edge technology, often bringing products with the latest controllers to market rapidly. Their partnership with Phison plays a key role in this, as Phison’s controllers power many of Sabrent’s offerings. For instance, their Rocket nano V2, a 2 GBps-class portable SSD, is built on the Phison U18 native controller and has been enjoyed by users for over a year.

In this review, we’ll dive deep into the Rocket nano V2 External SSD, assessing aspects such as performance consistency, power consumption, and thermal management.

Introduction and First Impressions

In the last decade, breakthroughs in flash technology, including the rise of 3D NAND and improvements in TLC reliability, have gone hand-in-hand with faster interfaces for external devices. These advancements have enabled bus-powered storage devices to increase both in capacity and speed. The Type-C standard, now widely adopted, alongside protocols like USB 3.2 Gen 2×2 / USB4 and Thunderbolt, has paved the way for compact storage devices to hit impressive 2 GBps+ speeds.

High-speed storage devices do come with challenges, particularly concerning heat management. Historically, different bridge solutions, involving protocol conversion chips, dissipated more energy due to their extra components. Initially, these solutions relied on SATA bridges, transitioning to NVMe bridges over time. However, the arrival of native UFD controllers from Phison and Silicon Motion, capable of reaching 10 Gbps and 20 Gbps, presents a new gateway for high-performance storage. Back in August 2021, the Crucial X6, which featured Phison’s U17, broke through SATA speed limitations, reaching 800 MBps without an NVMe bridge. Concurrently, Silicon Motion’s SM2320 powered the Kingston XS2000, achieving 2 GBps speeds in a similar direct manner.

Devices built around the SM2320, like those from Silicon Motion, have earned consumer interest due to their ability to reach the upper speed limits of both 10 Gbps and 20 Gbps interfaces. Even though Phison’s U17 and U18 debuted with slightly lower peak performance figures, their recognition grew with notable implementations, such as in the OWC Envoy Pro Mini. The integration of faster flash memory has since empowered SSDs using Phison’s controllers to achieve even higher speeds. This trend has led to broader adoption, seen in products like the PNY EliteX-PRO, Sabrent Rocket Nano V2, and Corsair EX100U, all of which utilize the Phison U18 controller. While the EliteX-PRO didn’t stand out significantly performance-wise, we approached Sabrent to see if the Rocket nano V2 could measure up to the well-regarded OWC Envoy Pro Mini.

The EliteX-PRO, Corsair EX100U, and Rocket nano V2 share Phison’s U18 controller with 128L 3D TLC NAND from SK Hynix at their core. Nevertheless, they differ considerably in terms of firmware configurations, thermal solutions, and overall design.

The Rocket nano V2’s compact size of approximately 72mm x 32mm x 14mm and sturdy aluminum build give it a solid feel, complemented by its light 50g weight. It comes with a silicone cover offering some protection against dents and scratches on the aluminum casing, adding a bit of ruggedness.

The drive supports S.M.A.R.T pass-through, as indicated by the CrystalDiskInfo screenshots. While TRIM isn’t listed among the features, our tests demonstrated its ability to process TRIM commands on an NTFS volume efficiently, and all S.M.A.R.T features, such as temperature readings, functioned smoothly.

Below is a comparison table summarizing the specifications of the various portable SSDs discussed in this review.

Testbed Setup and Evaluation Methodology

We evaluated these direct-attached storage devices using a Quartz Canyon NUC testbed, essentially the Xeon/ECC version of Intel’s Ghost Canyon NUC. This setup included 2x16GB DDR4-2667 ECC SODIMMs and a PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe SSD from ADATA.

The Quartz Canyon NUC stands out with two PCIe slots to accommodate add-in cards, making it ideal for DAS benchmarking since GPU needs are minimal here. A SanDisk Extreme PRO NVMe SSD was installed to prevent DMI bottlenecks, allowing for two operational add-in cards. Additionally, we equipped the system with Silverstone’s SST-ECU06 to introduce a USB 3.2 Gen 2×2 port for testing all non-Thunderbolt devices.

Below is a breakdown of the testbed’s configuration showing more specifics.

The hardware, however, is only part of the evaluation. Direct-attached storage workloads have grown to cater to high-resolution content demands, with 4K video being widely prevalent and 8K beginning to surface. This evolution even influences game size, particularly in portable consoles. With these factors in mind, our SSD and UFD evaluation involves several workloads detailed in later sections:

1. Synthetic workloads via CrystalDiskMark and ATTO
2. Real-world traces using PCMark 10’s storage benchmark
3. Custom ‘robocopy’ tasks reflecting typical use
4. Sequential write stress testing

In the following sections, we explore how the Sabrent Rocket nano V2 performs in these benchmarks. Observations on power consumption and thermal solutions round out our analysis before concluding remarks.

Synthetic Benchmarks – ATTO and CrystalDiskMark

These benchmarks offer a quick glimpse into a direct-attached storage device’s capabilities, revealing expected performance within various workloads. While beneficial for gauging potential transfer rates, they don’t capture long-term conditioning or thermal throttling. Despite these limitations, ATTO and CrystalDiskMark help illustrate the performance of devices like the Rocket nano V2.

Sabrent advertises transfer speeds up to 1500 MBps, confirmed by the following ATTO results. ATTO’s focus remains narrow in terms of workload configurations, suggesting performance peaks around a 512 KB block size with a queue depth of four.

CrystalDiskMark further tests read and write speeds using diverse access traces. Its sequential and random 4K tests utilize different configurations, revealing whether advanced features like NCQ/UASP are supported. Distinct discrepancies between ‘4K Q32T16’ and ‘4K Q1T1’ results can indicate absence or presence of support for such features.

In these synthetic trials, the Sabrent Rocket nano V2 demonstrates performance comparable to the PNY EliteX-PRO, which isn’t too surprising given the platform similarities. For modest data sizes, SM2320-based models edge out their U18 counterparts.

AnandTech DAS Suite – Performance Consistency Testing

Our overall testing evaluates devices for typical usage, guided by the AnandTech DAS Suite which includes several real-world scenarios.

For routine tasks, most users won’t notice substantial differences between PNY EliteX-PRO and Rocket nano V2—the experience remains consistent for casual data transfers. However, we also delve into performance consistency where power users may require additional insight.

Performance Consistency

Performance continuity can be swayed by SLC caching and thermal management or firmware-imposed speed caps to prevent overheating. This is vital for users dealing with heavy data tasks, avoiding slowdowns to USB 2.0 speeds.

During our assessments, the Rocket nano V2 shone thanks to its robust thermal design, managing a maximum temperature of 55C. This efficient cooling ensured there was no thermal throttling, particularly during extensive disk-to-disk transfers, completing tasks noticeably faster compared to the PNY EliteX-PRO.

PCMark 10 Storage Bench – Practical Access Traces

Beyond synthetic trials, PCMark 10 measures storage performance using real-world access traces, simulating typical storage-limited tasks like booting or game launches.

Component and Overall Scores

Examining individual performance scores, the Rocket nano V2 regularly places in the lower half, but without an extreme deficit.

When seasoned against other devices under the full gamut, the Rocket nano V2 holds its ground, tying closely with the PNY EliteX-PRO while bridge-based solutions take the lead.

Performance Consistency under Stress

At times, flash storage devices falter under continual random writes. Fortunately, this is unusual for direct-attached storage where sequential tasks dominate. However, firmware limitations for overheating prevention could reduce write speeds during intense workloads.

In stress tests approaching 90% drive capacity, the Rocket nano V2 excelled, maintaining around 800 MBps while holding an internal temperature of just 61C. Conversely, the PNY EliteX-PRO struggled with elevated temperatures and reduced speeds, underscoring the Rocket nano V2’s favorable performance.

Power Consumption

Bus-powered devices must navigate power constraints dependent on the host port. Depending on supply, requirements range from Thunderbolt’s 15W to as low as 2.5W for some USB ports. Detailed examination of each device’s power profile reveals some interesting insights.

The Rocket nano V2 shows a higher idle power at 0.76W than its peers and takes longer to enter sleep mode. This could slightly affect battery-powered devices but is negligible for desktop use.

Final Words

Priced at $182, the Sabrent Rocket nano V2 is competitive with other 2 TB SSDs using native controllers. While it might not leap ahead with short workload bursts, it excels in sustained operations, maintaining performance without overheating. Its build makes it a solid pick for tasks requiring reliability over extended durations. Deciding between the Rocket nano V2 and others like the Crucial X10 Pro or Lexar ARMOR 700 may come down to specific preferences in size and design.