Adata Switches NAND on XPG SX8200 Pro SSD Again, Affecting Performance

AceGoober

Live! Laug[H]! Overclock!
Joined
Jun 25, 2003
Messages
22,791
Adata up to their old tricks again by swapping in SKHynix NAND, reducing performance by approximately 23%. I dislike when companies do this yet realize they cannot always get the same components. In this particular case there was no warning ahead of time nor labels to differentiate changes between drives.

https://www.tomshardware.com/amp/news/adata-switches-nand-on-sx8200-pro-ssd-performance-impacted

Tom's Hardware Article said:
A report has emerged that Adata has altered its XPG SX8200 Pro again by swapping in SK Hynix flash, making this the fourth known SSD configuration. According to the report, the latest revision is purportedly 23.6% percent slower in sequential read speed than the previous revision, and it also takes a 14.3% haircut in sequential write performance. As before, Adata ships this drive with the same model number as the original SSD.
 

coynatha

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
424
That explains why it dropped in price so drastically there for a while, and then went back up. I think I paid $289 for my 2TB near the end of 2019. I saw it just over $200 for a while during 2020, and I think it's back up to like $240 or so. Wonder which version I have!? I'll be f'n pissed if I had ordered another one and it was that much slower, reduced price or not! There has to be some sort of consumer protection laws against this kind of thing?!
 

Kardonxt

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
3,375
I don't install adata drives in anything other than a budget office PCs, and even then only in a pinch.
 

J Macker

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jan 25, 2001
Messages
10,151
I saw news of one of the memory swaps recently and decided to purchase alternate brands because of it.
For 1TB nvme, the SK Hynix Gold P31 is a much better buy.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
31,678
I don't care which company does it.

Any company that tries to sell a product with different specifications under an existing product name/number should be ashamed of themselves.

There is no reason to do this other than trying to be deceptive and rip off ones customers.

AMD does it too, selling older generation Zen cores on it's APU's, even when they match the same generation product number as their non-APU counter parts.

Ryzen 7 3600x = Zen 2
Ryzen 5 3400g GPU = Zen 1+

This, despite the fact that the 3 in 3xxx denotes generation. They should be the same architecture, but they aren't.

Stuff like this needs to stop from all players in all markets.
 

Lakados

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 3, 2014
Messages
3,613
Stuff like this is why my budget go to is Kingston, they aren't without their faults but at least they are consistent with them.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
838
I don't care which company does it.

Any company that tries to sell a product with different specifications under an existing product name/number should be ashamed of themselves.

There is no reason to do this other than trying to be deceptive and rip off ones customers.

AMD does it too, selling older generation Zen cores on it's APU's, even when they match the same generation product number as their non-APU counter parts.

Ryzen 7 3600x = Zen 2
Ryzen 5 3400g GPU = Zen 1+

This, despite the fact that the 3 in 3xxx denotes generation. They should be the same architecture, but they aren't.

Stuff like this needs to stop from all players in all markets.


I see your point but I would argue that this is worse.
It would be like AMD selling their R7 3600x initially as Zen2 arch at launch, then after reviews/later down the line, nerf it to the Zen1+ arch making it effectively a 2600x while keeping the same Product Number (3600x) and same Boost Clock Specs...
It was known from the beginning that the 3400g was going to be Zen1+ from the get go and it never changed to this day. Yes, I agree that the product number is stupid, but hey there's no doubt what you're getting if you've researched it beforehand.

What ADATA and others are doing is similar but much much worse, borderline illegal.
 

mda

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 23, 2011
Messages
1,959
I don't care which company does it.

Any company that tries to sell a product with different specifications under an existing product name/number should be ashamed of themselves.

There is no reason to do this other than trying to be deceptive and rip off ones customers.

AMD does it too, selling older generation Zen cores on it's APU's, even when they match the same generation product number as their non-APU counter parts.

Ryzen 7 3600x = Zen 2
Ryzen 5 3400g GPU = Zen 1+

This, despite the fact that the 3 in 3xxx denotes generation. They should be the same architecture, but they aren't.

Stuff like this needs to stop from all players in all markets.

I can understand your point but I'm not totally in on this one.

To me (my opinion only): companies sell you the advertised performance and not really the technology.

So long as the performance for that SKU is the same on day 1 of the launch until the second the last copy of the SKU has rolled off the line, they have delivered on a 'promise' of consistency.

This adata is definitely not that.
 
Top