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

AceGoober

Live! Laug[H]! Overclock!
Joined
Jun 25, 2003
Messages
22,970
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
494
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
3,451
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
10,171
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
31,902
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.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
844
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
2,028
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.
 

Nebulous

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
1,608
I just ran across this thread and it explains why my Adata XPG SX8200 drive is not running it's rated speeds of 3200/1700. It's more like 2900/1600 :meh:

 

warmon6

n00b
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
47
I just ran across this thread and it explains why my Adata XPG SX8200 drive is not running it's rated speeds of 3200/1700. It's more like 2900/1600 :meh:

oof....

You would think that ADATA would change the product sku a little bit so everyone could tell the difference between these very much different SSD's....

It wasn't hard for AMD to change 1 letter in the SKU for everybody to know the difference between the original Zen R5 1600 (AE) cpu and Zen+ R5 1600 (AF) cpu...
 

SPARTAN VI

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
8,028
Been tempted by many SX8200 Pro discounts lately, but ultimately decided on a WD Black SN850 this weekend (local guy sold it for $130). This thing is way heckin fast.

Sequential Read Performance: 7000MB/s
Sequential Write Performance: 5300MB/s

Granted my drive is 60% full now, you get what you pay for at least:
1619643515361.png
 
Last edited:

Nebulous

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
1,608
Been tempted by many SX8200 Pro discounts lately, but ultimately decided on a WD Black SN850 this weekend. This thing is way heckin fast.

Sequential Read Performance: 7000MB/s
Sequential Write Performance: 5300MB/s

Granted my drive is 60% full now, you get what you pay for at least:
View attachment 351540
Dam that's sweet! I'm snagging one!
 

harmattan

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 11, 2008
Messages
4,740
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.
It's shady to shoehorn older/slower gen tech into a line up (nV used to do this as well with their mobile chips e.g. a 9800m GT is an 8800m GTX), but what ADATA is doing here is much worse. They replaced the core component on an existing model with an interior one and didn't update model designation or advertised specs -- pretty sure this breaks anti-consumer law many places.

I've been running two ADATA SX8200s for the past year with the original components and they've been solid. If I'd had gotten this version, I would have been pissed.
 
Last edited:

sinisterDei

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
1,440
I certainly think it is shitty. At this point it's gone much farther than the simple controller swap I originally noticed. I personally just consider the SX8200 Pro a compromised product at this point.
 

Nebulous

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 16, 2005
Messages
1,608
I certainly think it is shitty. At this point it's gone much farther than the simple controller swap I originally noticed. I personally just consider the SX8200 Pro a compromised product at this point.
Agreed. I got fedup with the lack of performance I paid for plus Adata's shenanigans. I also noticed there some sort of hesitation when accessing files/opening up progs which I never have before. Even with the PNY heater I had at first, then the Samsung PM981a I never had that problem before. I went and snagged a WD Black SN850 because of SPARTAN'S screenie and recommendation. Soons I get it Imma swap and send the Adata back. That's bullshit.
 

sinisterDei

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
1,440
At this point I've reviewed >25 SSDs, and my review for the SN850 is in progress. The SN850, the Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus, and the Samsung 980 PRO are all top tier and are in a dead heat with each other for fastest drives out there.

With that said though, for 99% of users in the world, almost *any* NVMe SSD is going to be fine. For read-heavy workloads (which is most common consumer workloads) even crappy budget QLC SSDs are generally acceptable.
 
Top