Patriot’s been on fire lately, releasing some appealing SSDs. The company’s Viper VP4100 is one of the fastest money can buy, and the Viper VPR100 offers solid PCIe Gen 3 performance with some tasteful RGB illumination. But, while these SSDs are great picks for enthusiasts, they’re too expensive for those searching for NVMe flash storage on a tight budget. Enter Patriot’s P300.
Significantly outpacing SATA competitors, the P300 is the company’s latest M.2 NVMe SSD, offering up multi-GB performance figures thanks to a Phison E13T DRAMless NVMe controller and Kioxia’s latest 96L TLC flash. But while the price is appealing (starting at just $35 for the 128GB model), the P300 falls behind competition in terms of overall value. In short, you won’t find it on our list of best SSDs, though that doesn’t mean it’s not worth considering, especially if you find it on sale.
Patriot is offering the P300 in 256GB, 512GB, 1TB, and 2TB capacities, although the smallest 128GB capacity is not yet available. Patriot prices the P300 at around $0.12-$0.20 cents per GB, depending on the capacity, with our 1TB sample being one of the best values at $120 shipped.
The company rates these SSDs to hit sequential performance figures of 2.1/1.7GB/s read/write and upwards of 290,000/260,000 IOPS read/write in random performance. The smallest capacities take a slight performance hit, however. As an entry-level NVMe SSD, the endurance rating on the P300 is lower than mainstream competitors, but is still more than enough for most users. Patriot backs the P300 by a three-year warranty, too.
A Closer Look
Patriot’s P300 comes in an M.2 2280 form factor. Our 1TB sample is single-sided, meaning all components are on just on side of the PCB to ensure compatibility with mobile devices that have thin size constraints. If you’re installing the drive in a desktop and care about aesthetics though, you may want to look elsewhere. The P300 sports a distracting white sticker over an ugly blue PCB on our U.S. version. Those not in the U.S. will receive one with a black PCB and a Silicon Motion SM2263XT NVMe controller.
Powering our U.S. version is Phison’s PS5013-E13T PCIe 3.0 x4 NVMe 1.3-compliant 4-channel SSD controller. This 28nm controller utilizes a single-core Cortex R5 CPU that operates at 667MHz, plus a CoXProcessor to aid with NAND management tasks.
The P300 was built with a DRAMless architecture to reduce manufacturing costs. Without the DRAM on the device, the SSD’s potential performance compared to DRAM-based SSDs is hindered. Phison’s E13T mitigates this a bit with Host Memory Buffer (HMB) support, which lets the controller utilize the host system’s memory as a DRAM cache for accelerating the flash translation layer (FTL) interaction, offering improved performance than without this feature.
The controller interfaces with Kioxia’s (Formerly Toshiba Memory) BiCS4 96L TLC NAND flash. At 1TB, our sample features four NAND packages that each utilize four 512Gb dies. They operate at 1.2V and interface with the controller at a speed of 800MT/s.
If the controller gets too hot, there is thermal throttle support to prevent data damage. As well, it boasts end-to-end data protection and Phison’s fourth-gen LDPC and RAID ECC to ensure data integrity. Along with S.M.A.R.T. data monitoring and TRIM, the controller also supports secure erase capability to wipe it clean and has support for APST, ASPM, and L1.2 power saving modes.
Comparison Products
Up for comparison, we threw in a handful of entry-level NVMe competitors, including the WD Blue SN550 1TB, Intel SSD 665p 1TB, and Crucial P1 1TB. We added in Team Group’s MP33 1TB, which is close to what the non-US version of the P300 would perform like with its SM2263XT controller and 96L NAND flash. Additionally, we threw in Adata’s XPG SX8200 Pro and Corsair’s Force MP600, two top-ranking NVMe SSDs as well as Crucial’s MX500 and WD’s Black HDD, SATA based competitors, for good measure.
Game Scene Loading – Final Fantasy XIV
The Final Fantasy XIV StormBlood and Stormbringer are two free real-world game benchmarks that easily and accurately compare game load times without the inaccuracy of using a stopwatch.
Patriot’s P300 lags the competition when it comes to serving up game data. With total load times that exceed the SATA-based Crucial MX500, it falls into eighth place. That doesn’t exactly make the drive slow though. It still offers significantly faster performance than an HDD.
Transfer Rates – DiskBench
We use the DiskBench storage benchmarking tool to test file transfer performance with our own custom blocks of data. Our 50GB data set includes 31,227 files of various types, like pictures, PDFs, and videos. Our 100GB includes 22,579 files with 50GB of them being large movies. We copy the data sets to new folders and then follow-up with a reading test of a newly written 6.5GB zip file, 8GB test file, and a 15GB movie file.
When reading large files from Patriot’s P300, the performance was snappy and much faster than the Crucial MX500, closer to that of the WD Blue SN500. But, while large file reads were quick, large folder copy tests show sluggish performance in comparison to the rest of the NVMe-based competitors. Still, it was about twice as fast as the MX500 at copying our large test folders and 4 times faster than the WD Black HDD.
Trace Testing – PCMark 10 Storage Tests
PCMark 10 is a trace-based benchmark that uses a wide-ranging set of real-world traces from popular applications and common tasks to measure the performance of storage devices. The quick benchmark is more relatable to those who use their PCs lightly, while the full benchmark relates more to power users. If you are using the device as a secondary drive, the data test will be of most relevance.
Like Team Group’s DRAMless MP33, the P300 ranks slower than any of the DRAM-based SSDs. Both perform relatively similar overall, but SMI’s SM2263XT is a bit more responsive here. Again, the P300 maintains a lead over the MX500, meaning that when dealing with application data, the P300 will offer a snappier user experience over SATA competitors.
Trace Testing – SPECworkstation 3
Like PCMark 10, SPECworkstation 3 is a trace-based benchmark, but it is designed to push the system harder by measuring workstation performance in professional applications.
In contrast to its performance in PCMark 10, Patriot’s P300 shows a bit stronger performance than the Team Group MP33 here. Completing the test about 14 minutes quicker, it showed stronger read and write performance when pressed with heavier loads. Both the P1 and 665p, QLC-based competitors, deliver faster performances, however, with the additional DRAM buffers onboard their PCBs.
Synthetics – ATTO
ATTO is a simple and free application that SSD vendors commonly use to assign sequential performance specifications to their products. It also gives us insight into how the device handles different file sizes.
In ATTO, we tested Patriot’s P300 at a QD of 1, representing most day-to-day file access at various block sizes. The device’s read performance at small file sizes leaves it clearly lagging behind the competition. Patriot’s P300 display’s responsive sequential write performance, however. These differences may explain why PCMark 10 favored the Team Group MP33 while SPEC workstation 3 favored the Patriot P300.
Synthetic Testing – iometer
iometer is an advanced and highly configurable storage benchmarking tool that vendors often use to measure the performance of their devices.
We measured Patriot’s P300 to hit peak throughput speeds about 2.6/1.8 GBps read/write. But it takes multiple transfers to attain that read speed. Random performance is weak compared to competitors as well. When randomly reading from it at a QD1, the P300 lags behind the MX500. Compared to a plain old HDD, however, the P300 offers a significantly faster performance any way you look at it.
Sustained Write Performance, Cache Recovery, and Temperature
Official write specifications are only part of the performance picture. Most SSD makers implement a write cache, which is a fast area of (usually) pseudo-SLC programmed flash that absorbs incoming data. Sustained write speeds can suffer tremendously once the workload spills outside of the cache and into the “native” TLC or QLC flash. We use iometer to hammer the SSD with sequential writes for 15 minutes to measure both the size of the write cache and performance after the cache is saturated. We also monitor cache recovery via multiple idle rounds.
When possible, we also log the temperature of the drive via the S.M.A.R.T. data to see when (or if) thermal throttling kicks in and how it impacts performance. Bear in mind that results will vary based on the workload and ambient air temperature.
Peaking at about 1.6 GBps, the P300 wrote a little over 24GB of data before the write speed degraded to an average speed of 430 MBps from then on out. Thanks to its relatively small SLC write cache, the P300 is capable of much more consistent write performance over the Team Group MP33 featuring the SMI SM2263XT controller. And, given just 30 seconds of idle time after writing is complete, the 24GB write cache is recovered and ready for more.
When moving files around without airflow in a 25C environment, the controller reported temps in the mid-60s, peaking at 68C after moving 400GB of data to the drive. Thus, Patriot’s P300 usually won’t need any sort of heatsink or airflow to aid in cooling it in most use cases.
Power Consumption
We use the Quarch HD Programmable Power Module to gain a deeper understanding of power characteristics. Idle power consumption is a very important aspect to consider, especially if you’re looking for a new drive for your laptop. Some SSDs can consume watts of power at idle while better-suited ones sip just milliwatts. Average workload power consumption and max consumption are two other aspects of power consumption, but performance-per-watt is more important. A drive might consume more power during any given workload, but accomplishing a task faster allows the drive to drop into an idle state faster, which ultimately saves power.
Overall, Patriot’s P300 is fairly efficient, nearly matching the SX8200 in performance per watt. It consumes the least amount of power out of all other SSDs in our test pool, sipping just over 2.2W and peaking at 3.3W under concurrent small and large block sequential reading/writing.
The Patriot drive also supports APST, ASPM, and L1.2 power saving modes. On our desktop testbench, the SSD couldn’t hit its lowest idle state, but fell to a respectable 40mW when ASPM was enabled. When disabled or when active, P300 consumes about 10x the amount, lower than the rest of the pool once again.
Due at least in part to the global shutdown caused by the coronavirus, SSD prices have gone up a bit since a few months ago. This has made some of the cooler and faster-performing NVMe SSDs jump back up in cost per GB, leading to some would-be purchasers who still want a bump up in speed compared to SATA to consider buying cheaper alternatives. And while speed-craving enthusiasts might not bite, entry-level NVMe SSDs are typically a great choice when the price is similar to their SATA competitors.
In day to day use, while the performance difference is usually quite small, NVMe SSDs usually offer an ever-so-slightly more-responsive system over their SATA counterparts. This makes them the best choice for installing your operating system. Similarly, they may very well complement to your main M.2 drive if you are just looking for a larger capacity storage device to go along with a faster drive. Offering much-improved performance over a SATA SSD in many situations, Patriot’s P300 looks to be a good fit for such situations. Just know that the drive has limitations, primarily due to its lack of DRAM.
Overall, Patriot’s P300 is versatile and efficient in day-to-day use. Coming in a thin single-sided form factor, it’s ready for almost any mobile device and will sip power compared to most SSDs, let alone a hard drive. This also leads to less heat output . And, without any cables, it won’t add clutter to your desktop build like a 2.5-inch SATA SSD will.
In our testing, Patriot’s P300 displays strong large block sequential read performance, but lags in small file reading and requires higher queue depths (multiple transfers at once) to hit the same IOPS as competitors. This leaves it lagging behind the Team Group MP33 and DRAM-based NVMe competitors in light, low QD consumer use cases like we saw in PCMark 10. However, with a more consistent write cache design, when taxed with writes, it prevails ahead of the SMI solution.
It’s priced fairly low, but lacks the value adds other brands give you, such as a software suite to manage and monitor the device. It isn’t as fast as WD’s Blue SN550 or Intel’s and Crucial’s QLC drives in many real-world applications either. Some alternatives come with longer 5-year warranties, and WDs Blue SN550 features a higher endurance rating, too.
If you are looking for a new game drive on a tight budget, while Patriot’s P300 is significantly better than an HDD, it isn’t our first recommendation. The average gamer is probably better off with a SATA SSD at this price. And if you want to go NVMe, it’s worth paying $20 or so extra on a model with DRAM for improved performance and responsiveness.
