Sabrent USB 3.2 Enclosure + Sabrent Rocket Q 2TB NVMe SSD On Linux Performance

But where there is a difference in performance was when looking at the FIO results using the modern IO_uring interface and really pushing the drive performance to its limits. 4K random reads fell from around 166K to 76K.

Random writes were much slower using the USB 3.2 drive.

Sequential reads took a sizable hit while the sequential write performance was to a lower extent.

When it came to running Facebook's RocksDB persistent key-value store on the Sabrent Rocket Q in the two configurations, like with the LevelDB performance, the USB 3.2 interface led to only very modest performance penalties.

Comparing the Sabrent Rocket Q drive temperature connected to the NVMe M.2 slot without any extra heatsink and then running within the USB 3.2 enclosure was interesting. The Sabrent EC-TFNB enclosure is all-aluminum and helps in the heat dissipation to the extent that the peak temperature under I/O workloads was less than the drive attached to the motherboard. But for idle temperatures, the bare SSD within the system obviously had the advantage. The average temperature was similar in the two scenarios at 41~42 degrees Celsisus.

Those wishing to compare their own Linux drive performance to these results can install the Phoronix Test Suite and run phoronix-test-suite benchmark 2006207-NE-SSDTEST8330. About two months in, I am happy with the Rocket Q and tool-free aluminum enclosure for acting as a local Steam cache.