External USB-C SSD review – The best external SSD for the new MacBook Pro and Windows competitors

We review modern USB-C SSDs from Samsung (T3), WD (G|Drive), Angelbird (SSD2go PKT), SanDisk (Extreme 900) and a USB 3.1 USB-C case for M.2-SSDs from DeLock. Which drive is the fastest and how much power do they consume? We will answer these questions in the following article.

Klaus Hinum, ✓ Sven Kloevekorn (translated by Andreas Osthoff), Published 04/24/2017 🇩🇪 🇫🇷

The review group is pretty mixed and the only common denominator is the USB-C interface. The external solutions are particularly interesting as additional storage for MacBook Pro users with USB-C ports, where inexpensive storage is rare. The most popular test model is the Samsung SSD T3. It only supports USB 3.1 Gen.1, but is small and inexpensive in return. SanDisk's Extreme 900 combines two SSDs via RAID 0 and wants to be the fastest drive. The WD G|Drive Slim SSD also uses USB 3.1 Gen.2 and is available directly from the Apple Store. The Angelbird SSD2go PKT is an external SSD designed for professional users. It supports TRIM and the specs are specifically tuned for video editing (e.g. short latencies and steady performance), so it is not particularly interesting for private users. Finally, we also chose an external adapter from DeLock. It is an interesting alternative if you already have an old M.2 SATA SSD.

Design and Build Quality

The test models clearly differ in terms of design, and we prefer the small Angelbird SSD2go PKT. The two-color aluminum case is sophisticated and looks nice. It is also available in six different colors. The drop-down USB-C connector is a clever idea, but it also means you can only use the provided cable. Samsung's T3 is a bit thinner, but larger in return. It is therefore just as portable and uses a two-color case. The plastic part and the model designation at the bottom affect the high quality impression a bit. The next model in the size comparison is the adapter from DeLock. It is just as long as the WD G|Drive Slim, but much slimmer. It is completely made of metal, appears sophisticated, but the lettering already came off after the short review period. Both the G Drive and the SanDisk 900 series remind us of a 2.5-inch drive. Both feature metal cases with plastic (G|Drive) or rubber (Extreme 900) at the sides, respectively. The G|Drive is much slimmer, whereas the Extreme 900 leaves a more durable impression. SanDisk also advertises the temperature and shock resistance of the drive.

Benchmarks

PCMark 8 Storage – Angelbird and Samsung are leading

The benchmarks show a mixed picture. PCMark 8 Storage tests the SSD with traces of the Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Office, and some games. It is supposed to represent daily workloads for a system drive. The professional Angelbird SSD2go PKT is slightly behind the PCIe SSD in the MacBook Pro (Bootcamp). Samsung's SSD T3 is basically on par, while the DeLock case with a 128 GB Toshiba SSD (-5%) and the WD G|Drive (-6%) are a bit slower.

We also tested the SSDs with a Ryzen 1700X octa-core processor in combination with the Aorus AX370 Gaming 5 mainboard for the comparison. It uses the popular ASMedia chip as 3.1 solution. The values are slightly lower compared to the MacBook Pro 15 with Thunderbolt 3 (except for the Toshiba SSD, but it is filled by the operating system and therefore takes an outsider role).

PCMark 8 - Storage Score v2
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	5052 Points ∼100%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	4942 Points ∼98%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	4934 Points ∼98%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	4694 Points ∼93%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	4638 Points ∼92%

PCMark 8 Storage	Apple MacBook Pro 15 2016	Ryzen 1700X Aorus AX370-Gaming-5 ASMedia
Angelbird SSD2go 512 GB	4942	4932
Samsung Portable T3 1 TB	4934	4927
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU 128 GB	4694	4724
WD G-Drive slim SSD USB-C 500 GB	4638	4625
SanDisk Extreme 900 480 GB	4915	4897

Synthetic Tests

The synthetic benchmarks CrystalDiskMark and AS SSD leave a mixed impression. The SanDisk Extreme 900 is clearly ahead in the AS SSD benchmark (Total Score), but it reveals some weaknesses in the CrystalDiskMark 3.0 4K write test, where the drive falls behind. The sequential read and write results on the other hand are excellent.

Performance Rating | CrystalDiskMark 3.0

Performance Rating - Percent
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	86.6 pt ∼87%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	44.5 pt ∼45%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	42.3 pt ∼42%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	39.7 pt ∼40%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	39.2 pt ∼39%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	33.3 pt ∼33%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	27.1 pt ∼27%
ADATA SE720 128G	24.2 pt ∼24%

CrystalDiskMark 3.0
Write 4k QD32
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	443 MB/s ∼100%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	179 MB/s ∼40%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	167 MB/s ∼38%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	139 MB/s ∼31%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	30.3 MB/s ∼7%
ADATA SE720 128G	29.2 MB/s ∼7%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	27.4 MB/s ∼6%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	15.4 MB/s ∼3%
Read 4k QD32
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	630 MB/s ∼100%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	183 MB/s ∼29%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	181 MB/s ∼29%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	171 MB/s ∼27%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	129 MB/s ∼20%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	18.8 MB/s ∼3%
ADATA SE720 128G	14.2 MB/s ∼2%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	12.6 MB/s ∼2%
Write 4k
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	27.2 MB/s ∼100%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	22.5 MB/s ∼83%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	17 MB/s ∼63%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	16.6 MB/s ∼61%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	15.5 MB/s ∼57%
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	13 MB/s ∼48%
ADATA SE720 128G	11.8 MB/s ∼43%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	7.6 MB/s ∼28%
Read 4k
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	21.7 MB/s ∼100%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	15.1 MB/s ∼70%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	14.5 MB/s ∼67%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	14 MB/s ∼65%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	12.4 MB/s ∼57%
ADATA SE720 128G	10.5 MB/s ∼48%
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	9.8 MB/s ∼45%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	9.2 MB/s ∼42%
Write 512
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	945 MB/s ∼100%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	397 MB/s ∼42%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	396 MB/s ∼42%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	356 MB/s ∼38%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	201 MB/s ∼21%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	191 MB/s ∼20%
ADATA SE720 128G	163 MB/s ∼17%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	154 MB/s ∼16%
Read 512
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	842 MB/s ∼100%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	375 MB/s ∼45%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	368 MB/s ∼44%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	361 MB/s ∼43%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	358 MB/s ∼43%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	341 MB/s ∼40%
ADATA SE720 128G	313 MB/s ∼37%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	277 MB/s ∼33%
Write Seq
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	1343 MB/s ∼100%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	458 MB/s ∼34%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	437 MB/s ∼33%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	385 MB/s ∼29%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	238 MB/s ∼18%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	192 MB/s ∼14%
ADATA SE720 128G	163 MB/s ∼12%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	140 MB/s ∼10%
Read Seq
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	1298 MB/s ∼100%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	690 MB/s ∼53%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	477 MB/s ∼37%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	477 MB/s ∼37%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	422 MB/s ∼33%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	410 MB/s ∼32%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	355 MB/s ∼27%
ADATA SE720 128G	342 MB/s ∼26%

AS SSD - Score Total
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	463 Points ∼100%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	292 Points ∼63%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	292 Points ∼63%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	275 Points ∼59%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	174 Points ∼38%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	160 Points ∼35%
ADATA SE720 128G	138 Points ∼30%

AS SSD: Copy Test

We use the AS SSD copy test to check the main application area of consumer SSDs. We can see heavily fluctuating results influenced by the caches in particular. The first place is secured by the SanDisk Extreme 900 thanks to the two SSDs in a RAID configuration. The drives Samsung T3, G|Drive Slim, and Angelbird SSD2go PKT follow from some distance. The internal SSD in the MacBook Pro did not work in two out of three tests, however, it clearly beats even the Extreme 900 in the ISO copy test. This shows what fast internal NVMe-SSDs are capable of.

Performance Rating | AS SSD

Performance Rating - Percent
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L ^-2!	100 pt ∼100%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	73.5 pt ∼74%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	50 pt ∼50%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	46.9 pt ∼47%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	43.6 pt ∼44%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	36.1 pt ∼36%
ADATA SE720 128G	30.8 pt ∼31%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	27.9 pt ∼28%

AS SSD
Copy Game MB/s
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	257 MB/s ∼100%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	155 MB/s ∼60%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	151 MB/s ∼59%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	150 MB/s ∼58%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	107.4 MB/s ∼42%
ADATA SE720 128G	97 MB/s ∼38%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	86 MB/s ∼33%
Copy Program MB/s
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	166 MB/s ∼100%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	131 MB/s ∼79%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	112 MB/s ∼67%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	96.6 MB/s ∼58%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	96 MB/s ∼58%
ADATA SE720 128G	78 MB/s ∼47%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	72 MB/s ∼43%
Copy ISO MB/s
MacBook Pro 15 - Apple SSD SM0256L	1335 MB/s ∼100%
SanDisk Extreme 900 480GB	273 MB/s ∼20%
Angelbird SSD2go 512GB	188 MB/s ∼14%
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1TB MU-PT1T0B	172 MB/s ∼13%
WD G\|DRIVE slim SSD USB-C 500GB	169 MB/s ∼13%
ADATA DashDrive Elite SE720	111.7 MB/s ∼8%
ADATA SE720 128G	101 MB/s ∼8%
DeLock Enclosure M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU	92 MB/s ∼7%

Additional Benchmarks

We cannot see any compression-dependent data in the AS SSD compression benchmark. You can still see the consistency of SSD read and write operations. Samsung and Angelbird show the best results here.

The ATTO benchmark determines the theoretical maximum performance, which is often advertised by the manufacturers. It clearly shows the USB 3.0 limitation of the Samsung T3 as well as the RAID 0 performance of the SanDisk Extreme 900.

Performance OS X

The SanDisk Extreme 900 is also the fastest drive running on OS X (MacBook Pro 15). SSD2go and G|Drive are on par. The Samsung T3 – quite interestingly – falls slightly behind.

Performance: USB 3.0 (3.1 Gen 1)

We also tested the external SSDs at a USB 3.0 USB-C port via an Acer Aspire E 15 E5-553G-15FM. The fast SanDisk Extreme 900, for example, loses almost 30 percent of its performance in the AS SSD overall score. However, the result in the ISO copy test of the heavily fluctuating AS SSD copy benchmark is similar. It should therefore depend on the scenario how much performance you lose, but you cannot take advantage of the high sequential transfer rates of the SSD 900. However, the Samsung T3 also loses some performance.

Power Consumption

The Samsung T3 is clearly the most efficient drive while idling. At just 0.1 watts in Windows and 0.6 watts in OS X, it is clearly ahead of the competition. It is also the only drive where we can see a clear difference between Windows and OS X. The next drive in the ranking is the old ADATA SE720 at 0.9 watts. G|Drive and SSD2go are roughly on par at 1.4-1.5 watts depending on the platform (three tested). The old WD Passport HDD is in the same ballpark at 1.5-1.6 watts, which is also the case for the SanDisk Extreme 900 at 1.6 watts. At the bottom of the list is the DeLock adapter with the Toshiba SSD; this combination consumed between 2-2.1 watts in the test.

The old ADATA SE720 is the most efficient drive (1.9-2.3 watts) under load, followed by the Samsung T3 (2.3-2.7 watts). The next drive is the WD Passport at 3.1-3.7 watts. WD G|Drive and the DeLock combination follow at 3.3-4 watts. The fast Extreme 900 needs the most amount of power at 3.7-6.3 watts as well as the small SSD2go at 4.4-6.8 watts. However, the load measurements are more of a class indicator, because the values differ quite a lot and the USB-C measurement device from Satechi refreshes the values slowly and does not log them.

Prices

The least expensive way to get 500 GB USB-C storage right now is the Samsung portable SSD T3 500 GB (192 Euros/~$209 at Amazon). The combination of DeLock adapter (40 Euros/~$44 at Amazon) and an inexpensive M.2 SATA SSD like the Crucial MX 300 525 GB (153 Euros/~$167 at Amazon).

The next SSD is the G-Drive with 500 GB (290 Euros/~$316 at Amazon; price should drop, 245 Euros/~$267 at Apple) or the SanDisk Extreme 900 SSD 480 GB (280 Euros/~$305 at Amazon). The most expensive solution is the Angelbird SSD2go PKT 512 GB (320 Euros/~$349 at Amazon), which is designed for professional users.

A conventional external hard drive is still the least expensive method. Western Digital's 1 TB Elements Portable, for example, is available for around 54 Euros (~$59) at Amazon.

	Price Comparison – Street Prices
Angelbird SSD2go 512 GB	344-379 (price comparison)
Samsung Portable SSD T3 1 TB	194 - 254 (price comparison, 500 GB), 348 - 467 (price comparison, 1TB)
DeLock 42573 M.2 USB 3.1 Gen.2 Toshiba THNSNJ128G8NU 128 GB	38 - 52 (price comparison, adapter) + 512 GB SSD (155 - 200 Euros)
WD G-Drive slim SSD USB-C 500 GB	249.95 (Apple) / 290 Euros (Amazon)
SanDisk Extreme 900 480 GB	268-339 Euros (price comparison)

Verdict

The Samsung T3 SSD wins this comparison, mainly due to the lowest street price. It even beats the combination of DeLock adapter and an inexpensive SSD on Amazon. It convinces with low power consumption, small case, and good performance results. You can hardly notice the limitation to USB 3.1 Gen.1 in the tests. The larger SanDisk Extreme 900 is the fastest drive (except for PCMark 8 Storage). However, the power consumption is comparatively high. The small and well-designed Angelbird SSD2go scores with excellent AS SSD and PCMark 8 Storage performance as well as TRIM support for both Windows and OS X. The high price and the comparatively high power consumption under load should be considered though. The G|Drive Slim SSD is not easy to get, so the price is still very high. The performance in the copy and synthetic tests is very good, but falls behind in PCMark 8. It would be an interesting alternative when the price drops below the Samsung T3.

However, you can save a lot of money by purchasing an external hard drive if you just want to back up your files periodically. The low performance is not the only drawback though; you also have to live with the audible operating noise as well as the susceptibility against shocks.

Dockcase external smart M.2 SSD enclosure hands-on: A sleek SSD enclosure with a big brain 03/16/2022

External SSD: Samsung's T5 Review 08/15/2017

Apple MacBook Pro 13 (Mid 2017, i5, without Touch Bar) Review 07/15/2017

Loading comments

Comment on this article

Editor of the original article: Sebastian Jentsch - Managing Editor Consumer Laptops - 1813 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2010

Computers always had an important place in my life, starting with an Intel 80286 microprocessor in the early 1990s. I became interested in the productive side of technology, especially in campus radio, while studying at TU Chemnitz and during a trainee program in Belfast. Hardware interests led me to manage Notebookjournal.de, which is now a division of Notebooksbilliger, for a few years. I became self-employed in 2010 and took the next logical step in my career by starting to write for Notebookcheck.

contact me via: Xing

Translator: Andreas Osthoff - Managing Editor Business Laptops - 1492 articles published on Notebookcheck since 2013

I grew up with modern consumer electronics and my first computer was a Commodore C64, which encouraged my interest in building my own systems. I started working as a review editor for Notebookcheck during my dual studies at Siemens. Currently, I am mainly responsible for dealing with business laptops and mobile workstations. It’s a great experience to be able to review the latest devices and technologies and then compare them with each other.

contact me via: LinkedIn

Please share our article, every link counts!

.170

> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Reviews > External USB-C SSD review – The best external SSD for the new MacBook Pro and Windows competitors

Klaus Hinum, 2017-04-24 (Update: 2017-04-25)