My performance benchmarks were fantastic, but I started seeing some corruption issues. I wrote a C# program to fill the entire disk up with pseudorandom bytes (starting with a known seed), then read it back and compare.
Nearly all of them gave back different bytes at some point in the test. These were silent errors, and didn't trigger any read warnings or CRC/ECC failures reported by the drive's controller.
I suspect they achieved the performance by simply ignoring any errors and steamrolling right along.