60/64 GB SSD Shootout: Crucial, Samsung, And SandForce

[acku]

[citation][nom]exban224[/nom]Are the tests on the m4 with the new firmware, if not then is you update the firmware the m4 is overall better. 120gb sandforce speeds anyone in a 64gb package.[/citation]

Check out the test page. We list firmware.

 

[acku]

[citation][nom]Dacatak[/nom]What kind of flash does Super Talent use in their 64GB SATA III drives? They are hardly any slower than the higher capacity drives, which shows lower capacity doesn't always have to mean lower speed.[/citation]
Just because a manufacturer cites a high spec doesn't actually mean you get that performance. Lower capacity SSDs will get lower performance. Super Talent is no exception. Their drives use the same NAND as everyone else.

 

[acku]

[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]Hey great in-depth article Andrew, really liked it!BTW: Intel lists different IOPS for its drives. They say, for example, that:Random Write (8GB Span)=21000 IOPSRandom Write (100% Span)=600 IOPSReads seem to be unaffected. What's this about?p.s. The graphs in any article (in general) aren't readable using the iOS app have to open it in safari then use the reader...and some comments aren't displayed entirely...i'm using an ipod touch, maybe it works fine on a tablet? Just thought i'd let someone know, didn't who develops the app...[/citation]

Which drive is this for?

 

[acku]

[citation][nom]reynod[/nom]Thanks Andrew.I'm getting a Samsung ... this looks to good to miss as a new boot drive, and I'll keep my Momentus XT for storage.I'm thinking of 2 of the Seagates in RAID0.Does that seem good value for the money ?cheers.[/citation]

Depends. If you have the money to buy two 64 GB Sammys. I would just go and buy a 128 GB instead because you'll get TRIM support.

 

[compton]

[citation][nom]acku[/nom]Interesting. Didn't know that Mushkin did a 60 GB. Seems like the only manufacturer who chose to do a 60 GB Toggle. In any case, something is wrong with your drive. I chat regularly with Ao1@XS and there's no throttling on Samsung drives. You should do an RMA.[/citation]


Well, I really like the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 60... but there is a British company (FutureShop or something like that which makes one as well). They really are pretty interesting, but again, it's certainly worth $50 to get the 120GB version. As with the 64GB 830, I needed the highest write speed vs. lowest capacity, and both drives fit the bill very well.

There is something wrong with my 830 -- and I believe the act of upgrading the fw when available may be able to "fix" it. I've also got a month invested in it already, so I figured it would be dead before too long anyway. I'm about to hit 200TB.

 

[palladin9479]

I bought a 256GB Samsung 830 myself. I plan on having more then just windows on that drive.

There is some magic you can do with NTFS. Windows doesn't support you specifying different volumes for different folders during install, as such it puts everything on the system root drive (C. After install you can use symbolic links to redirect various folders to your HDD vs your SSD.

What you do is have your HDD formatted and mounted as some drive letter, V / Q / ect. while your SSD is the system root (C:\). You then go in and use mklink to redirect folders from the SSD to the HDD.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTFS_symbolic_link

mklink /D c:\program files (x86)\adobe Q:\adobe

would create a directory named adobe under Program files, it would appear to be on the C: drive but would actually exist on the HDD. These symbolic links can not only be used for local volume linking but also for linking to a network storage folder. You can have your documents folder stored on a local file server (NAS is the new term) but appear to be on the C: drive.

 

[ojas]

[citation][nom]acku[/nom]Which drive is this for?[/citation]
All Intel 320 Series drives! :O
http://ark.intel.com/products/family/56542/Intel-SSD-300-Family
http://ark.intel.com/products/56563/Intel-SSD-320-Series-(120GB-2_5in-SATA-3Gbs-25nm-MLC)
http://ark.intel.com/products/56569/Intel-SSD-320-Series-(600GB-2_5in-SATA-3Gbs-25nm-MLC)

 

[lcs2012]

In your page "Storage Bench v1.0, In More Detail" you added a graph were you detail performance loss over time, but you didn't specify what time data are you counting there (hours, weeks, months, etc.). Can you detail it? I want to use the SSD as a Operating System drive (Windows 7 Ultimate 64 as primary [I will use this 95% of time], Windows XP for backup and some stuff, Ubuntu for tests) so supposing I would need to reformat the SSD Win7 partition from time to time, How often do I have to reformat it to keep a high performance SSD? How often would you personally reformat it?

Also I was planning to buy a Vertex 3 Max Iops 240GB drive, but before it I was reading a lot of reviews. I really liked your article, but you refer most to 60/64GB models. Comparing Samsung 830 240GB vs Vertex 3 Max iops 240GB vs Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 240GB vs Patriot Wildfire, which one would you recommend?

Thanks a lot!

 

[lcs2012]

[citation][nom]lcs2012[/nom]In your page "Storage Bench v1.0, In More Detail" you added a graph were you detail performance loss over time, but you didn't specify what time data are you counting there (hours, weeks, months, etc.). Can you detail it? I want to use the SSD as a Operating System drive (Windows 7 Ultimate 64 as primary [I will use this 95% of time], Windows XP for backup and some stuff, Ubuntu for tests) so supposing I would need to reformat the SSD Win7 partition from time to time, How often do I have to reformat it to keep a high performance SSD? How often would you personally reformat it?Also I was planning to buy a Vertex 3 Max Iops 240GB drive, but before it I was reading a lot of reviews. I really liked your article, but you refer most to 60/64GB models. Comparing Samsung 830 240GB vs Vertex 3 Max iops 240GB vs Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 240GB vs Patriot Wildfire, which one would you recommend?Thanks a lot![/citation]


Also one more question (sorry), Does the new 2.15 firmware for Vertex 3 Max Iops resolves all it stability problems??? If I buy this one I will make sure 2.15 is loaded.

 

[lp231]

Is they any more reasons to write articles on SSD?
1. Price has come down, but it's still unaffordable to most users.
2. Sub $100-150 are small in size like them 64GB or 32GB for SSD caching on Z68.
Install OS and a few of your important apps and it's almost full. You buy a SSD to run thing at blazing speed, but what is the point, let's say your edited photos or video are running from your regular HDD?
3. With a bunch of them SSD controller currently out there which confuses most of us as to
'which SSD is the best for me', any one what really wants one can check out Tom's SSD charts or do this.
- Set a price budget
- Look for one that offers the largest capacity within that budget
- And fastest read/write

 

[Guest]

Nice comparison but I would be really interested in 128 vs 256 GB comparison. I need to bump up to 256GB range from 160GB and I am wondering whether 2x128 or 1x256 GB would be faster. I am currently running 2x x25M (80GB models).

 

[robluft]

[citation][nom]a4mula[/nom]Another issue that really could have been tackled here is RAID0 and performance per dollar of the 60/64GB drives vs their 128/256GB counterparts. I know there is a RAID0 scaling article already out there it would have been nice to see that incorporated here. Looking strictly at these benches it would seem as though a 256 m4 is the automatic choice. Maybe straight out of the box, not taking RAID0 into consideration that's the case. Once the drives start filling and considering the near 100% scaling of RAID I think you'd come to a different conclusion.[/citation]

Maybe I'm off tilt but right from the first page this is an article is about 60/64 GB SSD's for entry level consumers. Where did 128/256GB and RAID configurations come into the discussion?!

Yes, RAID O will be faster than non-RAID and you can search for "All SSD RAID 0 Charts 2011" for more info. Drive size impact on performance is well documented when looking at those 128/256GB drive comparisons.

 

[neiroatopelcc]

After reading this I'm wondering if it wouldn't be a smart idea to get one of those samsung drives to host my minecraft server and my inetpub on the server - instead of running them off of a 2tb green drive....

 

[steadywaters]

If you can shell out the extra $80 or so, I'd say go for the 128GB Crucial M4 since the 64GB is already $110 to $120. Faster and more space for those bulky games that you just can't wait another second for loading.

 

[anhxeom]

You recommend 120 GB as the best-balanced capacity point....

How about spending a few more dollars and buy 2 x 64gb for RAID0 instead? You still get 128gb capacity but your read and write speed just go crazy.

I have 2 Crucial M4 64gb that I bough on Newegg sale for around $95 each. At the time the 128gb version were also on sale for $170. I figured I spend and extra $20 and get 2 64gb and RAID0 them. The speed is amazing, the POST process actually took longer than Windows7 to load.

 

[Guest]

Are we still considering 64GB Drives? This isn't realistic, fast or not nobody should be using 64GB drives.. It's almost pointless to introduce these technologies on a consumer level if the price is going to be astronomical, try to sell us on these drives when the cost/capacity ratio gap is fixed. Until then, this is overpriced "space technology" to your average joe and that's why SSD hasn't caught on at all. The economy is tanked, stop trying to squeeze money out of people.

 

[Camikazi]

[citation][nom]james_1978[/nom]You can move your personal folders to your HDD (my documents, my music, downloads, ...), so downloads will end up there automaticaly, but programs will go to your C drive (SSD) by default.[/citation]
Using Hardlinks and windows recovery you can move program files,users and almost everything else to any other drive and windows will work fine.

http://lifehacker.com/5467758/move-the-users-directory-in-windows-7

I used that method and it works fine, the good thing about using it you can continue to let programs install to c:\program files but the files will go to the second drive.

 

[palladin9479]

Using Hardlinks and windows recovery you can move program files,users and almost everything else to any other drive and windows will work fine.

http://lifehacker.com/5467758/move-the-users-directory-in-windows-7

I used that method and it works fine, the good thing about using it you can continue to let programs install to c:\program files but the files will go to the second drive.

That method is a bit dangerous as someone can really screw their box up.

My suggestion is a slight modification to it. Login to your regular account, then log out and boot to safe mode.

Make a folder "D:\Users\username" and copy the contents of your "C:\users\username" folder to it.

Delete original folder.

Then Create a symbolic link to your username

mklink /D C:\users\username D:\users\username

Once done, you never need to boot to safe mode again to do it. All references to your original home folder "C:\users\username" will be redirected to your new folder.

This process works on any folder or file system, just be very careful not to use it on your program files or windows folder. It may seem like a good idea, but if something bad should happen Windows will start to freak out. Instead reference each individual program one at a time after their installed.

 

[danbfree]

What about the speed of TWO of these in RAID0 vs. a single 120/128GB drive? Serious question, why are they not testing this? I know that Intel drives are not the fastest but I noticed MASSIVE speed gains when putting them in RAID0... So why buy a single 300GB drive for more than 2 160GB drives or a single 120/128GB over 2 60/64 for desktop use?