64GB SSD on the Desktop: Samsung and OCZ go mainstream
by Gary Key on May 15, 2008 11:30 PM EST- Posted in
- Storage
HD Tune Pro 3.00
In our read tests, the Samsung/OCZ drive is within striking range of the lightning quick drive from Memoright. The average read rate of 87.2 MB/s is about 27% slower than the Memoright drive, but is around 45% faster than the previous drive from Samsung. On a side note, the WD VelociRaptor has an average read rate of 101.6 MB/s.
In our write speed tests, the Memoright drive offers a maximum write speed that is 41% faster, average write speed is 63% quicker, and burst rates are about 49% lower, something we are still investigating. As a comparison, average write speeds on the WD VelociRaptor are 101.4 MB/s with maximum speed at 122.1 MB/s and access time of 7.0ms. However, for the most part, the new Samsung/OCZ drives have write speeds that are now comparable with the majority of the latest 7200RPM mechanical drives. This is a significant improvement over the previous 64GB SSD drive from Samsung that featured average write rates near 36 MB/s.
We have included a selection of results from our HD Tune benchmarks in image galleries for those that are interested in comparing the Samsung/OCZ 64GB SSD against the latest 32GB SSD from Memoright. Our test results are at 32kb, 512kb, 8MB, and 128MB file sizes. Of note, in the 32kb test, the Samsung/OCZ drive performs exceptionally well in the 64/128 range and like most SSD drives, we see a significant decrease in write throughput at the 64 range on the Memoright drive.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
38 Comments
View All Comments
Dobs - Saturday, May 17, 2008 - link
I like the sound of that.. a Hybrid with built in Raid (or equiv).So.... I'll have the Samsung F1 SSD3 500GB Hybrid thanks!
That's the one that includes 1 308GB platter and 3 64GB SSD's (in Raid0 equiv)
mechBgon - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link
"We waivered about presenting either drive an award."I think you meant "wavered."
Baked - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link
I know you guys get all the freebies you want, do a RAID-5 w/ these drives now!Juddog - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link
The main advantage here IMHO is the power required, heat dissipation, noise level and MTBF. Perfect for notebooks. Working as a tech I see notebook drive failures all the time. I see plenty of executive level people with notebooks that would gladly pay a few hundred extra to get a much greater extended battery time from lower power usage, and greater data protection from the MTBF, not to mention the shock levels that these drives typically have is much greater than that of a hard drive.This is excellent for people who travel around a lot and carry expensive data on their laptops. Top it off with data encryption technologies that more companies are moving into, and the access time plays an even greater roll.
strikeback03 - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link
IIRC, the tests in the Macbook Air at least showed little to no advantage in battery life from the SSD. The durability though would be nice. I personally wouldn't consider one until we can get drives upwards of 100GB for under $500.JarredWalton - Saturday, May 17, 2008 - link
MacBook Air SSD testing was actually http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=3226&a...">quite good. I think you're probably remembering the more recent http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=328...">128GB SSD follow-up where the extra performance and size of the SSD made power requirements about equal to a standard HDD.Ender17 - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link
Any results on the snapiness with these drives as seen here?http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=328...">http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=328...
tshen83 - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...Too bad it is out of stock. I hope STT makes more of it. 299 for 30GB of 120MB/read speed.
JarredWalton - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link
But only 40MB/s writes.semisonic9 - Friday, May 16, 2008 - link
...over it's competition? What's up with that? Would have expected 7200.11 drives, or 1tb drives, to be faster.