USB 3.0 Speed + Intel 320 SSD is early

Scataphagos

Scataphagos

Tried a Patriot USB 3.0 enclosure, X25-M, W7-64-bit, X58 mobo, USB 3.0 port. Very fast for USB!

CrystalDiskMark
197.4/88.0
134.2/86.66
16.86/36.22

Same setup, but running from USB 2.0 port..
35/31
35/31
8/8

Even from the 2.0 port performance is snappy!

With X25-M mounted in either USB 3.0 or 2.0 enclosure and running from USB 2.0 port, performance is the same.

____________________________________

Intel says the new 320 SSD (upgrade to X25-M/V), previously slated for April release, will be available next Monday, March 28. Prices for 80GB, 120GB, and 160GB drives are comparable to X25-M prices. Also available in 300GB and 600GB models.
 
Quote from Bolimomo:


The price of >$1000 for a 600GB is a little bit out of my reach for the time being. :)
More...

BTW: what do you think the price erosion curve would be for SSD drives? Mark today's Intel SSD 320 series prices as a benchmark. Will come back in a year to see how prices have fallen.

4/3/2011:

Intel SSD 320 series:
600GB $1062
300GB $590
160GB $313
80GB $209
40GB $127
 
Quote from Bolimomo:

BTW: what do you think the price erosion curve would be for SSD drives? Mark today's Intel SSD 320 series prices as a benchmark. Will come back in a year to see how prices have fallen.

4/3/2011:

Intel SSD 320 series:
600GB $1062
300GB $590
160GB $313
80GB $209
40GB $127
More...

You might want to skip the 320 and go for the X25-M G2 instead. In the 320, Intel apparently caved on "small file operations" to favor the greater sizzle of "sequential writes". (According to some, the "sequential" write speed is used only about 1% overall while "small file ops" are used about 50% of the time.)

From reviews of the 320 so far, I'm disappointed.... not planning to buy any.
 
Quote from Scataphagos:

You might want to skip the 320 and go for the X25-M G2 instead. In the 320, Intel apparently caved on "small file operations" to favor the greater sizzle of "sequential writes". (According to some, the "sequential" write speed is used only about 1% overall while "small file ops" are used about 50% of the time.)

From reviews of the 320 so far, I'm disappointed.... not planning to buy any.
More...

agreed, i have been using about ten X25-M G2 in my trading systems over a year and never had a problem. newegg has some negative reviews on intel's new 510 series and its reliability is questionable. 320 has yet to get sufficient proven user results.
 
Quote from Scataphagos:

Tried a Patriot USB 3.0 enclosure, X25-M, W7-64-bit, X58 mobo, USB 3.0 port. Very fast for USB!

CrystalDiskMark
197.4/88.0
134.2/86.66
16.86/36.22
More...

Scataphagos:

I am trying to learn these things.

Were your Crystal Disk Mark numbers from a X25-M SSD drive?

I have an Intel SSD 40GB, model # SSDSA2M040G2GC. Going through the internal SATA cable on a box with Intel i7-930 processor.

My Windows 7 64-bit OS reboot takes about 40 seconds.

My Crystal Disk Mark scores are:
182.8/44.0
135.8/32.0
22.72/37.75

They seemed to be similar to yours. If I buy an Intel 320 SSD, would you expect these numbers to be much higher? I am trying to have a feel for how much faster the new SSD may be able to offer me.
 
Response to:
BTW: what do you think the price erosion curve would be for SSD drives? Mark today's Intel SSD 320 series prices as a benchmark. Will come back in a year to see how prices have fallen.

4/3/2011 - best guess price 4/2012

Intel SSD 320 series:
600GB $1062 - $795
300GB $590 - $445
160GB $313 - $234
80GB $209 - $155
40GB $127 - $95
 
Quote from Bolimomo:

Scataphagos:

I am trying to learn these things.

Were your Crystal Disk Mark numbers from a X25-M SSD drive?

I have an Intel SSD 40GB, model # SSDSA2M040G2GC. Going through the internal SATA cable on a box with Intel i7-930 processor.

My Windows 7 64-bit OS reboot takes about 40 seconds.

My Crystal Disk Mark scores are:
182.8/44.0
135.8/32.0
22.72/37.75

They seemed to be similar to yours. If I buy an Intel 320 SSD, would you expect these numbers to be much higher? I am trying to have a feel for how much faster the new SSD may be able to offer me.
More...

Those CDM scores are about right for your X25-V (varies from controller to controller)

The new 320's CDM scores run something like...

270/220
175/210
21/43

Whereas CDM scores for X25-M, 160 GB are like..

265/105
205/100
23/63

For overall performance the most important numbers are "Sequential Read" and "small file read/writes"

The overall performance leader currently is the OCZ Vertex 3... in large enough size to take advantage of max parallelism, of course.
 
Quote from Bolimomo:

Scataphagos:

Were your Crystal Disk Mark numbers from a X25-M SSD drive?
More...

An 80 GB X25-M, G2... mounted in a USB 3.0 enclosure, precisely.

BTW... an X25-V (40 GB) does NOT work like an X25-M when mounted in a USB enclosure. The "V" is quite slow... much like a 2.0 flash drive.

An X25-V as a boot drive is still very good... can be called "outstanding" in RAID 0.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top