A-DATA to OCZ: 64MB Cache on SSD? Easy

Not to be outdone by the impending release of OCZ’s high-performance Vertex series of solid-state drives, A-DATA has announced a new 256 GB SSD that features the same 64 MB of internal cache as OCZ’s product.  The company was showing off the SATAII SSD 300 Plus, as well as its mammoth 512 GB XPG SSD, at this year’s Cebit show in Hanover, Germany. The loss of capacity isn’t that bad of a deal if you look at it like a fat runner shedding weight; A-DATA is boasting speeds of up to 250 MB/sec and 160 MB/sec on the drive’s sustained reads and writes, respectively. That's 20 MB/sec faster reads than the company's XPG SSD.

You can thank the included 64MB SDRAM buffer for the speed boost. Double the size of more typical SSD caches, the extra memory—alongside an alleged new controller design--allows the drive to spit out better performance by providing more room for storing frequently accessed data.  Although solid-state drives are known for their speed in accessing data, it’s still faster to pull information straight out of the drive cache than the internal memory cells. For what it's worth, the OCZ Vertex currently wins the tale of the boasting tape, as its drive allegedly delivers 80 MB/sec greater sustained writes than A-DATA's SATAII SSD 300 Plus.

There’s no word on the price or estimated street date for the new A-DATA drives.  Nor do we know the specifics of the controller in the drive, including how many memory channels it might be able to handle at once. But the company has said that it plans to launch the 300 Plus in four different storage capacities: 32 GB, 64 GB, 128 GB, and 256 GB.

Create a new thread in the US News comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
9 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • baov
    Why are we talking about pulling reads out of the cache? The reason it's there on an SSD is to buffer those slow writes, not to have reads from the cache.
    1
  • jacobdrj
    As cheap as DDR style memory is, why not have a gig of built in chace? These drives cost upwards of $500 anyways, what is another $5? Intel is still a leg up. But they are pushing them with innovation. For you geeks out there, it is taking the brute force Stargazer approach, rather than the finesse Excelsior one.
    1
  • Grims
    jacobdrjAs cheap as DDR style memory is, why not have a gig of built in chace? These drives cost upwards of $500 anyways, what is another $5? Intel is still a leg up. But they are pushing them with innovation. For you geeks out there, it is taking the brute force Stargazer approach, rather than the finesse Excelsior one.


    Why stop there, why not just make a 64GB cache drive and be done with it? :P
    2