Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Power Consumption

Hot or Not? New Samsung and Solidata SSDs
By

We’d expect all flash SSDs to stay below 1 W idle power. In fact, the Intel and Samsung drives switch into low power idle modes, initiated by the devices or the host system, and reduce idle power to 0.2 W or less. These are great results, especially for notebooks or mobile workstations.

Solidata, however, shocked us with inopportune idle power consumption, which is 20 times higher than the results of the Intel and Samsung drives. Even high-performance SLC-based flash SSDs by Mtron require less than a quarter of the Solidata drives’ idle power consumption. I guess there is still a lot of room for improvement here.

If you want maximum sequential throughput, the power consumption of most SSDs increases to anything between 0.8 W and 2 W, which is excellent—mechanical hard drives require at least 50% more power. Solidata again is way behind at 7 W, which clearly disqualifies the drive for notebook applications. It’s amazing to see Samsung’s power consumption at maximum throughput: 1.0 W is a new record.

Playing HD video off the SSDs means limiting the data stream to a lower bit rate. In this case, the Intel and Samsung SSDs are very efficient, at 0.2 to 0.3 W, while the other SSDs mostly need between 1 W and 2 W. In contrast, Solidata requires 5.2 W. In their defense, though, I want to point out that this is close to the idle power level of 4.9 W so this represents a power increase of approximately 0.3 W. Clearly, the base power requirement is the issue.

Most drives hit their peak power requirements if you request lots of random I/O operations. Solidata jumps to as much as 10.9 W in the case of the X2-128, while the new Samsung 256 GB SSD stays at 1.5 W and hence requires 25% less power than the Intel X25 SSDs. This promises to be an exciting shootout, as we now look at performance per watt.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 50 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 14 Hide
    jpdykes , April 30, 2009 7:31 AM
    Can we have the drop down list of pages back?
    I really don't want to go through every single page to get to the results and conclusions.
Other Comments
  • 0 Hide
    Eric The Red , April 30, 2009 6:37 AM
    Nice artice, but 1 small note, on page one.. isn't Samsung’s new PB22-J available a little bigger than 256 MB? Seems small..

  • 14 Hide
    jpdykes , April 30, 2009 7:31 AM
    Can we have the drop down list of pages back?
    I really don't want to go through every single page to get to the results and conclusions.
  • 3 Hide
    dafin0 , April 30, 2009 7:41 AM
    jpdykes there is a table of contents at the very top.. but i to like the drop down menu
  • 3 Hide
    christianspoer , April 30, 2009 7:45 AM
    Price?! I can't seem to find it in the article...
  • 0 Hide
    mschu_52 , April 30, 2009 7:47 AM
    Also note that on the graphs the Intel x25-M is labeled as 64GB, where on pg 8 it says it comes as 80 or 160.. Also did the x25-M have the new firmware?
  • 0 Hide
    jpdykes , April 30, 2009 7:49 AM
    Good point - I missed that!
  • -2 Hide
    pcworm , April 30, 2009 7:53 AM
    i like the new table of contents
    nice edit
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , April 30, 2009 7:53 AM
    The 256Gb Samsung is available for general sale in the UK; I bought one last week.
  • 5 Hide
    mschu_52 , April 30, 2009 7:57 AM
    I just wish new Table of Contents (TOC), or drop down was on every page, after I get past page 1, you either have to go back to page 1 to jump ahead/around or page though
  • 8 Hide
    renozi , April 30, 2009 8:04 AM
    no OCZ Vertex?
  • 1 Hide
    alert101 , April 30, 2009 8:12 AM
    Considering that the Samsung PB22-J is a MLC-based drive like Intel's X25-M, Samsung beats the crap out of Intel with write speeds.

    Also, Register Hardware reviewed the same drive six weeks ago!
    http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/03/17/review_storage_ssd_samsung_mmd0e56g5/
  • 0 Hide
    rags_20 , April 30, 2009 10:54 AM
    @ 1st poster. It think they meant GB
  • 1 Hide
    krazyderek , April 30, 2009 11:56 AM
    page 2 hard drive specs, 80-500gb??? shouldn't that be 2tb?? and price $100 for 320gb?? try $50 for 320gb or $80 for 500gb
  • 3 Hide
    xsamitt , April 30, 2009 12:24 PM
    We used to get 3 and 4 new articles a day.Now it's been reduced to one.
    I would think with all new teck in the market place we can find more than just hard drives to talk about.
    As I mentioned before there are a new host of monitors out there.One that do 120htz and the response times have gotten better.It would seem the 24 inch monitors have been catching up to the smaller 22 inch counter parts in terms of speed.
    This is the would be article you won't get for a long time I am afraid.

  • 0 Hide
    xsamitt , April 30, 2009 12:33 PM
    What I also find odd is that there are more ads on Toms than before but they get rid of our avatars?I have to wonder why?
  • 0 Hide
    neapolis , April 30, 2009 12:41 PM
    Thank You for making the "Table of contents" actually accessible!!!
  • 2 Hide
    Anonymous , April 30, 2009 1:33 PM
    Place the table of contents in every page, not just the first. And put it at the bottom of the page, so you can use it after you read the page. Currently you read the page and have to scroll up to use it.
  • 8 Hide
    Anonymous , April 30, 2009 2:01 PM
    This article avoids detailed discussion of the controllers used in the SSDs, does not emphasize the importance of small random write tests, and implies that OCZ does not have a product, when in reality the OCZ Vertex using the Indilinx controller has the second best performance to Intel at half the price. The JMicron controller is garbage. Read the vastly superior articles on AnandTech "The SSD Update" and "The SSD Anthology" for more information.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , April 30, 2009 2:06 PM
    Perhaps this is an irrelevant question, and you'll understand why in a moment, but would owning an SSD with a throughput of over 200 mb/s help in situations where the amount of available ram is exceeded? IE - in games where instead of writing to RAM, the program would have to write to the HD as virtual ram. Oftentimes I would notice a stuttering when a new area in a game was streamed from the HD when I didn't have available ram, would this effect be eliminated? (The reason I felt it was somewhat irrelevant would be because those of us who can afford to buy a $400-600 SSD drive can probably afford a few more gigs of ram - or would have the ram in the first place.)
  • 2 Hide
    kschoche , April 30, 2009 2:11 PM
    Drop down list again please, forcing me to see all of your ads by removing drop downs, or having a dozen image pages instead of text only forces me to add more things to adblock.
Display more comments