Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Solidata X1-64 (64 GB SLC)

Hot or Not? New Samsung and Solidata SSDs
By

Sent to us by ssdshop.ch, Solidata’s X1 SSD is a 2.5” SATA/300 drive based on single level cell (SLC) flash memory, which usually guarantees excellent I/O and write performance. The trade-off is a total capacity of only 64 GB. The manufacturer specifies a maximum sequential read throughput of 240 MB/s, and 230 MB/s for sequential writes, but it also lists random read and write numbers: 130 MB/s and 45 MB/s. Our test results were very much in between. The throughput test from our h2benchw suite resulted in constant 167 MB/s read throughput and 21-31 MB/s for sequential writes.

Unbalanced Performance

We were disappointed at the I/O performance of this product, as the SLC flash memory should basically provide more potential than what we’ve seen. The IOmeter performance results are, in fact, not much better than what a high performance mechanical hard drive is able to deliver. The PCMark Vantage benchmark scores were respectable, but still not impressive. Clearly, this product was optimized for throughput, but not for many other disciplines.

Unreasonable Power Consumption

We don't mean this to be a Solidata bashing session, but we cannot help but point to the power consumption results as well. We double-checked our results on various systems (since we originally couldn't believe it), but the X1-64 is a power hog. It requires 4.6 W at idle, which is more than most 3.5” 7,200 RPM hard drives require; this is also more than twice the power requirement of 2.5” notebook drives. Peak power even went to as much as 10.1 W during workstation I/O testing, which is unbelievable.

This product is the opposite of what flash SSDs are supposed to be: it does not outperform its competition in any way, and it is inefficient due to its high power requirements. These don’t matter that much on the desktop, but even so, you can still find much better flash SSD drives around.

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