- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (46) |
- Share
Here it is, the new X25-M; the name sounds very much like an experimental hypersonic plane. And the analogy isn’t far off, since the new flash SSD provides excellent performance. Intel even titled one of its presentation slides “better by design," which is in fact true for all of the new flash SSDs.
We already mentioned that Intel intends to deliver 250 MB/s of sequential read throughput. While we didn’t see this bandwidth on either of our two different systems, we did measure a constant throughput of roughly 200 MB/s for read operations and more than 70 MB/s for write operations. The transfer diagram (see benchmark section) shows that this throughput is maintained throughout the entire capacity of the unit.
Quantum Leap In Performance?
We double-checked our benchmarks carefully knowing that this product is based on MLC flash memory, which typically shows mediocre application performance and even poor I/O performance. But we weren’t disappointed this time around: the 0.085 ms access time (that’s 85 microseconds) stated by Intel is likely true, as our benchmarks only go down to 0.1 ms. I/O performance, however, was the real eye opener. The X25-M provides at least three times more I/O operations per second for database operations, at least twice the performance for file server scenarios, equal performance for Web server requirements and double the I/O operations per seconds for workstation applications. This all relates to the performance shown by the Samsung 64 GB SSD SATA-2. In an ideal case, which means low command queue depths, the Intel drive is 9x faster for databases, 3x faster for file servers, 20% faster in Web servers and gives 2.5x performance for workstations.
…But Not Across All Benchmarks
While throughput and I/O performance are frankly incredible when compared with traditional hard drives, and at least much faster in comparison with Samsung’s SLC-flash based 64 GB SATA-2 drive, the X25-M still isn’t perfect. The PCMark 05 HDD benchmark, which is a good tool to evaluate real-life throughput, confirms the stunning performance in the Windows XP startup benchmark. It is more than twice as fast as the Samsung drive, and more than 13 times faster than a Seagate Momentus 7200.3 2.5” notebook hard drive, which is considered state-of-the-art today. File writes, however, are quicker on the Seagate drive and Samsung’s 64 GB SATA-2 Flash SSD, as these are limited by the 74 MB/s write throughput. Look at the benchmark section to find more results on power consumption and performance per watt in workstation and streaming read workloads, as well as DVD playback power consumption.
- Intel x25m ssd: raid 0 vs solo boot up times [Storage]
- Intel X25-M SSD 80GB RAID-0 or NOT? [Storage]
- Installing Vista Home 64 on Intel X25-M SSD getting Error 0x8007000d [Windows Vista]
- Open SSD High Performance Territory–Intel X25-M 80GB PC&NB Platform [Storage]
- X25-M seeker seeking help with 23 hardware ?s + new build advice [Storage]
Questions? Ask Tom's community!
- 1 / 3
- Next
-
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
Best offers
|
My Passport Essential 500GB Portable... | $129.99 STAPLES More info |
|
Caviar Black 1TB Hard Drive (Serial... | $99.99 Dell Small Business More info |
|
My Book Essential Edition External... | $148.00 ServerSupply.com More info |
|
X25-M Gen2 160GB 2.5" Solid State... | $509.95 PC Connection More info |
|
My Passport Essential Portable 320GB... | $134.00 ServerSupply.com More info |
- seagate momentus 7200.3 review
- ssd controller
- seagate 7200.3
- flash drive benchmarks
- momentus 7200.3 review
- ssd samsung benchmark
- ssd performance comparison
- 7200.3
- notebook hard drive benchmark
- test seagate momentus 7200.3
- ssd better for gaming
- notebook hard drive comparison
- notebook hard drive comparison
- 2.5 hdd benchmark
- seagate momentus 7200.3 500gb
Partners
The Games selection
adventure :
Ray
Adventure game, South Park style. Pick the way the story goes by picking an answer among those offered.
|
crazy :
Interactive Boogy
Pick one of the 3 songs, hit on the correct keys matching this boy's dance moves.
|
Very nice Intel, I couldn't drop that much cash into a harddrive, otherwise I'm sold
.
200 Mb read solid. sweeeeeeet. i want one.
Yummy! They greatly improved the write performance for a MLC drive.
I would like to see it in a desktop compared to a VelociRaptor.
I look forward to the distant day storage devices are silent, last for a lifetime, contain no moving parts and perform like champs. We're nowhere near that day but it's coming closer one step at a time.
It'd kill the velociraptor. SSD's are that much faster than regular magnetic HD's.
Yeah I'm surprised this review didn't include Velociraptor.
Great review - Thanks! Request for future SSD reviews: please include the warranty period. SSDs are new technology and the length of the warranty is very important factor in my buying decisions.
Agree with your conclusions: Intel has a killer product here. I *need* two of these - to go!
Check out hothardware's review of these SSD's they did include the velociraptor.
I look forward to the distant day storage devices are silent, last for a lifetime, contain no moving parts and perform like champs. We're nowhere near that day but it's coming closer one step at a time.
Nontech?
Yeah I'm surprised this review didn't include Velociraptor.
They tested it in a laptop and thus only compared it to laptop HDs. However, given the latest articles about SSD for gamers and 14 SSDs compared (neither of which compared it to a VelociRaptor), I would think they would want to address those interested in using a SSD in a desktop.
man this look sweet! i'm getting one! go intel!
Quantum Leap In Performance? in short yes.
It is a small leap in performance. Maybe not as small a leap as the word quantum should describe.
(Quantum Physics - a science of incredibly small things)
Isn't Intel releasing SLC drives Also.. I thought this was the low-end MLC SSD Drive. If the Samsung part is a SLC then shouldn't we compare it to Intel's SLC also?
Ok...you guys just completed a "roundup" test of the fastest notebook drives on August 28. Why did you compare the X25-M to the SLOWEST of all the 7,200 RPM drives (the Seagate) you tested?
My bet is that the WD Scorpio Black would have equalled or outperformed the X25-M in several of the applications benchmarks -- which would be the same result that IDC got in their benchmarks.
And what's up with this "simulated startup" workload? Why on earth not test the actual startup (which, unlike your simulation, accurately tests synchronous IO capabilities). Again, in ACTUAL rather than simulated workload tests, these SSD's generally underperform the manufacturer's overblown claims. IDC's benchmark tests showed 7,200RPM HDD startup times faster than SSD. So...why "simulate" a startup workload?
Finally -- why do the actual application benchmarks continue to show only marginal (and often -- MINISCULE) performance advantages for SSD?
Based on the results of your 8/28 tests, if the X25-M had been compared to the WD Scorpio Black, the SSD probably would not have even come out on top in the applications tests.
Looking at the application benchmarks, these flash-in-the-pan SSDs clearly have a long way to go before they can even reach across-the-board speedup of 2x over a fast HDD, much less meet the SSD hypesters ridiculous performance claims.
Yeah so how much?
Yeah so how much?
Well, the X25-M scored 119 on SYSmark 2007 (overall) and the 'slowpoke' Momentus HDD scored 111. I think I want more than a measley 7% improvement before I'd (a) spend $700 and (b) give up 200GBytes of capacity.
Don't you think?
Well, the X25-M scored 119 on SYSmark 2007 (overall) and the 'slowpoke' Momentus HDD scored 111. I think I want more than a measley 7% improvement before I'd (a) spend $700 and (b) give up 200GBytes of capacity.Don't you think?
Fyi...in case you missed it...it's at the bottom of the page:
http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 12-11.html
Sorry, not impressed. Performance only slightly better then conventional HDD? WTF are these guys doing.
It seems like the SSD industry is looking to ONLY match the performance of the HDD where the technology should really shine well above it. Your telling me that whipping a read/write head over a disk spinning at 7200 RPM's performs comparable to reading and writing electrons directly out of a transistor? WTF? I am supposed to be impressed by this?
If you can't read data off an SSD drive AT LEAST 4x faster then an HDD, don't bother me with it. The technology is not ready for prime time and the minor savings in power do not justify the tremendous cost per GB premium.
Intel should be ashamed of even admitting making this drive. The whole SSD industry is a wash IMHO, this technology has been over promised and under delivered for such a long time I don't think the SSD industry knows what they are doing anymore. SSD should be cheaper, faster, and offer far greater storage capacities and near ubiquitous by this point in time after the promises made in the 90's.
Am I the only one that thinks what Intel is doing is merely providing a template for other companies to copy and sell them that template at a modest profit?
And there is no contest that SSDs are a wash, right now. But this is an emerging technology that is going to be continually refined.
Add to the mix Fusion IO's entry into the storage market (a flash pci express card) and SAS plugs being included on standard motherboards (some of the new x58s) we see a battle for the future of storage/hard drives and the removal of the bottle neck that has plagued computers for far too long.
In my mind it's about time there was a serious push to remove the bottle neck of storage. Only the bleeding edge people are gonna be out a buck but how is that different from any other emerging technology?
Go Intel for refining MLC tech and adding a controller.
1000 years mtbf? Did they use a time machine or what?