Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Marvell-Based SSDs From Corsair, Crucial, OCZ, And Plextor: Tested

Marvell-Based SSDs From Corsair, Crucial, OCZ, And Plextor: Tested
By

Do you want the best performance from your SSD all of the time, regardless of workload? Drives with Marvell's controller technology should be on your short list. We put seven of them through the paces and discover lots of speed at each capacity point.

Aside from Intel and Samsung, most SSD vendors employ storage controllers from either Marvell or SandForce. Developing the logic necessary to drive a solid-state drive at high performance in all relevant workloads without compromising data integrity is not an easy task, and buying the hardware directly from Marvell or SandForce lets new players participate in the market with a much smaller investment and compete aggressively.

Adopting a turnkey solution also makes it a lot more difficult to stand apart, though. As we found in Ten 60 GB SandForce-Based Boot Drives, Rounded-Up, there are a number of brands selling comparable SSDs, but most of them perform pretty much identically. 

Unlike SandForce, Marvell gives its partners the option to license its controller firmware framework, which then gives vendors the option to lean on Marvell's reference design or optimize, facilitating differentiated solutions. OCZ seems to have taken that flexibility to an extreme in its Vertex 4, which operates at higher frequencies than Marvell's design and purportedly employs a heavily-modified firmware. You can read more about that particular implementation in OCZ Vertex 4 Review: A Flagship SSD Powered By...Indilinx?.

Of course, getting more heavily involved in modification means we're no longer talking about turnkey SSDs that perform similarly. Yay. That should make for a more interesting session of benchmarking, at least. Considerable development resources must be devoted to fully validating drive performance and endurance, creating unique or compelling features, and establishing the differentiation needed to make an SSD stand out from the rest of the pack.

Requiring that extra effort probably helps explain why there are fewer Marvell-based SSDs than there are from SandForce. And now that the SSD 510 is no longer with us (Intel SSD 510-Series 250 GB Review: Adopting 6 Gb/s SATA), making room for the newer SSD 520 (Intel SSD 520 Review: Taking Back The High-End With SandForce), we can no longer count Intel as a member of that fairly exclusive group of contenders. 

Among the remaining guard, we have Corsair, Crucial, Plextor, and of course, OCZ.

We rounded up several Marvell-based SSDs to (hopefully) divulge how they differ. We're throwing in a SandForce-based OCZ Vertex 3 120 GB for comparison, too. The round-up is limited to 64 GB and 128 GB drives, two of the most popular capacities. Hopefully, our results help guide you in the direction of the most cost-effective Marvell-based SSD for your PC.

On deck, we have:

  • Corsair Performance Pro 128 GB (CSSD-P128GBP-BK)
  • Crucial m4 64 GB (CT064M4SSD2)
  • Crucial m4 128 GB CT128M4SSD2)
  • OCZ Octane 128 GB (OCT1-25SAT3-128G)
  • Plextor M3 64 GB (PX-64M3)
  • Plextor M3 128 GB (PX-128M3)
  • Plextor M3 Pro 128 GB (PX-128M3P)


Beyond modifications to the way the controller logic operates and firmware-based optimizations, vendors are also able to differentiate their drives through the use of three memory interfaces. We've talked about this in the past; however, leaning on Toggle-mode, synchronous ONFi, and asynchronous ONFi flash affects performance (and pricing) in a number of ways. To be sure, we'll be keeping an eye out for that.

Corsair and Plextor position their SSDs to attract enthusiasts willing to spend a little more, justifying their use of Toggle-mode NAND. Meanwhile, Crucial and OCZ both lean on familiar Synchronous ONFi flash from IM Flash Technologies.

Toggle-Mode-Based
Synchronous-Based
Corsair Performance Pro 128 GBCrucial m4 64 GB
Plextor M3 64 GBCrucial m4 128 GB
Plextor M3 128 GBOCZ Octane 128 GB
Plextor M3 Pro 128 GB
Display 40 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
Other Comments
  • 10 Hide
    hellfire24 , May 1, 2012 6:39 AM
    crucial FTW!
  • 1 Hide
    Anonymous , May 1, 2012 7:49 AM
    Shoulda tossed in a V4 128gb for entertainment value...ah well. :p 
  • -7 Hide
    uruquiora , May 1, 2012 9:14 AM
    hellfire24crucial FTW!

    hmm , my M4 has 10x more BSOD than my vertex 3... Each i boot my pc and work with it i prepare myself for a BSOD with my M4...
  • 3 Hide
    joytech22 , May 1, 2012 11:27 AM
    uruquiorahmm , my M4 has 10x more BSOD than my vertex 3... Each i boot my pc and work with it i prepare myself for a BSOD with my M4...


    That is what we in the I.T industry like to call: "Faulty Hardware".
    If you considered that normal all this time, I have some bad news for you..
  • 6 Hide
    chesteracorgi , May 1, 2012 1:00 PM
    With the price of SSDs coming down, Toms should start introducing 256 GB + drives into its reviews. It's nice to have the 64 & 128 GB reviews, but for power builders the 256 GB is becoming mainstream.
  • 2 Hide
    Cyclops21 , May 1, 2012 1:23 PM
    Any tests planned on the Sandisk Extreme models. They were a Tom's recommend buy but I still haven't seen any benchmarks on Tom's.
  • -2 Hide
    cknobman , May 1, 2012 1:51 PM
    I'd still say for most boot and program drives SandForce is the way to go as it has a significant performance edge.
  • 4 Hide
    Onus , May 1, 2012 1:54 PM
    I've only installed 6-7 SSDs, with mixed results. Two with Sadforce controllers died within months or weeks (the RMA of one is yet to be tested). Given that the slowest SSD beats the pants off the fastest magnetic HDD, I have quickly reached the conclusion that reliability has to be the #1 criterion for SSDs, and I'm not sure Sandforce is there yet.
  • 0 Hide
    zodiacfml , May 1, 2012 2:13 PM
    Awesome. SSDs time is now!
  • 7 Hide
    ramon zarat , May 1, 2012 2:34 PM
    uruquiorahmm , my M4 has 10x more BSOD than my vertex 3... Each i boot my pc and work with it i prepare myself for a BSOD with my M4...


    You must be joking... The list of forum thread complaining about SF controller instability is endless. The M4 actually has a very solid reputation. I've been running 2 128GB M4 in 2 different PC for the last 8 months. Not a single BSOD. They still both benchmark the same speed as day 1. Actually, the M4 was and might very well still be the best choice for balance between price, performance and reliability in the whole SSD market. In my book, there are only 3 manufacturers really worth mentioning when it comes to SSD: Crucial, Intel and Samsung.

    Your unit is simply defective. That can happen to any manufacturer. RMA it and be happy.
  • 6 Hide
    daysyang , May 1, 2012 3:54 PM
    ^ agree... my M4 has been nothing but awesome.
  • 1 Hide
    Pawessum16 , May 1, 2012 4:50 PM
    When are you going to update your SSD charts? Some of the SSD's on the 2011 chart don't even exist anymore, and it's missing all the cool new drives released in the past couple of months.
  • 4 Hide
    americanherosandwich , May 1, 2012 4:55 PM
    Hah, I just got done reading this, too: http://computerhardwareupgrades.blogspot.com/2012/05/comparing-different-nand-types-and.html

    Crucial M4's still kicking butt.
  • 2 Hide
    g-unit1111 , May 1, 2012 5:04 PM
    daysyang^ agree... my M4 has been nothing but awesome.


    So has mine, but at $70 I am thinking I might ditch my Intel 320 for a Plextor M3. I've always been a fan of Plextor drives and it's good to know that the move to SSD hasn't changed their quality at all. Tempting, tempting...
  • 2 Hide
    eddieroolz , May 1, 2012 5:14 PM
    Godo to see my choice of SSD be proven in tests. I have high hopes for my Crucial m4.
  • 1 Hide
    inflexion , May 1, 2012 6:07 PM
    Nice review. I just picked up another Crucial M4 today on Buy.com for $110 USD to my door.

    Thanks for the great content!
  • 2 Hide
    Anonymous , May 1, 2012 6:33 PM
    Where the heck can you get the M3 64gb for $70?
  • 0 Hide
    rohitbaran , May 1, 2012 11:31 PM
    I wonder if there are any reliability stats on SSDs available. They are fast for sure, but how about reliability scores, based off drive performance over a year or so?
  • 0 Hide
    slomo4sho , May 2, 2012 1:11 AM
    rohitbaranI wonder if there are any reliability stats on SSDs available. They are fast for sure, but how about reliability scores, based off drive performance over a year or so?


    I couldn't agree more. Having a fast drive means nothing if it dies or corrupts your data.
  • 0 Hide
    10tacle , May 2, 2012 3:36 AM
    Where are you guys seeing the 64GB M3 for $70? I have yet to find it anywhere for under $100. In fact, the best price I can find from reputable E-tailer is $120. I'd snap one up in a second as dedicated Intel SRT cache drive.
Display more comments