|
16X DVD Duplicator 1:1 |
Compare the top 5 lowest prices by hovering your mouse over the product names on the left |
$259.99 |
| 3.5in 1.44MB External USB Floppy... | $22.99 | ||
|
Kanguru - 4 HD KanguruClone Hard... | $2257.99 | |
|
750GB QS2 eSATA / USB 2.0 Combo... | $172.95 | |
|
16X 1-to-3 DVD Duplicator Tower | $499.99 |
- Adaptec's Series 5 Unified Serial Controllers
- iSCSI SANs Compared
- Can Heterogeneous RAID Arrays Work?
- Storage Accessories: Move, Cool, Multiply
- Portable Storage: Convenience is the Key
- AMCC, Areca & LSI Serial RAID Controllers
- RAID Scaling Charts, Part 3: 4-128 kB Stripes Compared
- Take Your Storage Online
- Is Zettabits Next Generation Storage?
- Unified Serial RAID Controllers for PCIe
Memoright SSD MR25.2-032S
Source: Tom's Hardware – Keywords: ssd, memoright
Syndication:
Memoright SSD MR25.2-032S
Update : Memoright asked us to emphasize that this drive aims at the server market, as the cost for SLC Flash SSDs (single level cell) is still unreasonably high. Random read and write performance is where SSDs are strongest, and where they beat conventional hard drives by orders of magnitude.
The Memoright Flash SSD MR25.2-032S is available in several capacities of 8, 16, 32, 64 and 128 GB. We received four 32-GB drives, which allowed us to do RAID 0 benchmarks, so we could see the potential of flash SSD when set up in RAID arrays. All of these come with a five-year warranty, which is comparable to other enterprise hard drives on the market. The warranty is also a sign of faith in flash SSD’s reliability.
We found that the performance of the Memoright 32-GB flash SSD is awesome. The 0.1 ms access time is similar to what other Flash SSDs deliver, but the 115 MB/s read transfer rate is a new record for Flash SSDs. The cool part is that write performance is almost as high. Mtron’s 32-GB flash SSD reached 95 MB/s read performance on our storage test system, but it was limited to 75 MB/s write performance. With the exception of the Webserver benchmark, all other I/O performance results are dominated by Memoright: 700-4,300 I/O operations per second are significant, which is approximately between 4x and 20x faster than a Western Digital WD1500 Raptor.
Although we found that the sequential throughput does not reach the interface bandwidth, the next SSD generation will certainly have to use SATA/300 instead of SATA/150 to avoid the interface becoming a bottleneck. When we compared four Memoright 32-GB flash SSDs to four Seagate Savvio 10K.2 2.5” SAS drives and four 3.5” WD1500 Raptor drives, we found the conventional drives don’t stand a chance against the four Memoright device. A 0.2-ms access time is amazing for a RAID 0 array (vs. 7.4 ms for the Seagate Savvio 10K.2 and 8.5 ms for WD’s Raptors). The Memoright flash SSDs also sustain a minimum write transfer rate of 323 MB/s in RAID 0, while the Savvios drop to 199 MB/s and the Raptors go down to 177 MB/s. The read throughput of 450 MB/s for the Mtron quartet is equally impressive.
The 128-GB version is priced at $3,500, which is way too much for the vast majority of us. A 64-GB version still costs slightly more than $2,000, but the 32-GB device is priced at $1,049, which is not out of reach for power users and enthusiasts. Other 32-GB flash SSDs may be much cheaper (DV Nation offers the Mtron device for $699), but they also aren’t as fast. If you are a true hardcore user with a flexible budget then you should not hesitate. For everyone else I can only repeat the recommendation I made half a year ago: Capacities, performance and price points will only drop considerably over time.
- Previous page Flash SSD Tech Talk
- Next page Test Controller: Adaptec RAID 5805
- 1 / 2
- Next
-
The key here is that SSDs are optimum for big retailers & enthusiasts, because of the lower failure rate compared to mechanical drives means less hardware failure and RMA and tech support calls. For us, its performance based. Dell and others will flock to these when the pricepoint hits home, and as soon as they jump on, drives will sell in such volume that new plants will have to be made and we'll need SATA-1000 before long.
Anyone whose been in the industry professionally and watched tech roll out over the years can see the writing on the wall, SSDs will dominate at least the "bootdrive" sector within two years. It might take longer to ramp up capacity for the "data" drives for home users, but its coming, and every process shrink to a smaller fab makes capacity go up exponentially.
personally i'm still waiting for the o dB (SIL) machines and for the 10 milisecounds to boot up an Operating system =D
HDD's are slower, but they can be as low as a quarter per gig. I'll stick with my 160GB seagate.
The ONLY, and I mean only, area where ssd drives will get consumer exposure will be in the laptop sector, simply because of the size/power requirements. For that to happen, ssd prices will need to fall "tenfold" and conventional hard drives will need to die out, which won't happen any time soon.
Desktops will will continue to use conventional hard disks for at least the next 5-10 years as they will go down in price and increase in capacities. Sata III 6gbps and newer pmr technologies will keep the traditional hard drive alive for a long time yet.
Servers may transition into a hybrid environment with both ssd and conventional drives, but with the cost of raid now so affordable (controllers incorporated into chipsets) and the fact that traditional fast (velociraptor) and beefy (terabyte) drives will ALWAYS be cheaper than the ssd variants - it's going to be a hard sell.
I'm not saying ssd is bad, but for those who don't have 5-digit monthly income, it is merely a toy for the rich. Sure, prices will eventually fall, but until you can sell the technology for 25 cents/gig or better, it will remain insignificant.
| geralt : SSDs have weakness in random writes and reads. Unfortunately this was not tested here. |
A mix of SSDs and HDDs will probably be the best solution for a long time. They each have their strengths depending on usage patterns. As soon as SSDs become more economical, mixed setups will quickly become the norm. I would have a couple of SSDs in a RAID 0 config to boot on and load applications off of, but I would have a some HDDs in a RAID setup for mass storage.
I really can't wait to build my next system. Gone is the day where I reuse a harddrive on a new build, and the new computer seems only as fast as the old one due to the HDD bottleneck.
As someone else commented on I am HORRIBLY disappointed that Tom's didn't test random writes and reads. If they actually didn't that is, I haven't finished the article but wanted to respond to the "clown" guy. I've noticed a lot of stuff like that with tech sites and it makes me wonder what kind of enticements these guys have to talk up a given product. Please do a follow up with random read&write tests.
as fas as the size goes. there is only a small amount of XP/Vista that needs benefits from super fast access. Your application and it's data are usually the best canidates for super fast storage.
/And yes show us the random access tests since you do talk about OS storage.
...Taking Mother's Day present out of Shopping Cart, putting MemoRight in...
Give me a break. Maybe years from now but that's not exactly news. Anyway, when it finally happens this specific model will not be the one to do it. It may end up being an entirely different technology that ends the HDD if SSD's don't drop in price fast enough.
Drop the sensationalism, start labeling both the X and Y axis of your graphs like professionals, and try to regain some journalistic integrity.
Toms is going downhill fast.
In fact, even if the 32gb ssd drive was $300, I would still have a hard time justifying the cost for such little space. 128GB at $300-$500 and I MAY think about buying one or more of these.
- 1 / 2
- Next
-
This has about the same marketing hype as ddr3 compared to ddr2.
I could care less about access times.
I am not paying their prices for a 32gig "SSD".
It is just not worth the money.