In sequential reads, almost all SSDs offer performance between 350-370 MB/s at a queue depth of one, and the competition stays tight at a queue depth as high as eight. The only drives that lag behind are the 60 GB models with second-gen SandForce controllers. Throughput on both starts at close to 310 MB/s and only manages to break through 450 MB/s at a queue depth of four. The 64 GB m4 and 830 both hit those higher numbers at a queue depth as low as two.
Compressible Sequential Writes (example tasks: Some Application Installation, Document Backup)
When you’re dealing with compressible data, SandForce-based SSDs enjoy a particular advantage, since the company’s architecture employs compression under the hood to approach 500 MB/s using a 128 KB transfer size. The results are downright impressive. Even the 60 GB model based on asynchronous memory performs much like the high-end Samsung 830 256 GB.
Crucial’s 64 m4 is the poorest performer here, "puttering along" at 100 MB/s write speeds all the way up to a queue depth of eight. The 64 GB 830 does slightly better, achieving 165 MB/s. But performance actually falls off by 10-20 MB/s as you move up to higher queue depths. Both drives deliver less than half of the performance provided by the 60 GB SandForce-based SSDs.
- Which 64 GB SSD Is The Best?
- Simplfying The SandForce Landscape
- Test Setup And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: Storage Bench v1.0 And PCMark 7
- Benchmark Results: 4 KB Random Performance
- Benchmark Results: 128 KB Sequential Performance
- SandForce: Incompressible Performance
- Real-World Tests
- Crowning An Entry-Level SSD Performance King
- Storage Bench v1.0, In More Detail
- More Background On Our Benchmarks