Benchmark Results: Storage Suite v1.0 And PCMark 7
Storage Bench v1.0 (Background Info)
Storage Bench v1.0 is our homegrown trace tool that stores and replays the first two weeks of I/O activity on a desktop workstation. Including several software installations, the trace incorporates quite a bit of sequentially-written compressible and incompressible information.
Samsung's 512 GB 840 Pro jumps to the top of the chart, beating every other drive we've tested so far. This big 512 GB repository certainly looks like it's the new king of the hill.
Unfortunately, we don't have a 128 GB model to test. At least in theory, the 256 GB version should serve up identical performance, given the degree of NAND parallelism and larger data buffer. But we'd suspect the 128 GB drive of being a little slower.
PCMark 7 puts more emphasis on compressible data. But, yet again, Samsung's 840 Pro springs to the top of our chart. That's an impressive finish considering that SSDs based on SandForce's second-gen controller have held the top spot in this metric for almost a year.
I dont see why it did not get a Toms approved award.... its faster, uses less power, and offers better warranty than the competition. And the firmware is also stable, unlike SF.
Probably because it still costs $600 for a pathetic 512gb of memory. Once you can get 512gb for under $200 and have a life span that gets close to a decent HDD, then you can expect an award.
They keep increasing the speed, but they do nothing to reduce the COST. I would take an SSD half as fast as some that are out now if they cost me half as much and had a decent amount of storage. It's still pointless for someone like me who has over 1.5TB of space used. I can't load Windows and all of my critical programs on a 256GB SSD, and the 512GB wouldn't give me much wiggle room. Not to mention my sample libraries that would benefit from the speed... that are hundreds of GB each.
Thats technology growth for you :D