Skip to main content

Crucial m4 And Intel SSD 320: The Other SSD Competitors

Benchmark Results: Iometer Streaming

While the second-gen SandForce controllers at the heart of OCZ’s Vertex 3 drives enable superior streaming read performance, Crucial's m4 unseats the SSD 510 for third place. Sequential performance, enabled over a 6 Gb/s interface, is where these four drives put their best feet forward. It's the only way we can push a sequential read in excess of 500 MB/s.

Intel's SSD 320 falls just shy of the X25-M, but the difference is minor. The Vertex 2s, Agility 2, X25-M, and SSD 320 all get lumped together at the low-end of the SSD spectrum. Between these drives, there is only a 3% margin of difference. Notice that G.Skill's older JMicron-based drive ranks the slowest. This is how far we have come from the first generation of SSDs.

We see the same situation transpire in the streaming writes benchmark pattern. However, this time, Crucial's m4 falls behind the SSD 510, and the Vertex 3s pull far ahead.

Writes are where we see an improvement for Intel's SSD 320. While it uses the same controller as the X25-M, we suspect the larger cache helps here. Performance approaches Crucial's C300, but relative to other drives, the SSD 320 falls behind. Even the older first-generation SandForce drives from OCZ outperform Intel's newest drive.

  • rainwilds
    Oooo, Crucial or Vertex? Decisions, decisions!
    Reply
  • Could you expand on the Full Disk Encryption capabilities of the Intel 320?
    If you can actually use hardware FDE on that drive (rather than just secure erase), that's a winner for me.
    Reply
  • bto
    Why does the Intel 510 250GB appear to have two scores in crystalmark? (469.4 and 259.7) on the top benchmark on page: "Benchmark Results: CrystalDiskMark Streaming Performance" the specs are identical for both.
    Reply
  • poppasmurf
    Great lil tidbit, wonder what the difference will be between other SSD's with different interface connections other than physical appearance and the interface connection. More on the lines of pro's and con's between the SSD interface connections I'm referring to the OCZ PCI-e drives vs. SATA 6GB just a thought to stir up the hoop la of ssd's :P
    Reply
  • JohnnyLucky
    I am beginning to wonder if we haven't reached the point where the human eye and brain are finding it harder to differentiate performance among ssd's. Some mainstream benchmarks seem to suggest that. Some of the benchmarks in this review seem to indicate the same. There are some very tight groupings.
    Reply
  • henryvalz
    At the speed points that SSDs are functioning, I'm beginning to think that durability and reliability might be the best basis for decision. I would also really like to see some boot times from Windows 7, or loading time for games.
    Reply
  • kev_stev
    Does anyone know when the vertex 3 and M4 are going to actually be available? I have heard rumors that the vertex 3 will be released "any day now" since mid march...
    Reply
  • iamtheking123
    I'll go SSD in my next build, probably in a year and a half. Right now I'm satisfied with Raid 0-ed 1TB Caviar Blacks.
    Reply
  • foscooter
    No mention of a release date. When will they be "in stores?" Q2 isn't exact enough.
    Reply
  • zerapio
    Alert! Spelling police is coming and their PISSED

    (yes, it was intentional)
    Reply