Benchmark Results: Power Consumption
Our benchmark configuration still consists of a smart battery that allows us to measure DC power consumption on the +5 V and +12 V power rails. The next configuration isn't quite ready yet. However, it will allow us to also measure the +3.3 V rail, which means we will be able to compare the VelociRaptor.
The power consumption results for the Vertex 3 line up with our expectations. OCZ claims it turned up performance a bit, which we saw in the preceding benchmarks. As a result, our benchmark confirms a slightly more aggressive use of power.
Even though our results show that the Vertex 3 consumes more power than the Seagate's Momentus, we have to take time into account. A disk-based drive will always consume more power absolutely. At the system level, a SSD will increase power consumption because CPU and memory utilization rises in response to improved I/O activity (they're not sitting there, waiting on a hard drive to send data). But remember that a SSD-based configuration will always finish those operations faster. At the end of the day, a SSD lowers power consumption.
| PCMark Vantage (x64) HDD Suite | Average Power Rating (W) | ActualPower Used (mW) | AverageCPU utilization (%) | Completion Time (mm:ss) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kingston SSDNow 100 V+ | 0.6 | 85 | 14.7 | 8:06 |
| OCZ Agility 2 | 1.4 | 186 | 10.9 | 7:54 |
| Intel X25-M | 1.4 | 242 | 10.8 | 10:17 |
| OCZ Vertex 3 Pro | 1.6 | 207 | 15.1 | 7:41 |
| OCZ Vertex 2 | 1.9 | 269 | 13.9 | 8:28 |
| Seagate Momentus 5400.6 | 2.2 | 426 | 10.4 | 11:40 |
| OCZ Vertex 3 | 2.3 | 305 | 15.1 | 7:50 |
| G.Skill SATA II FM-25S2S-64GB | 2.6 | 369 | 13.5 | 8:40 |
