SATA 3 SSD Roundup Review
Conclusion
Published: 27th February 2012 | Source: OC3D | Price: |
Conclusion
We know that people are paying closer attention to the IOPS result as more and more manufacturers include it in their technical specifications and advertising blurb. Now we've finally found a tool that can easily and consistently give us usable IOPS testing, what new information does it give us?
Oddly, we don't think there is much that IOPS can inform us of that isn't clear in the MB/s rating. Generally the two are linear with the lower IOPS score leading to a lower pure data transfer rate.
Probably most surprising is how varied the results can be which shows how important it is to use a multitude of testing to get a clear view of the performance of the drives under a variety of scenarios. If we just looked at AIDA64 we would think the Mushkin was the lesser drive. Crystal Disk Mark clearly favours the Intel and Corsair drives. Otherwise they are all amazingly close and there really isn't a lot between them. This further ads weight to our argument that its difficult to get a drive that clearly leads or lags across all of the benchmark results.
So of the four drives we have on test today, which gives the best results?
I think it's pretty obvious that the Intel 520 was the most consistent drive throughout all of our testing, in both the read and write benchmarks. All the other drives had strong results and weak results, but the Intel just kept churning out high scores regardless of what we threw at it and that would have to be our recommended drive of the four on test. Although it is of course worth noticing than in real-life daily usage any of these drives would be nearly inseparable and provide the performance increase that we're all so desperate for.
Thanks to Intel, Mushkin, Corsair and Kingston for providing the drives on test today.
Let us know your thoughts in our forums.
Most Recent Comments
to the SSD market. and thatll change with the months due to more and more technology and users of SSD.
airdeano
All prices are approx after a quick search:
Intel = £360
Mushkin - only found a price for 120gb = £170
Corsair = £280
Kingston = 300
Definately gettting bang for your buck.
...
F*** me, i'll get the 520 240GB sooner or later anyway...
edit: @leerory: Companies have quite different demands in terms of reliability, as such they pay more for that than raw POWER!!!!111
Nice to have some other tests to compare with.Glad I bought a Corsair Force GT 120GB the other week. Awesome drive imo.
|
Originally Posted by Timbaloo
I'm not cheap, and i believe the intel 520 is one of if not the best SSD out there, but paying almost twice the money per GB compared to eg. the Mushkin Chronos is something to consider. ... F*** me, i'll get the 520 240GB sooner or later anyway... |
Mushkin Chronos Deluxe - $279
Kingston HyperX Drive - $330
Kingston HyperX Kit - $350
Corsair Force GT - $330
Intel 520 Series retail- $370
Intel 520 Series OEM - $335
Price wise, the best is the Mushkin drive. As long as you don't mind getting a OEM package you can get the Intel for close to the same price as the Corsair and Kingston offerings. For the most part, most of us on here build our own computers and don't really need a retail package.
IMHO if I was going to pay extra for a drive I would get the HyperX kit, comes with the external case, screwdriver, migration software, sata and usb cables, and a 3.5" tray.
For me personally the Intel did perform the best, but I have really good luck out of corsair products and think I will continue to buy quality products they offer.
CSS Valid
As we bring a new benchmark to the OC3D suite of testing, we thought we'd give you a quick run through of some popular SSDs.
Continue Reading