Articles: Storage

Bookmark and Share

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 ]

Performance in FC-Test

For this test two 32GB partitions are created on the SSD and formatted in NTFS and then in FAT32. A file-set is then created, read from the SSD, copied within the same partition and copied into another partition. The time taken to perform these operations is measured and the speed of the SSD is calculated. The Windows and Programs file-sets consist of a large number of small files whereas the other three patterns (ISO, MP3, and Install) include a few large files each.

We’d like to note that the copying test is indicative of the drive’s behavior under complex load. In fact, the SSD is working with two threads (one for reading and one for writing) when copying files.

This test produces too much data, so we will only discuss the results achieved with the Install, ISO and Programs file-sets in NTFS. You can use the links below to view the full results:

The Indilinx-based SSDs are ahead when writing large ISO files. They don’t deliver the promised speeds but all of the Vertex series models offer 100MBps and more, the Agility following closely behind. They slow down on small files, especially those of the Program pattern, and Intel’s SSDs take first two places. By the way, Intel’s second-generation model is always 10MBps better than its predecessor. The OCZ Summit is the main disappointment of this test as its performance is low with each file-set.

All of the SSDs are excellent at reading files, especially the Programs file-set where they are about two times as fast as modern HDDs. The new Intel X25-M is the overall winner while the Summit and Agility are losers.

Intel’s SSDs are ahead at copying, the newer model being some 10MBps better than the older one again. The Summit stands out among the others. It is surprisingly good with large ISO files but does not like the Install pattern. The Vertex Turbo is worse than the others, probably due to imperfect firmware.

Pages: [ 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 ]


Comments currently: 3
Discussion started: 10/14/09 12:57:27 PM
Latest comment: 10/30/09 06:10:38 PM

View comments

Add your Comment