Intel gen 1 80GB SSD vs Samsung gen 5 SSD

[RU482]

My ATTO comparison of Intel and Samsungs newest MLC SSDs

IntelvsSamsungMLCSSD.JPG

HD Tach graph comparison

IntelvsSamsungMLCSSD_HDtach.JPG


If there are any other benchies or data you want, let me know.

FWIW, I measured the Windows XP boot times, and there was about a 1 sec difference

Dissection pics...

SamsungSSD1.jpg

SamsungSSD2.jpg

SamsungSSD3.jpg

IntelSSD1.jpg

IntelSSD2.jpg

IntelSSD3.jpg

 

[jvnk]

Very cool - does this mean the Samsung Gen5 is beating out the new "uber fast" Intel x25-M?
EDIT: Err, nevermind, I didn't see that the scale on the graphs was changed between each in the first screenshot.

Any real performance boosts in applications that you can see(versus synthetic results like you've showed)?

It's awesome to see a drive performing so well, and considering Intel is probably just getting started, we're going to see alot faster and faster drives out there hopefully. As the Anandtech review of the Intel x25-M on Anandtech said, Intel just Conroe'd the storage market.

 

[LTG]

JVNK, the first graph is misleading because they don't use the same scale.

The intel drive overall beats the samsung drive.

 

[LTG]

Btw, if the enterprise version of the Intel drive comes as close to it's specs as the Intel consumer drive does, they will totally open a can of whoopass on the samsung enterprise drives.

 

[frostedflakes]

Nice to see the Samsung drive doesn't completely flounder with small random writes. I'm really anxious to see how the next-gen JMicron controllers perform.

 

[RU482]

there is one comparison I didn't post...

$682 for the Intel drive
$334 for the Samsung drive

 

[Denithor]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes
Nice to see the Samsung drive doesn't completely flounder with small random writes. I'm really anxious to see how the next-gen JMicron controllers perform.

SLC drives aren't affected by the random write problems, just the "cheap" MLC SSDs that use the crappy JMicron controller.

But $334 for an SLC drive? That's dirt cheap! Most of the 64GB models go for $600+ which is why Intel's fast MLC at 80GB for $600-700 was market priced.

 

[RU482]

Originally posted by: Denithor

Originally posted by: frostedflakes
Nice to see the Samsung drive doesn't completely flounder with small random writes. I'm really anxious to see how the next-gen JMicron controllers perform.

SLC drives aren't affected by the random write problems, just the "cheap" MLC SSDs that use the crappy JMicron controller.

But $334 for an SLC drive? That's dirt cheap! Most of the 64GB models go for $600+ which is why Intel's fast MLC at 80GB for $600-700 was market priced.

no, they are both MLC

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: redly1
there is one comparison I didn't post...

$682 for the Intel drive
$334 for the Samsung drive

Good price on the Samsung. Where did you buy it? Do they offer these drives in 32GB?

 

[Loreena]

Test with Crystal if you can. ATTO isn't telling the story with solid state.

 

[RU482]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Originally posted by: redly1
there is one comparison I didn't post...

$682 for the Intel drive
$334 for the Samsung drive

Good price on the Samsung. Where did you buy it? Do they offer these drives in 32GB?

not retail. OEM source. Yes, they are offered in 32GB....would you like to buy 100?

 

[RU482]

Originally posted by: Loreena
Test with Crystal if you can. ATTO isn't telling the story with solid state.

provide me a link to download and I will!

n/m...got it. Will run Monday when I get back to the office
http://crystalmark.info/softwa...lDiskMark/index-e.html

 

[jvnk]

Originally posted by: redly1
there is one comparison I didn't post...

$682 for the Intel drive
$334 for the Samsung drive

This is perhaps one of the most important comparisons between the drives
Hopefully we'll see the prices on the Intel drive drive drop soon, and quickly at that.

@LTG - Yeah, I noticed. Very misleading.

@Redly1 - Are you showing the Intel X25-M or X25-E? The E is the performance edition(apparently) versus the M for mobile edition.

 

[Loreena]

Originally posted by: redly1

Originally posted by: Loreena
Test with Crystal if you can. ATTO isn't telling the story with solid state.

provide me a link to download and I will!

n/m...got it. Will run Monday when I get back to the office
http://crystalmark.info/softwa...lDiskMark/index-e.html

Yeah there it is. I tried finding a source but only found torrents on warez sites.

 

[Glenn]

I only have the X25M in my 64bit Vista system but these are the crystal marks for comparison. I'm curious how the samsung will compare and also curious whether the stutter problem is still present on these new Samsungs?

--------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 2.2 (C) 2007-2008 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
--------------------------------------------------

Sequential Read : 253.565 MB/s
Sequential Write : 45.749 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 204.854 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 45.190 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 21.053 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 34.182 MB/s

Test Size : 100 MB
Date : 2008/11/02 7:09:06

 

[RU482]

Originally posted by: jvnk

Originally posted by: redly1
there is one comparison I didn't post...

$682 for the Intel drive
$334 for the Samsung drive

This is perhaps one of the most important comparisons between the drives
Hopefully we'll see the prices on the Intel drive drive drop soon, and quickly at that.

@LTG - Yeah, I noticed. Very misleading.

@Redly1 - Are you showing the Intel X25-M or X25-E? The E is the performance edition(apparently) versus the M for mobile edition.

The prices I quoted were for an MLC Samsung drive and an MLC Intel Drive (X25-M)

Also notice the power consumption difference on the labels of the two drives:
Samsung MLC: 0.2A @ 5V (1W)
Intel MLC: 1A @ 5V (5W)

How do I test for stutter??

 

[kensiko]

Install Office 2007 and go surfing to see if your mouse blocks.

 

[RU482]

My crystal disk test report

Here's the specs of the system we are testing with (which will explain the perf difference between my tests and others)

Core Duo U2500 - 1.2Ghz
2GB DDR2
945GMS (ICH-7) chipset
Windows XP Tablet Edition

Samsung MLC SSD
Sequential Read : 92.82 MB/s
Sequential Write : 75.48 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 90.30 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 59.95 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 12.38 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 4.555 MB/s
Test Size : 100 MB

Intel MLC SSD
Sequential Read : 128.9 MB/s
Sequential Write : 71.85 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 110.6 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 70.00 MB/s
Random Read 4KB : 12.70 MB/s
Random Write 4KB : 33.68 MB/s
Test Size : 100 MB

 

[kensiko]

We are still waiting for the stutter test.

 

[coolVariable]

That would be absolutely awesome for the Samsung.
Could it be that they have fixed the stuttering?

 

[kensiko]

redly1 where are you? We are still waiting...

 

[RU482]

I have not had a chance to test for stutter yet...I had to send the Intel drives back to the vendor.

I did notice on my office PC with a regular hard drive, working with excel 2007, I experience quite a bit of stutter type behavior, so I am not sure this is a great evaluation test of an SSD.

 

[Toadster]

Originally posted by: redly1
there is one comparison I didn't post...

$682 for the Intel drive
$334 for the Samsung drive

so if price is your model, stripe 2 of them and see if it wins?

 

[capeconsultant]

Where can I get more data on the Samsung drive used in this review? Is it out yet?

Dave

 

[RU482]

Originally posted by: capeconsultant
Where can I get more data on the Samsung drive used in this review? Is it out yet?

Dave

the datasheets are dated july 08. I am getting them through a distributor. First (partial) shipment will be in my hands Monday. These are all spoken for now, but as the supply chain relaxes, I may be able to sell one of these drives to you with some small handling markup.