Sequential Read/Write Speed

Using the 6-22-2008 build of Iometer I ran a 3 minute long 2MB sequential test over the entire span of the drive. The results reported are in average MB/s over the entire test length:

Iometer - 2MB Sequential Read

Sequential read/write performance suffers on these entry level drives. Remember that these drives hit their low capacities (and price points) by leaving half of the NAND channels unpopulated, which means in situations where you've got a ton of data to transfer in parallel you're going to be slower than a high end SSD. In read speed the Intel and Kingston drives are limited to around 180MB/s, still faster than any desktop hard drive. Sequential write speeds are slower than 2.5" hard drives however:

Iometer - 2MB Sequential Write

Random Read/Write Speed

This test reads/writes 4KB in a completely random pattern over an 8GB space of the drive to simulate the sort of random access that you'd see on an OS drive (even this is more stressful than a normal desktop user would see). I perform three concurrent IOs and run the test for 3 minutes. The results reported are in average MB/s over the entire time.

Iometer - 4KB Random Read

Improved random read and write performance are SSD advantages. Even the cheaper drives hold this advantage over the fastest hard drives. While the 600GB VelociRaptor is stuck at 0.7MB/s in our random read test, Intel's X25-V delivers 60.5MB/s. The best performer here out of the value drives is the Intel X25-V, followed by OCZ's Onyx.

Iometer - 4KB Random Write

Many of you have asked for random write performance at higher queue depths. What I have below is our 4KB random write test performed at a queue depth of 32 instead of 3. While the vast majority of desktop usage models experience queue depths of 0 - 5, higher depths are possible in heavy I/O workloads:

Iometer - 4KB Random Write - QD32

All of the value SSDs improve performance as they are able to extract more parallelism out of the data and thus get better NAND/controller utilization, but the standings don't change: Intel is on top, followed by OCZ and Kingston at a distant 2nd and 3rd place.

Introducing the Contenders Overall System Performance using PCMark Vantage
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • loimlo - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    Despite the same controller, SSDNOW V+ series enjoys better flash memory, thus faster speed, compared to SSDNOW V. That said, I'd purchase Intel G2 rather than SSDNOW V+ given the cost difference is next to none, but performance is better on Intel side. SSDNOW V occucpies better position in comparison to SSDNOW V+ on the market.

    OK, NOW I'll show you the proof of Toshiba controller in Kingston's SSD across the web reviews.
    "Kingston's SSDNow V+ series is our first glimpse of Toshiba's T6UG1XBG controller"
    "Toshiba T6UG1XBG SSD controller that is being used on the 30GB boot drive. This is the same exact controller that is used on the higher performing Kingston V+ Seires of SSDs,"
    "The Toshiba T6UG1XBG controller on this drive is the same controller used in the latest Kingston SSDNow V+ Series drives. "
    "The heart and soul of all Kingston V+ Series SSDs is the Toshiba T6UG1XBG SSD controller pictured above."
  • Phate- - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    So the Toshiba controller is actually the JMicron controller?

    "It's tough to see and even tougher to photograph but stenciled on the controller chip are the letters T-O-S-H-I-B-A which apparently is a JMicron JMF618 controller but branded as Toshiba as they are the manufacturer. This controller does support TRIM for those running Windows 7."

    And 140 euro for a the Kingston V S2 64GB or 210 euro for the Intel Postville 80GB, that is quite a difference. The cost difference is huge.

    I think your making some kind of mistake, the huge advantage of the Kingston V S2 series is that it is a lot cheaper. There are four "different" drives: The V, the V+, the V+ S2 and then the V S2.
  • loimlo - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    First, I'm comparing price of V+ to Intel G2, not V to G2. Second, Toshiba/WD's controller isn't identical to JMicron's reference design mainly because of their in-house firmware tweaks. You can compare Kingston, WD, and JMicron reference design and later you'll find differing speed despite the same IC under the hood in the review(hint: Anandtech's excellent SSD reviews). Last, but not the least, I know there's 2nd generation of Kingston's SSDs, but Kingston still calls them SSDNOW V and SSDNOW V+ on the official website. Kingston never calls V G2 or V+ G2 for their SSD products. In other words, Kingston adopts the very similar way to WD which doesn't explicitly tell the difference between previous and next generation products. You need to specify product model like SNV125S2(30GB)/SNV425S2(64/128GB) to ensure it's V "G2". OK, I've to admit that I've done a lot of work before purchasing a 2nd generation SSDNOW 64GB for myself a few days ago.
  • Phate- - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    I know that firmware is very important, but I've seen no mention of the fact that it all in all is still the same controller, just with different firmware. Annoyingly enough. (If that is even correct.)

    And well, you should look at V-series pricing, that's where this debate started. ;) My whole argument is based solely on the point that the new (S2) V-series are very competative in the ssd market, solely based on their competative pricing. As stated above, over here, you can pick up an 64GB S2 V-series for 70 euros less then the intel postville 80GB, which is quite a lot.

    And the fact that we are having this discussion makes it even more interesting to properly discuss these ssd's on Anandtech.
  • loimlo - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    Well, you seem to misunderstand my words. I do think V series is better than V+ in terms of price-to-capacity ration. I'll quote what I wrote before.
    "SSDNOW V occucpies better position in comparison to SSDNOW V+ on the market"
    ", I'd purchase Intel G2 rather than SSDNOW V+"
    Also, I've purchased SSDNOW V series 64GB, so you know my decision.

    Btw, I'd like to show my respect and thanks to Anand who made this review and clarified Kingston's TRIM which is missing in previous budget SSD review -- Intel's X25-V & Kingston's 30GB SSDNow V Series: Battle of the $125 SSDs.
  • MrSpadge - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    I wonder what kind of real world application performance one would get using a normal HDD and one of these small SSDs as Win 7 ReadyBoost drive. Pretty much everything you normally use should be in the cache then, except the video and music collection and games you haven't touched for months.
  • 7Enigma - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    I'm glad you mentioned this in the conclusion. I've said it before but for most of the smaller capacity drives (<200GB), and ESPECIALLY these tiny drives, they will predominantly be used as boot drives with secondary large storage mechanical HDD's. Sure someone might put one in a laptop/netbook if they only use it to surf the web, but due to the capacity contraint I really feel these are the perfect-sized drives for desktops that have an extra HDD for mass storage.

    In that case the Random performance and specifically the READ performance is paramount and shows just how good this Intel drive is (if you can justify the higher cost). I personally feel for this group the StorageBench data is pretty much worthless due to the unlikely usage pattern.

    With that said, I think the wait approach is key. Unless you are building a system today waiting for the 80gig 25nm models to come out is a no-brainer. My 80gig G2 Intel SSD is the perfect size IMO for most people as a boot/small set of games/software drive, and to have that for $100 is a STEAL.

    I just built my dad a gaming/editing desktop and the combination of an 80gig Intel G2 and 1TB secondary HDD for under $300 total is just about unbeatable.
  • semo - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    good luck waiting for the 80GB G3s. It is very likely that this will be a very popular drive and will be even harder to get than the G2s when they came out. That's assuming Intel does actually release it on time.

    I doubt Intel will make such a drastic cut in price this time around since they know the G3s will sell like hotcakes. They might just wait for the competitors to match their performance figures before they start dropping prices (just like in the CPU arena). Or, if we're lucky they might choose to dictate the market and enter at a low price again (depends how badly they really want to get in to the mainstream).
  • Anosh - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    Something that is (just about) never mentioned/measured in these test are the life of the SSDs.
    How long can I expect the drive to last? I've been reading on forums about people's SSD drives dying after six months!
  • StormyParis - Thursday, June 3, 2010 - link

    MS is taking their own sweet time to come out with ReadyBoost for SSD. In the mean time, would it be possible to benchmark a small, OS-only SSD vs USB3 Readyboost ? I'm wondering what makes more sense, the dumb approach of putting everything on a SSD? or intelligent caching. I'm guessing USB3 levels the playing field for ReadyBoost ?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now