Archive Home arrow Reviews: arrow Storage arrow Corsair X256 CMFSSD-256D1 MLC SSD
Corsair X256 CMFSSD-256D1 MLC SSD
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Storage
Written by Olin Coles   
Monday, 07 September 2009

Corsair X256 SSD Review

The competition among Solid State Drive manufacturers is reminiscent of the video card wars between AMD and NVIDIA a few years ago. The invention of new controller technology has slowed somewhat, while each company races to combine high-speed NAND with custom firmware tweaks to produce the fastest SSD speeds possible. The Indilinx Barefoot controller has exploited a dominant hold over the consumer SSD market during the past several months, and 'overclocked' Solid State Drive products are beginning to replace 'new' product designs. In this article, Benchmark Reviews tests the fastest MLC SSD we've discovered to-date: the 256GB eXtreme-edition Corsair X256 CMFSSD-256D1.

With generation 3 guidelines for the 6.0 GBps SATA interface already being used in certain Intel P55 motherboards, it's understandable to see the speeds of Solid State Drive products increase so quickly with each new model. The Indilinx Barefoot controller has become the backbone chip for over a dozen different SSD models, first introduced in the OCZ Vertex SSD, and now make a return appearance in the Corsair X256 SSD.

Virtually identical to the popular OCZ Vertex Turbo in every aspect except branding and firmware, the Corsair X256 SSD series offers the same Indilinx 'Barefoot' controller and 64MB of DRAM buffer, but now boasts ultra-fast 240/170 MBps read and write speeds. Benchmark Reviews tests the reaction time and bandwidth performance for the Corsair X256 256GB CMFSSD-256D1 Indilinx MLC SSD model against over two dozen other storage products in this article.

Anyone familiar with articles published at Benchmark Reviews is very well aware of our obsession with Solid State Drive technology. They're complex, and every SSD is different than the next. Nothing like Hard Disk Drive technology, which improves as spindle speed and cache buffer are increased, SSDs are the future and because of this their internal architecture is constantly evolving. This is why we offer so much coverage on the topic: it's interesting and exciting. Plus, they can turn the average computer system into a roaring beast. It's not marketing hype; for once the truth is stranger than fiction.

Corsair-X256-256GB-SATA-II-MLC-SSD-CMFSSD-256D1-splash.jpg

Since first making a public debut at the 2007 Consumer Electronics Show, Solid State Drives (SSDs) have been a topic of hot discussion among performance enthusiasts. These nonvolatile flash memory-based drives feature virtually no access time delay and promise a more reliable storage medium with greater performance while operating at a fraction of the power level. Moving into 2008, SSDs became a consumer reality for many performance-minded power users. Now that 2009 has proven how strong the industry support behind Solid State Drive technology is, we should hope that mainstream acceptance moves faster than it did for DDR3 SDRAM.

Solid State Drive products are no longer restricted to bleeding edge hardware enthusiasts or wealthy elitists. Heading into 2009, SSD storage devices were available online for nearly $2 per gigabyte of storage capacity while the most popular performance desktop hard drive hovered just above $1/GB. While most consumers are waiting for that day when SSD costs the same as HDD, they seem to be forgetting how Solid State Drives have already surpassed Hard Disk performance in every other regard. Our collection of SSD reviews is a good starting point for comparing the competition.

EDITOR'S NOTE 29 OCT 2009: The X256 SSD sample provided to Benchmark Reviews by Corsair nearly two months ago has stopped working and is no longer recognized by any system BIOS or O/S. After some research, it appears that a very small number of Corsair X256 SSDs have suffered similar firmware-related issues. This problem has been confirmed with Corsair, and the present solution is to contact Corsair technical support via the company website or support forums. Replacement X256 SSDs are said to have a new firmware version that remedies this issue, although this is unconfirmed. As a precaution, ensure that all important files have been backed-up onto another source.

SSD Testing Disclaimer

Early on in our SSD coverage, Benchmark Reviews published an article which detailed Solid State Drive Benchmark Performance Testing. The research and discussion that went into producing that article changed the way we now test SSD products. Our previous perceptions of this technology were lost on one particular difference: the wear leveling algorithm that makes data a moving target. Without conclusive linear bandwidth testing or some other method of total-capacity testing, our previous performance results were rough estimates at best.

Our test results were obtained after each SSD had been prepared using DISKPART or Sanitary Erase tools. As a word of caution, applications such as these offer immediate but temporary restoration of original 'pristine' performance levels. In our tests, we discovered that the maximum performance results (charted) would decay as subsequent tests were performed. SSDs attached to TRIM enabled Operating Systems will benefit from continuously refreshed performance, whereas older O/S's will require a garbage collection (GC) tool to avoid 'dirty NAND' performance degradation.

It's critically important to understand that no software for the Microsoft Windows platform can accurately measure SSD performance in a comparable fashion. Synthetic benchmark tools such as HD Tach and PCMark are helpful indicators, but should not be considered the ultimate determining factor. That factor should be measured in actual user experience of real-world applications. Benchmark Reviews includes both bandwidth benchmarks and application speed tests to present a conclusive measurement of product performance.

About Corsaircorsair_logo_stacked_100px.png

Founded in 1994, Corsair Memory, Inc., is a worldwide leader in high-performance components for personal computers. Specializing in very high performance memory and ultra-efficient power supplies, our flagship products, Including Dominator memory modules, are the choice of overclockers, enthusiasts, and gamers everywhere. Our expertise in design and manufacturing is also evident in our complete line of Flash Voyager and Flash Survivor USB storage devices. Corsair offers 24/7 customer support via forums and the Tech Support Express helpdesk. For more information, please visit www.corsair.com

Replacing your hard disk drive with a Corsair Extreme Series SSD will revolutionize your computing experience. Games load more quickly, your computer starts faster, and multiple applications run more smoothly, all while running cool and silent.

Corsair's Extreme Series drives are among the fastest available today. The combination of the Indilinx Barefoot controller, Samsung flash memory, and a generous onboard cache, results in extreme performance with up to 240MB/s sequential read and 170MB/s sequential write speeds. Available in 32GB, 64GB, 128GB, and 256GB configurations, the Extreme Series drives are for RAID 0 configurations on your desktop, delivering blistering speed and eliminating the long-standing performance bottleneck of traditional mechanical hard disks.

  • Fast-Games and apps load faster, Windows is more responsive
  • Compatible-The Extreme Series uses the proven Indilinx Barefoot controller, found on SSDs installed in tens of thousands of systems worldwide
  • Stutter free-The sophisticated controller and onboard cache and ensure smooth performance, unlike that of cheaper SSDs
  • Silent-No moving parts means zero noise and high reliability
  • Low Power-Longer battery life for laptop users means greater productivity
  • Backed by Corsair-A respected name with a passion for great service and support

Corsair X256 Features

  • Maximum sequential read speed up to 240MB/s
  • Maximum sequential write speed up to 170MB/s
  • Indilinx Barefoot controller and Samsung MLC NAND flash for maximum performance
  • 64MB DRAM cache for stutter-free performance
  • No moving parts for increased durability over standard hard disk drives
  • Decreased power usage for cool and quiet operation and increased laptop battery life
  • 100+ Year Life Expectancy (MTBF)
  • User upgradeable firmware
  • Two year warranty

Corsair X-Series Specifications

Model CMFSSD-256D1 CMFSSD-128D1 CMFSSD-64D1 CMFSSD-32D1
Technology High-reliability Samsung MLC NAND flash High-reliability Samsung MLC NAND flash High-reliability Samsung MLC NAND flash High-reliability Samsung MLC NAND flash
Form factor 2.5 inch 2.5 inch 2.5 inch 2.5 inch
Unformatted capacity 256GB ‡ 128GB ‡ 64GB ‡ 32GB ‡
Interface SATA II (3.0Gb/s)
Backward compatible with SATA I 		SATA II (3.0Gb/s)
Backward compatible with SATA I 		SATA II (3.0Gb/s)
Backward compatible with SATA I 		SATA II (3.0Gb/s)
Backward compatible with SATA I
Performance 240 MB/s sequential read
170 MB/s sequential write 		240 MB/s sequential read
170 MB/s sequential write 		220 MB/s sequential read
135 MB/s sequential write 		220 MB/s sequential read
135 MB/s sequential write
DRAM cache memory 64MB 64MB 64MB 64MB
User upgradeable firmware Yes Yes Yes Yes
Weight 80g 80g 80g 80g

Electrical and Power Characteristics
Voltage 5V ±5% 5V ±5% 5V ±5% 5V ±5%
Power consumption
(active) 		2.0W Max 2.0W Max 2.0W Max 2.0W Max
Power consumption
(idle/standby/sleep) 		0.5W Max 0.5W Max 0.5W Max 0.5W Max

SSD Reliability
S.M.A.R.T. support Yes Yes Yes Yes
MTBF 1,000,000 hours 1,000,000 hours 1,000,000 hours 1,000,000 hours
Shock 1500G 1500G 1500G 1500G
Warranty Two Years Two Years Two Years Two Years

‡ NOTES:
1 megabyte (MB) = 1 million bytes; 1 gigabyte (GB) = 1 billion bytes
Unformatted capacity is the total amount of memory on the drive. The total formatted capacity for the drive will be lower, depending on the operating system and file system used.

First Look: Corsair X256 SSD

When it comes to the appearance of notebook drives, it must be understood that the product you're looking at will be hidden away from plain view once it gets installed. Keeping in mind that this product is solid state, and therefore has no moving parts, it takes some extra-special attention to product presentation in order to help keep the consumer feeling comfortable with their premium purchase. The CMFSSD-256D1 kit that Corsair sent to Benchmark Reviews appears to have been designed for OEM purposes, since the packaging was simply a plain white box with a part number sticker on it. For anyone familiar with SSDs, it's not what's on the outside that's important; it's the inside that counts.

Corsair-X256-256GB-SATA-II-MLC-SSD-CMFSSD-256D1-top.jpg

Unlike desktop computers which utilize a SATA cable system to connect drive to motherboard, nearly all notebooks allow the 2.5" drive to simply slide directly into a connection bay within the system. In addition to notebooks and desktop computer usage, this Corsair X256 MLC Solid State Drive can be utilized for mission-critical backups or high-abuse data systems, but it's real focus is high-performance speed. Most Indilinx-based SSDs include a two-pin jumper for flashing firmware updates onto the controller, which is obsolete with newer firmware (that updates without a jumper shunt). One unfortunate omission from the X-series SSDs is the integration of a High-Speed USB 2.0 Mini-B port, similar to what we've seen on previous-generation Solid State Drive products. If manufacturers offered a mini-B USB 2.0 port in the SSD chassis, consumers could access their drive without having to attach an SSD cable; similar to external and USB flash drives.

OCZ_Summit_MLC_SSD_Bottom.jpg

Unlike the average Hard Disk Drive (HDD) storage product, SSD's are nearly impervious to impact damage and do not require or benefit from any kind of special vibration dampening or shock-proof enclosures. Corsair utilizes a flat-black metal enclosure for the X256 Solid State Drive, which reveals the internal components after removing just four small counter-sunk screws on the underside.

Corsair-X256-256GB-SATA-II-MLC-SSD-CMFSSD-256D1-angle.jpg

Standard 2.5" drive bay mounting points are pre-drilled and threaded into the Corsair X256 SSD, which allows for quick upgrade or addition into any existing notebook or desktop system. The mounting positions matched up to the drive bracket on my laptop, and after only a few minutes of drive cloning I was quickly booting into the Windows O/S. The Corsair model CMFSSD-256D1 SSD kit does not include a 2.5" to 5.25" converter tray with the kit, similar to what we've seen other manufacturers begin to include.

Now that you're acquainted with the basic exterior features of the Corsair X256 CMFSSD-256D1, it's time to peek inside the enclosure and inspect the internal components...

Indilinx Internal Components

Corsair has designed the X256 and entire X-series Solid State Drives to use the familiar Indilinx Barefoot architecture and components introduced first in the OCZ Vertex series and shared by many others we've tested here at Benchmark Reviews. NAND flash module brand and custom firmware are the only differences between the two products internally. Because the design is identical between these models, this Internal Components section re-uses images from the original OCZ Vertex article to illustrate the electronics inside the Corsair X256 SSD.

Intermittent and delayed response cycles (stuttering) from Solid State Drive products is not entirely wide-spread among all MLC SSDs, but it has become a big-enough issue among most affordable SSD products that many are well-aware of the phenomenon. Consumers first experienced the bitter taste of stuttering SSD performance with the OCZ Core Series (v1) SSD, although it has also been reported with the G.Skill MLC SSD and Patriot Warp v2. The phenomenon occurs when the drives buffer is filled faster than it can read or write data, and was prevalent among first-generation JMicron JMF602 SSD controllers.

In our OCZ Apex SSD article, Benchmark Reviews detailed how a single JMicron JMB390 RAID controller managing a pair of JMF602(B) SSD controllers in a RAID-0 striped array was able to overcome the 'stutter' experienced in MLC drives... at least in read-from functions. Indilinx utilizes more traditional methods of delivering performance with their renowned Barefoot ARM7 Solid State Drive micro-controller.

OCZ_Vertex_PCB_Bottom.jpg

To the untrained eye, the Corsair X256 SSD looks like every other Solid State Drive you've probably seen when the internal components have been exposed. There's a collective bank of NAND modules, usually with Samsung markings, followed by the SATA controller chip. Indilinx delivers the SATA controller interface, since their 'Barefoot' chip was production-ready to be paired with a large cache at a time when JMicron was (and still is) a few months away with their successor to the JMF602B chip.

OCZ_Vertex_PCB_Top.jpg

While the internal NAND flash DRAM used in the original Indilinx SSDs, such as the OCZ Vertex, are comprised of Samsung K9HCG08U1M-PCB00 IC parts (pictured below) branded as K9HCG08U1M PCB0, the 'overclocked' Indilinx SSDs use several different manufactures to supply the fastest NAND modules available. These lead-free RoHS-compliant 48-pin ICs are multi-layer, with one IC directly atop another to offer 64GB in 16x organization for the 256GB CMFSSD-256D1 model.

SAMSUNG_K9HCG08U1M_DRAM.jpg

Indilinx claims that their IDX110M00-FC 'Barefoot' chip offer a maximum read speed 230 MBps and supports the capacity up to 512GB with standard multi-level cell (MLC) NAND flash, but really this limit was based off of early generation chips. The Indilinx (IDX110) Barefoot SSD controller chip is touted as delivering bandwidth over 200 MBps and random input-output (IO) of 20,000/s into various servers such as on-line transaction processing (OLTP) and streaming server units. These figures are NAND-flash dependant, which is why the Corsair X-series and OCZ Vertex Turbo series SSDs offer improved speed when compared to the original Indilinx product varieties.

INDILINX_IDX1100M00-FC.jpg

A single Elpida 64MB SDRAM module is marked with S51321CBH-7BTT-F, but the actual Elpida part number is EDS51321CBH, which is a 133MHz (CL3-3-3) mobile RAM component. This 64MB cache buffer helps improve small write-to performance and removes the 'stuttering' effect from all Indilinx Barefoot-based SSD products.

ELPIDA_S51321CBH.jpg

In the next section, Benchmark Reviews begins performance testing the Corsair X256 CMFSSD-256D1 256GB MLC SSD, and we determine just how well the new Indilinx Barefoot-based SSD compares to the current best-performing competition.

SSD Testing Methodology

Solid State Drives have traveled a long winding course to finally get where they are today. Up to this point in technology, there have been several key differences separating Solid State Drives from magnetic rotational Hard Disk Drives. While the DRAM-based buffer size on desktop HDD's has recently reached 32 MB and is ever-increasing, there is still a hefty delay in the initial response time. This is one key area in which flash-based Solid State Drives continually dominates because they lack moving parts to "get up to speed".

However the benefits inherent to SSD's have traditionally fallen off once the throughput begins, even though data reads or writes are executed at a high constant rate whereas the HDD tapers off in performance. This makes the average transaction speed of a SSD comparable to the data burst rate mentioned in HDD tests, albeit usually lower than the HDD's speed.

Comparing a Solid State Disk to a standard Hard Disk Drives is always relative; even if you're comparing the fastest rotational spindle speeds. One is going to be many times faster in response (SSD's), while the other is usually going to have higher throughput bandwidth (HDD's). Additionally, there are certain factors which can affect the results of a test which we do our best to avoid.

EDITORS NOTE: After November 2009 Benchmark Reviews will begin testing storage devices using the Microsoft Windows 7 Operating System. Although the Marvell SATA 6Gb/s (SATA-III) controller is available on select motherboards, our testing indicates that SSD devices perform better on the Intel ICH-10 Southbridge.

SSD Testing Disclaimer

Early on in our SSD coverage, Benchmark Reviews published an article which detailed Solid State Drive Benchmark Performance Testing. The research and discussion that went into producing that article changed the way we now test SSD products. Our previous perceptions of this technology were lost on one particular difference: the wear leveling algorithm that makes data a moving target. Without conclusive linear bandwidth testing or some other method of total-capacity testing, our previous performance results were rough estimates at best.

Our test results were obtained after each SSD had been prepared using DISKPART or Sanitary Erase tools. As a word of caution, applications such as these offer immediate but temporary restoration of original 'pristine' performance levels. In our tests, we discovered that the maximum performance results (charted) would decay as subsequent tests were performed. SSDs attached to TRIM enabled Operating Systems will benefit from continuously refreshed performance, whereas older O/S's will require a garbage collection (GC) tool to avoid 'dirty NAND' performance degradation.

It's critically important to understand that no software for the Microsoft Windows platform can accurately measure SSD performance in a comparable fashion. Synthetic benchmark tools such as HD Tach and PCMark are helpful indicators, but should not be considered the ultimate determining factor. That factor should be measured in actual user experience of real-world applications. Benchmark Reviews includes both bandwidth benchmarks and application speed tests to present a conclusive measurement of product performance.

Test System

  • Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD4P (Intel X58/ICH10R Chipset) with version F9d BIOS
  • Processor: Intel Core i7-920 BX80601920 @ 2.667 GHz
  • System Memory: 6GB Tri-Channel DDR3 1600MHz CL6-6-6-18
  • Operating System: Windows XP Professional SP-3 (optimized to 16 processes at idle)

Drive Hardware Tested

The following storage hardware has been used in our benchmark performance testing, and may be included in portions of this article:

Test Tools

  • System Speed Test v4.78 by Vladimir Afanasiev: Accurately measures random access response time
  • ATTO Disk Benchmark v2.34: Spot-tests static file size chunks for basic I/O bandwidth
  • HD Tune Pro v3.5 by EFD Software: Measured random access IOPS and speed
  • Iometer 2006.07.27 by Intel Corporation: Tests IOPS performance and I/O response time
  • EVEREST Ultimate Edition v5.02.1750 by Lavalys: Disk Benchmark component tests linear read and write bandwidth speeds
  • CrystalDiskMark v2.2 by Crystal Dew World: Sequential speed benchmark spot-tests various file size chunks
  • HD Tach RW v3.0.4.0 by Simpli Software: Measures approximate buffered read and write bandwidth speeds

EDITOR'S NOTE 29 OCT 2009: The X256 SSD sample provided to Benchmark Reviews by Corsair nearly two months ago has stopped working and is no longer recognized by any system BIOS or O/S. After some research, it appears that a very small number of Corsair X256 SSDs have suffered similar firmware-related issues. This problem has been confirmed with Corsair, and the present solution is to contact Corsair technical support via the company website or support forums. Replacement X256 SSDs are said to have a new firmware version that remedies this issue, although this is unconfirmed. As a precaution, ensure that all important files have been backed-up onto another source.

System Speed Test

I doubt that when DOS was put to rest, Vladimir Afanasiev ever thought he would see his System Speed Test software used again in professional reviews. This program offers comprehensive system information, but it also has a powerful benchmarking tool for memory, processor, and disks. In terms of disk performance, it measures interface and physical transfer rates, seek and access times at the hardware level, and it does so without delay or interference from Operating System software or running processes. This is why Benchmark Reviews will continue to use this test: it polls its results directly from the hardware layer without the need for an Operating System (such as Windows).

System Speed Test does not require a partition to be present for testing, so all of our Random Access Time benchmarks are completed prior to drive formatting. To detect the Random Access Time, each device runs the full test routine a total of five times. The highest and lowest scores were ignored, and the remainder was averaged. This would be prove pointless however, because the access time benchmark for every single SSD recorded identical test results between runs.

System_Speed_Test_Access_Time.png

Using the System Speed Test software, the top Random Access Time benchmarks places the OCZ Vertex EX, Mtron Pro 7500, and ACARD ANS-9010 at the very top of our results. The 0.9 ms performers include: MemoRight GT, Intel X25-E Extreme, Mtron Pro 7000, Mtron MOBI 3500, Intel 80GB X25-M, and the OCZ Summit. With a Random Access Time of 10ms, the following SSDs were included: Corsair X256, OCZ Vertex Turbo, OCZ Vertex, Patriot Torqx, Super Talent UltraDrive ME, Crucial M225, OCZ Agility, and lastly the Mtron MOBI 3000. With a lightning-fast sub 0.1 ms access time, every other SSD is forced to live in the shadow that these nearly-instant products have just created.

Some of the slower Random Access Times include the following SSD products: Kingston SSDNow V+ Series (Samsung PB22-J) with 0.14 ms, The Silicon Power SLC SATA-II SSD SP032GBSSD750S25 with 0.17 ms, the OCZ Apex at 0.18 ms, the Patriot Warp v2 with 0.19 ms, and finally the G.Skill Titan finishing at 0.21 ms. There were slower SSD products, but obsolescence removed them from our results.

The DRAM cache buffer is common link between request and response time. Solid State Drive devices have the advantage of a nearly instantaneous NAND storage bank responding to an even faster DRAM buffer. Conversely, Hard Disk Drive products depend on a fast spindle speed to reduce the delay before the buffer transmits data.

Although the SSDs at the slower end of our Response Time chart may seem less impressive, in reality you couldn't begin to perceive these subtle differences in real-world applications. Still, the slowest SSD product (0.51ms) is 14x more responsive than the fastest desktop hard drive. Hard Disk Drive alternatives are much slower to react, regardless of spindle speed and cache buffer size.

Even the very best of the desktop hard drive products, such as Western Digital's VelociRaptor, only produced a best response time of 7.15 ms. The older Western Digital Raptor took 8.53ms to respond, followed by 12.99ms for the Seagate 7200.11, and 15.39ms for the 7200 RPM Hitachi Travelstar 7K100 notebook drive. The worst performer was the standard 5400 RPM notebook drive (Hitachi Travelstar 5K160 HTS541640J9SA00), which recorded a painfully slow 17.41ms Random Access Time.

Drive Hardware

ATTO Disk Benchmark

The ATTO Disk Benchmark program is free, and offers a comprehensive set of test variables to work with. In terms of disk performance, it measures interface transfer rates at various intervals for a user-specified length and then reports read and write speeds for these spot-tests. There are some minor improvements made to the 2.34 version of the program, but the benchmark is still limited to non-linear samples up to 256MB. ATTO Disk Benchmark requires that an active partition be set on the drive being tested.

While the bandwidth results are not realistic for determining the maximum drive speeds, ATTO Disk Benchmark is still a good tool for illustrating bandwidth using various file size chunks. Please consider the results displayed by this benchmark to be basic bandwidth performance indicators.

ATTO-Corsair-X256-256GB-SATA-II-MLC-SSD-CMFSSD-256D1.png

Our basic I/O bandwidth tests begin with the Corsair X256 SSD connected to the integrated Intel ICH10R Southbridge chip, as the ATTO Disk Benchmark tools performs file transfers ranging from 0.5 KB to 8192 KB. The 256GB Corsair CMFSSD-256D1 model reveals a 260 MBps read plateau from 128-8192 KB file chunks, while the 217 MBps write performance plateaus from 32-8192 KB. Compared to the OCZ Vertex Turbo, the Corsair X256 matched read performance and improves upon the Vertex Turbo's already-impressive write performance.

Generally speaking, hard drive products such as the WD VelociRaptor reach their performance plateau 'earlier' around the 16-32KB chunk range, however SSD products pick-up performance around the 64-128KB file chunk range.

Drive Hardware

In our next section, Benchmark Reviews compares random access IOPS performance among high-end storage devices using HD Tune Pro...

HD Tune Pro Benchmarks

In the past, Benchmark Reviews has avoided HD Tune benchmarks because the software was so similar to others already being used in our articles. However, EFD Software has released several versions of this program, which now adds functionality and features not available in previous revisions. The latest edition of HD Tune Pro allows random access read and write testing, a feature not available to other similar software benchmark tools. HD Tune is a low-level test that will not operate on a drive which contains a partition, so Benchmark Reviews uses DISKPART to prepare hardware and remove any partitions before conducting these tests.

Random Access tests are divided into 512b, 4KB, 64KB, 1MB and random size test files sizes. The Random Access test measures the performance of random read or write operations. The amount of data which will be read varies from 512 bytes to 1 MB. Performance is reported in operations per second (IOPS), average access time, and average speed. Because it is our intent to compare one product against another, Benchmark Reviews has focused on random transfer size IOPS performance.

HD-Tune_Read_Corsair_CMFSSD-256D1.png

Benchmark Reviews has tested the 256GB Corsair CMFSSD-256D1 against a collection of top-performing desktop storage drives for our random IOPS benchmarks. The 4 KB random IOPS performance in HD Tune measured 7444 for read IO, and an impressive 16244 for write. The 4KB read IOPS was better on the X256 than it was on the Vertex Turbo, which scored 7272. The Vertex Turbo offered 17358 4KB write IOPS, which was slightly better than the Corsair X256. Random IOPS swung back into Corsair's favor, however.

HD-Tune_Write_Corsair_CMFSSD-256D1.png

The tight range of IO is an indicator of operational bottlenecks. For example, the WD VelociRaptor WD3000HLFS SATA Hard Disk Drive indicates a read-IOPS range of 10-150 whereas the average SSD might offer 200-1,000. As a direct result, in most cases SSDs will offer a much higher IO over their hard disk counterparts.

HD-Tune_Random_Transfer_IOPS_ICH10.png

Charted above, the OCZ Vertex EX (firmware 1.20) enjoys the benefit of SLC construction that delivers traditionally better IOPS performance than MLC counterparts, and also offers the best measured random IOPS performance of the group with 384 read and 477 write IOPS. The Corsair X256 and OCZ Vertex Turbo (MLC) lead the pack of Indilinx-based SSDs which follow behind (Vertex, CT128M225, Torqx, UltraDrive ME, Agility) and performs at near-SLC levels with 327 read and 429 write IOPS. The Intel X25-E Extreme SSD performed well, and produced 337 random read IOPS, and 394 write.

Our test results were obtained after each SSD had been prepared using the DISKPART program, and in the case of products using the Indilinx Barefoot controller they were further prepared with the Sanitary Erase application. In our tests, we discovered that the maximum performance results (charted) would decay as subsequent tests were performed. As a word of caution, applications such as Sanitary Erase (SE) and Wiper offer immediate but temporary restoration of original 'pristine' performance levels.

Drive Hardware

Benchmark Reviews measures I/O Response Time and IOPS performance using the Iometer tool in our next section...

Iometer IOPS Performance

Iometer is an I/O subsystem measurement and characterization tool for single and clustered systems. Iometer does for a computer's I/O subsystem what a dynamometer does for an engine: it measures performance under a controlled load. Iometer was originally developed by the Intel Corporation and formerly known as "Galileo". Intel has discontinued work on Iometer, and has gifted it to the Open Source Development Lab (OSDL).

Iometer is both a workload generator (that is, it performs I/O operations in order to stress the system) and a measurement tool (that is, it examines and records the performance of its I/O operations and their impact on the system). It can be configured to emulate the disk or network I/O load of any program or benchmark, or can be used to generate entirely synthetic I/O loads. It can generate and measure loads on single or multiple (networked) systems.

Benchmark Reviews has resisted publishing Iometer results because there are hundreds of different configuration variables available, making it impossible to reproduce our tests without having our Iometer configuration file. To measure random I/O response time as well as total I/O's per second, Iometer is set to use 4KB file size chunks over a 100% random sequential distribution. The tests are given a 50% read and 50% write distribution. Our charts show the Read and Write IOPS performance as well as I/O response time (measured in ms). Iometer was configured to test for 120 seconds, and after five tests the average is displayed in our benchmark results. The first tests included random read and write IOPS performance, where a higher I/O is preferred.

Iometer_Random_IOPS_ICH10.png

In the Random IOPS performance tests the single layer cell (SLC) Intel X25-E Extreme (3543/3548) and OCZ Vertex EX (3106/3091) outperformed all other products by a wide margin. The OCZ Vertex Turbo SSD rendered 1774 read/1770 write I/O's, while the Corsair recorded 1769/1773, both of which are just slightly ahead of a single Vertex 1.3 SSD that produced 1702 for read and write IOPS. Sharing the same Indilinx Barefoot controller and NAND architecture, the Crucial CT128M225 SSD (Firmware 1571) reported a read and write I/O of 1695. The mainstream OCZ Agility SSD trails behind with 1625/1618 I/O's while the OCZ Summit MLC SSD completed 730/733 I/O's. Every other product thereafter performs far beneath the above-listed products, and are not suggested for high input/output applications.

The 64GB Kingston SSDNow V+ (which is a rebranded Samsung PB22-J SSD) produced a meager 150 I/O's with Iometer. While offering better IO than any other desktop hard drive (and most first- and second-generation SSDs), the Western Digital VelociRaptor still fell short on IOPS performance compared with several current-generation SSDs and produced only 134/138 IO's. The Mtron MOBI 3000 performed 107 read and write IOPS, while the Western Digital WD5001AALS rendered 86 and the Seagate 7200.11 completing 77. The Seagate Momentus 5400.6, which is a 5400 RPM notebook hard drive, produced 60/59 IO's. The newer Mtron MOBI 3500 rendered 58 IOPS, which was worse than the older 3000 model. The OCZ Apex struggled to complete 9 IOPS, and its identically-designed G.Skill Titan managed only 8 IOPS. Clearly, the twin RAID-0 JMicron controllers are built for speed and not input/output operations. Next comes the average I/O response time tests...

Iometer_Average_Response_Time.png

The Iometer random IOPS average response time test results were nearly an inverse order of the IOPS performance results. It's no surprise that SLC drives perform I/O processes far better than their MLC versions, but that gap is slowly closing as controller technology improves the differences and enhances cache buffer space. The Read/Write IOPS performance for the Intel X25-E Extreme SSD measured 0.22/0.06 ms, while the OCZ Vertex EX (firmware 1.20) achieved 0.26/0.06 ms. Both of these premium MLC products share a dramatic lead ahead of the other SSDs tested.

The Corsair X256 and OCZ Vertex Turbo SSD both scored 0.50/0.06ms, while the Vertex 1.30 and Crucial CT128M225 SSD both offered 0.52/0.06ms. The mainstream Agility SSD produced 0.55/0.06ms, and the OCZ Summit responded to read requests in 0.78ms while write requests were a bit quicker at 0.59ms. Kingston's SSDNow V+ (Intel X25-M) produced 3.50/3.14 ms. The Western Digital VelociRaptor did very well compared against SSD products, producing 6.59/0.82ms. These times were collectively the best available, as each product measured hereafter performed much slower.

The Mtron MOBI 3000 offered a fast 0.42ms read response time, but suffered a slower 8.97ms write response. Both the WD5001AALS and Seagate 7200.11 hard drives performed around 11ms read and 1.2ms write. The Seagate Momentus 5400.6 offered 15.3/1.36ms response times. Mtron's newer MOBI 3500 offered great read response times at 0.19ms, but suffered poor write responses at 17.19ms. The worst was yet to come, as the G.Skill Titan and OCZ Apex offered decent 0.42ms read response times but absolutely unacceptable 127ms write times.

Drive Hardware

In our next section, we test linear read and write bandwidth performance and compare its speed against several other top storage products using EVEREST Disk Benchmark. Benchmark Reviews feels that linear tests are excellent for rating SSDs, however HDDs are put at a disadvantage with these tests whenever capacity is high.

EVEREST Disk Benchmark

Many enthusiasts are familiar with the EVEREST benchmark suite by Lavalys, but very few are aware of the Disk Benchmark tool available inside the program. The EVEREST Disk Benchmark performs linear read and write bandwidth tests on each drive, and can be configured to use file chunk sizes up to 1MB (which speeds up testing and minimizes jitter in the waveform). Because of the full sector-by-sector nature of linear testing, Benchmark Reviews endorses this method for testing SSD products, as detailed in our Solid State Drive Benchmark Performance Testing article. However, Hard Disk Drive products suffer a lower average bandwidth as the capacity draws linear read/write speed down into the inner-portion of the disk platter. EVEREST Disk Benchmark does not require a partition to be present for testing, so all of our benchmarks are completed prior to drive formatting.

The high-performance storage products tested with EVEREST Disk Benchmark are connected to the Intel ICH10R SATA controller resident on the Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD4P motherboard. Using the 1MB block size, read performance of the Corsair X256 256GB CMFSSD-256D1 Indilinx MLC SSD measured an average 244.2 MBps with a maximum peak of 245 MBps. Linear write-to tests were next...

Everest-Read-Corsair-X256-256GB-SATA-II-MLC-SSD-CMFSSD-256D1.png

Linear disk benchmarks are superior tools in my opinion, because they scan from the first physical sector to the last. A side affect of many linear write-performance test tools is that the data is erased as it writes to every sector on the drive. Normally this isn't an issue, but it has been shown that partition tables will occasionally play a role in overall SSD performance (HDDs are more mature products and don't suffer this problem). The 64MB buffer and fast NAND flash memory on the Corsair X256 Indilinx SSD helped improve results in our linear testing, as shown in the waveform chart below.

Although the chart makes the linear write performance appear unsteady, the results seen here are actually decent compared to most other SSD products we've tested in the past. The Corsair X256 SSD recorded an average linear write-to speed of 238.1 MBps , with a maximum performance of 240.9 MBps. These results were nearly identical, both in speed and waveform chart, to the OCZ Vertex SSD.

Everest-Write-Corsair-X256-256GB-SATA-II-MLC-SSD-CMFSSD-256D1.png

The chart below shows the average linear read and write bandwidth for a cross-section of other SATA drives attached to the Intel ICH10 Southbridge:

EVEREST_Disk_Benchmark_ICH10.png

Linear bandwidth certainly benefits the Solid State Drive, since there's very little fluctuation in transfer speed. Hard Disk Drive products decline in performance as the spindle reaches the inner-most sectors on the magnetic platter. I personally consider linear tests to be the single most important comparison of storage drive products, although hard disk drive products decrease performance as they reach the edge of the spindle, SSD products operate at a relatively smooth speed from start to finish.

Drive Hardware

In the next section, Benchmark Reviews tests sequential performance using the CrystalDiskMark software tool...

CrystalDiskMark Tests

CrystalDiskMark is a very basic read and write benchmark tool by Crystal Dew World that offers performance speed results using sequential, 512KB random, and 4KB random samples. For our tests, sequential read and write performance was measured using a 1000MB file size, with 50, 100, and 500MB being the other available options. CrystalDiskMark requires that an active partition be set on the drive being tested, and all drives are formatted with NTFS.

Benchmark Reviews uses CrystalDiskMark to confirm manufacturer suggested bandwidth speeds. In addition to our other tests, the sequential read and write benchmarks allow us to determine if the maximum stated speed of any storage product is within reasonable specification. In the chart below illustrated below, our sequential read and write performance speeds are organized from highest to lowest based on total bandwidth.

Enjoying a noticeable lead atop of our sequential performance chart, both the Intel X25-E Extreme (261/206 MBps) and the OCZ Vertex EX Single-Layer Cell SSD (256/182 MBps) offer the highest read and write bandwidth performance. Followed closely behind was the OCZ Summit MLC SSD with 128MB cache buffer that produced 227/191 MBps, and the Corsair X256 which scored 255/156. Not far behind the top leaders was the OCZ Apex, and it's twin cousin the G.Skill Titan (not shown). The OCZ Vertex Turbo offered 248/145, which is slightly faster than the Kingston SSDNow V+ and standard Vertex SSD performance of 230/138. The Crucial CT128M225 is essentially identical to the OCZ Vertex, as is the Patriot Torqx and Super Talent UltraDrive ME. The OCZ Agility followed closely behind the other Indilinx Barefoot SSDs and shared the same sequential write speed penalty.

Although the remaining drives are much older models, the SLC construction keeps the OCZSSD2, Mtron MOBI 3500, and MOBI 3000 all within respectable range. Even though the high-performance VelociRaptor hard drive is made to look low-end by the results charted below, it's actually very encouraging to see that a hard disk can still keep pace with a few SSDs. The WD VelociRaptor offers sequential read and write performance comparable to the Mtron MOBI 3500 and the first-generation OCZ SLC SSD.

Crystal_DiskMark_Sequential_ICH10.png

Drive Hardware

Benchmark Reviews tests and compares buffered transaction speed using HD Tach in the following section...

HD Tach RW Results

Although HD Tach (and also HD Tune or Crystal Disk Benchmark) are all excellent tools for measuring Hard Disk Drive products, they fail to offer the same precision with Solid State Drive products. These programs offer only an approximate estimate of bandwidth speed through their quick-result sample-testing mechanisms, as I have proven in the Solid State Drive (SSD) Benchmark Performance Testing article published not long ago. Nevertheless, HD Tach is still useful for offering an alternative perspective at performance, even if it isn't precisely correct when used with SSD architecture.

HD Tach is a software program for Microsoft Windows that tests the sequential read, random access and interface burst speeds of the attached storage device. For the record. every single product tested was brand new and never used. HD Tach allows write-bandwidth tests only if no partition is present. Additionally, each and every product was tested five times with the highest and lowest results removed before having the average result displayed here. The graphical user interface (GUI) of the Windows-based benchmark tool HD Tach is very convenient. and allows the test product to be compared against others collected on your system or those registered into the Simpli Software database. HD Tach will not test write performance if a partition is present, so all of our benchmarks are completed prior to drive formatting.

In the tests below, Benchmark Reviews utilizes the HD TachRW tool to compare the fastest collection of desktop hard drives and competing SSD's we can get our hands on. Using the Intel ICH10R SATA controller on the Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD4P, HD Tach was used to benchmark the test SSD five times with the best results displayed below. It's important to note that HD Tach's Burst Speed result should be ignored for Solid State Drives due to the cache methods inherent to each memory controller architecture. There are times where this number will be extremely high, which is a result of the optimized cache used for SSD's.

The important numbers used for comparison are the sustained read and write bandwidth speeds, which indicate an approximate performance level of the product. Our featured test item, the 256GB Corsair X256 CMFSSD-256D1 Indilinx MLC SSD, performed at an average 232.8 MBps best sustained average read speed and a best average sustained write bandwidth of 204.8 MBps. Using the Secure Erase tool after each test kept our results consistent and reliable, however used 'dirty' SSD will show significant performance degradation.

HD-Tach-Corsair-X256-256GB-SATA-II-MLC-SSD-CMFSSD-256D1.png

The chart below illustrates the collected averages for benchmark results using HD Tach RW on the Intel ICH10 SATA controller, with the read and write bandwidth results added together to determine rank placement. The first group is a collection of high-performance storage products. With an improved write performance, the SLC Vertex EX finds itself positioned in first place with the Corsair X256 and Intel X25-E Extreme SSD both tied second, ahead of the MLC Vertex Turbo and several other Indilinx Barefoot-based SSDs. (Crucial M225, OCZ Vertex, Patriot Torqx, Super Talent UltraDrive, and Agility). A set of Western Digital VelociRaptor hard drives paired into a RAID-0 stripe array come close, but just aren't enough to stave off SSD performance.

The ACARD ANS-9010 RAM-Disk, OCZ Summit SSD, OCZ Agility SSD, OCZ Apex SSD, Intel X25-M, and Kingston SSDNow V+ SSD all trail behind in overall performance and finish out the top five positions. Nearly every other storage product trails distantly behind these leaders, which all recorded a combined HD Tach bandwidth to over 300 MBps for each.

A single (non RAID-0) VelociRaptor and Seagate 7200.11 hard drive begin the next segment of upper midrange performers, offering nearly 200 MBps of combined bandwidth. Trailed by a closely-packed group consisting of the Patriot Warp v2 SSD, Silicon Power SP032GBSSD750S25, and G.Skill FM-25S2S-64GB, are SSDs generating between 168-172 MBps of combined average bandwidth.

HD-Tach_Bandwidth_ICH10.png

The lower-midrange SSD products begin with the Western Digital Raptor, scoring a combined total bandwidth of 154 MBps delivering half the performance of the leaders. Yesterday's high-performance SSD is today's low-performance drive, and the Mtron MOBI 3500, OCZ OCZSSD2-1S32G SSD, Super Talent MasterDrive MX SSD and Mtron MOBI 3000 all comprise products with less combined performance than Hard Disk Drive alternatives (except in regard to response time).

Drive Hardware

Please continue on to the Final Thoughts sections, where the state of SSD testing and Data Storage market sector are put under analysis...

SSD vs Hard Disk Drive

The last days of old technology are always better than the first days of new technology. Never has this saying been more true than with the topic of storage technology, specifically in regard to the introduction of Solid State Drive technology a few years ago. The only things standing in the way of widespread Solid State Drive (SSD) adoption are high storage capacity and affordable price of Hard Disk Drive (HDD) devices. Because NAND flash-based SSD technology costs more per gigabyte of capacity than traditional magnetic hard drives, the benefits of immediate response time, transfer speeds, and operational input/output performance often get overlooked. Like most consumer products, it wasn't a question of how much improvement was evident in the new technology, it was price. I'll discuss product costs more in just a moment, but for now consider how each new series of SSD product employs greater performance than the one before it, convincing would-be consumers into waiting for the right time to buy.

There's also a gray area surrounding SSD performance benchmarks that has me concerned. You might not know this, but SSDs can be very temperamental towards the condition of their flash NAND. My experience testing dozens of Solid State Drives is that a freshly cleaned device (using an alignment tool) will always outperform the same device once it's been formatted and used. A perfect example is Indilinx Barefoot-based SSDs, which suffers severely degraded performance when writing to 'dirty' flash NAND. The reason that all of this will matters is simple: the performance results reported to consumers in product reviews (such as this one) often report the very best performance scores, and the process used to obtain these results is not applicable to real-world usage. This is where garbage collection techniques such as TRIM become important, so that end-users will experience the same performance levels as we do in our tests.

Manufacturer Indilinx Intel JMicron Samsung Toshiba SandForce Marvell
Controller IDX110M00-FC PC29AS21AA0 JMF612 S3C29RBB01-YK40 T6UG1XBG SandForce SF-1200 88SS9174-BJP2
Max Cache 64MB 16MB 128KB+256MB 128MB 128MB Integrated 128MB
Max Capacity 256GB 160GB 256GB 256GB 512GB 512GB 256GB
Read/Write Speed 230/170 MBps 250/70 MBps 250/200 MBps 220/200 MBps 230/180 MBps 260/260 MBps 355/215 MBps
Interface SATA-II 3-Gbps SATA-II 3-Gbps SATA-II 3-Gbps SATA-II 3-Gbps SATA-II 3-Gbps SATA-II 3-Gbps SATA-III 6-Gbps
Garbage Collection GC/TRIM None TRIM GC/TRIM GC/TRIM GC/TRIM GC/TRIM

Chart By:

BmR

Garbage Collection (GC) is the current solution for keeping flash NAND in 'clean' condition, while maintaining optimal performance. Windows 7 offers native TRIM support, and most retail SSDs also include this special GC function or at least offer a firmware update that brings the drive up-to-date. For anyone using an Operating System or SSD that does not offer Garbage Collection functionality, you'll be using 'dirty' flash NAND modules and suffering sub-optimal performance for each write-to request. A few SSD manufacturers offers free tools to help restore peak-level performance by scheduling GC to 'clean' used NAND sectors, but these tools add excessive wear to the NAND the same way disk defragmenting tools would. SLC flash modules may resist wear much better than MLC counterparts, but come at the expense of increased production cost. The best solution is a more durable NAND module that offers long-lasting SLC benefits at the cost of MLC construction. Adoption is further stalled because keen consumers aware of this dilemma further continue their delay into the SSD market.

Getting back to price, the changes in cost per gigabyte have come as often as changes to the technology itself. At their inception, high-performance models such the 32GB MemoRight GT cost $33 per gigabyte while the entry-level 32GB Mtron MOBI 3000 sold for $14 per gigabyte. While an enjoyable decline in NAND component costs forced consumer SSD prices down low in 2009, the price of SSD products has been on the rise during 2010. Nevertheless, Solid State Drives continue to fill store shelves despite price or capacity, and there are a few SSD products now costing only $2.03 per gigabyte. Although the performance may justify the price, which is getting dangerously close to the $1.00 per gigabyte WD VelociRaptor hard drive, costs may still close some buyers out of the market. Price notwithstanding, the future is in SSD technology and the day when HDDs are obsolete is nearing; but there are still a few bumps in the road to navigate.

Corsair X256 Conclusion

Benchmark Reviews begins each conclusion with a short summary for each of the areas we rate. The first is product presentation, which takes packaging into consideration only to the extent that it provides adequate packing material and delivers important consumer information for an informed purchase. Since the national economy in the midst of an economic recession, manufacturers are forced to use some creative ideas to help lure consumers to their product. SSD technology already carries a premium price tag over the alternative, which is why product presentation becomes so important. The Corsair X256 SSD we received for testing came in a small plain white box with little more than the part number sticker and bar code on top; not exactly the kind of presentation that coerces you to reach for the wallet. The absense of any product detail is likely due to Kingston's product delivery: online retailers and direct e-commerce only, which enable a web page to deliver the data that their packaging does not.

Solid State Drives are a lot like spark plugs: you see them just long enough to install, and then they're forgotten. Corsair keeps production costs down on the X256 SSD by using a uniform black painted enclosure identical to nearly all other SSD products we've tested, and then attaches an adhesive label to the top of the chassis for each product series. Because Solid State Drives, like their Hard Disk Drive counterparts, are meant to place function before fashion, anything above and beyond a simple metal shell is more than what's expected of the appearance. To this end, I still prefer that manufacturers utilize sealed plastic enclosures (such as the MOBI 3000) to prevent moisture or electrical shock damage; an unlikely trend to come back.

Construction is probably the strongest feature asset credited to any SSD product line, and Corsair products have never been an exception. Solid State Drives are by nature immune to most abuses because of their architecture and technology, but the hard metal shell adds a superfluous level of protection. If a Corsair X-series SSD product does happen to fail during the standard 2-year warranty period, end-users can contact Corsair technical support via the company website or support forums. Fortunately, there's also a toll-free telephone number for support or customer service questions in the US (888-222-4346).

Benchmark performance results place the Corsair X256 ahead of every other MLC SSD we've tested, and directly behind the OCZ Vertex EX and Intel X25-E Extreme server-orientated SLC SSDs. Based on the large collection of tests conducted, the Corsair X256 offers a noteworthy 0.10 ms response time assure a nearly-instant reaction, and the CMFSSD-256D1 model showed absolutely no sign of data read/write stuttering during our tests. ATTO Disk Benchmark tool reported an impressive 260 MBps maximum read bandwidth in our tests and 217 MBps maximum write. EVEREST's linear full-sector bandwidth performance was a steady 244 MBps read-from, and an impressive 238 MBps write-to speed. While all of these benchmarks indicate the general bandwidth 'speed' was the highest among MLC SSDs available, matching the OCZ Vertex Turbo's read and improving on the write speed, the input/output performance results were also very high when compared against ultra-premium SLC SSDs. Iometer indicated a random read and write IOPS around 1769/1773, equal to the OCZ Vertex Turbo, and shared a random response time of 0.50/0.06ms. The 4 KB random IOPS performance in HD Tune measured 7444 for read IO, and an impressive 16244 for write.

As of September 2009, the Corsair X256 and other eXtreme series of Solid State Drives are sold at NewEgg in several capacities. Sharing nearly identical construction, the Corsair X-series competes directly with the OCZ Vertex Turbo SSD series. The Corsair X32 CMFSSD-32D1 sells for $135 after rebate, compared to the more expensive 30GB OCZSSD2-1VTXT30G model selling for $155. Corsair's X64 SSD model CMFSSD-64D1 sells for $179 after rebate, while the 60GB OCZSSD2-1VTXT60G model is listed for $249. The 128GB Corsair X128 SSD model CMFSSD-128D1 lists for $329 after rebate, and the 120GB OCZSSD2-1VTXT120G sells for over $100 more, listing at $439. Finally, the 256GB Corsair CMFSSD-256D1 model SSD that Benchmark Reviews has tested for this article sells for $649 after rebate. The Corsair X256 would normally compete head-to-head with the 250GB OCZ Vertex Turbo SSD, but thus far the OCZSSD2-1VTXT250G model has only been a paper launch and has yet to find its way onto store shelves. Either way, the Corsair X256 and the rest of the X-series SSD's seem to have the upper hand when it comes to sales price.

While only a few consumers might choose to pay $649 for the 256GB version over the more-affordable $329 120GB Corsair X128, our tests have shown that the Cosair X256 is definitely the sweet-spot for MLC SSDs. My support for this statement is simple: the fastest consumer SSD also sells for $2.50 per gigabyte. While that might still be three times the amount for a Western Digital VelociRaptor hard drive, it is also nearly three times as fast. The Indilinx Barefoot controller has proven itself to be a very popular chip for SSD makers, and the Corsair X256 exploits the highest order of MLC performance. It may take some extra effort to maintain pristine-level NAND performance on a full-time basis until native TRIM support in enabled in Windows 7, but the MLC SSD market has never seen a faster portable storage product. The Corsair X256 and eXtreme-series SSDs are premium high-performance storage products recommended to enthusiasts wanting the absolute best performance from their computer system.

EDITOR'S NOTE 29 OCT 2009: The X256 SSD sample provided to Benchmark Reviews by Corsair nearly two months ago has stopped working and is no longer recognized by any system BIOS or O/S. After some research, it appears that a very small number of Corsair X256 SSDs have suffered similar firmware-related issues. This problem has been confirmed with Corsair, and the present solution is to contact Corsair technical support via the company website or support forums. Replacement X256 SSDs are said to have a new firmware version that remedies this issue, although this is unconfirmed. As a precaution, ensure that all important files have been backed-up onto another source.

Pros:Benchmark Reviews Golden Tachometer Award

+ Impressive 244 MBps read and 238 write bandwidth with EVEREST
+ 64MB Cache buffer overcomes 'stuttering' data problem
+ Extremely low 0.10 ms random access time
+ Lightweight compact storage solution
+ Resistant to extreme shock impact
+ Up to 256 GB of SSD capacity
+ 2-Year Corsair product warranty and free support forum
+ Low power consumption may extend battery life

Cons:

- Metal case is heavier and less durable than plastic
- Lacks integrated USB 2.0 Mini-B data connection
- Expensive enthusiast-level product

Ratings:

  • Performance: 9.50
  • Appearance: 8.75
  • Construction: 9.75
  • Functionality: 9.50
  • Value: 8.50

Final Score: 9.2 out of 10.

Excellence Achievement: Benchmark Reviews Golden Tachometer Award.

Nomination: 2009 Editor's Choice Award for MLC SSD Products.

Questions? Comments? Benchmark Reviews really wants your feedback. We invite you to leave your remarks in our Discussion Forum.

EDITORS NOTE: After November 2009 Benchmark Reviews will begin testing storage devices using the Microsoft Windows 7 Operating System. Although the Marvell SATA 6Gb/s (SATA-III) controller is available on select motherboards, our testing indicates that SSD devices perform better on the Intel ICH-10 Southbridge.


Related Articles:
 

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews Archive