| Intel 311 Solid State Drive SSDSA2VP020G2E |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Storage | |||||||||||||
| Written by Olin Coles | |||||||||||||
| Wednesday, 11 May 2011 | |||||||||||||
Intel 311 Solid State Drive Review
Manufacturer: Intel Corporation Full Disclosure: The product sample used in this article has been provided by Micron. In only three short years, the solid state drive industry exploded from a small handful of SSD controllers compared to nearly fifty different versions that have collectively appeared on the retail market. Of the most prolific designs, Intel continues to earn its reputation for reliable solid-state storage solutions. In this article, Benchmark Reviews tests the 20GB Intel 311 Series Larson Creek SSD model SSDSA2VP020G2E. Built upon 34nm SLC Compute NAND Technology, the Intel 311 is capable of sequential read speeds up to 200 MB/s and 40,000 combined IOPS. The Intel 311 SSD is optimized for Intel Smart Response Technology, which debuts with the Intel Z68-Express chipset and works with the entire Sandy Bridge series. While most consumers have now become familiar with SSDs replacing their hard drive, it wasn't until the first Solid State Hybrid Drive one year ago (May 2010) that the idea of combining the speed of SSDs with the storage capacity of HDDs. Intel Smart Response Technology does exactly that, and offers this 20GB SLC flash-based Larson Creek SSD as a partner cache drive, and not necessarily a stand-alone SSD. Intel has designed the technology to cache frequently-used applications into the SSD to improve system performance and responsiveness, which they claim outperforms HDD-only systems by up to 60%. The Intel 311 Series comes in either 2.5" SATA or mSATA form factors, and is compatible with select Intel 6 Series chipsets: Z68, HM67, QM67. Intel Smart Response TechnologyThe purpose of Intel Smart Response Technology is to enable SSD-like performance combined with HDD capacity.
After decades of design improvements, the hard disk drive (HDD) is still the slowest component in any personal computer system. Consider that modern desktop processors have a 1 ns response time (nanosecond = one billionth of one second), while system memory responds between 30-90 ns. Traditional hard drive technology utilizes magnetic spinning media, and even the fastest spinning mechanical storage products still exhibit a 9,000,000 ns / 9 ms initial response time (millisecond = one thousandth of one second). In more relevant terms, the processor receives the command and must then wait for system memory to fetch related data from the storage drive. This is why any computer system is only as fast as the slowest component in the data chain; usually the hard drive. In a perfect world all of the components operate at the same speed. Until that day comes, the real-world goal for achieving optimal performance is for system memory to operate as quickly as the central processor and then for the storage drive to operate as fast as memory. With present-day technology this is an impossible task, so enthusiasts try to close the speed gaps between components as much as possible. Although system memory is up to 90x (9000%) slower than most processors, consider then that the hard drive is an added 1000x (100,000%) slower than that same memory. Essentially, these three components are as different in speed as walking is to driving and flying. Solid State Drive technology bridges the largest gap in these response times. The difference a SSD makes to operational response times and program speeds is dramatic, and takes the storage drive from a slow 'walking' speed to a much faster 'driving' speed. Solid State Drive technology improves initial response times by more than 450x (45,000%) for applications and Operating System software, when compared to their mechanical HDD counterparts. The biggest mistake PC hardware enthusiasts make with regard to SSD technology is grading them based on bandwidth speed. File transfer speeds are important, but only so long as the operational IOPS performance can sustain that bandwidth under load. Bandwidth Speed vs Operational PerformanceAs we've explained in our SSD Benchmark Tests: SATA IDE vs AHCI Mode guide, Solid State Drive performance revolves around two dynamics: bandwidth speed (MB/s) and operational performance (IOPS). These two metrics work together, but one is more important than the other. Consider this analogy: bandwidth determines how much cargo a ship can transport in one voyage, and operational IOPS performance is how fast the ship moves. By understanding this and applying it to SSD storage, there is a clear importance set on each variable depending on the task at hand. For casual users, especially those with laptop or desktop computers that have been upgraded to use an SSD, the naturally quick response time is enough to automatically improve the user experience. Bandwidth speed is important, but only to the extent that operational performance meets the minimum needs of the system. If an SSD has a very high bandwidth speed but a low operational performance, it will take longer to load applications and boot the computer into Windows than if the SSD offered a higher IOPS performance. Intel SSD Larson CreekIt's important to note that the Intel 311 was not designed to be a stand-alone SSD, although it could certainly be used that way if the limited capacity was not an obstacle. The Intel 311 Series SSD is intended to be partnered with a high-capacity hard disk drive, using Intel Smart Response Technology with any Intel 6-Series chipset: Z68, HM67, QM67. This design promotes improved performance on computer systems for casual/mainstream users, and does so without the risk of losing data to an SSD failure (although hard drive failure should still be a concern).
Because it uses SLC NAND flash construction, the Intel 311 SSD could prove useful in capacity-sensitive personal computers and SOHO computer systems where Intel Smart Response Technology hardware is available. Alternatively, the Intel 311 Series solid state drive also functions as a low-capacity SSD capable of holding the Operating System and installed applications. Once installed the SSD is usually hidden away from view, which explains why Intel has remained conservative towards the appearance of their solid state drive. Standard 2.5" drive bay mounting points are pre-drilled and threaded into the SSD chassis, and the black plastic spacer is attached to the top side of the SSD to enable the Intel 311 Series to fit into SATA notebook computers if desired. Both halves of the enclosure are made of steel, with a textured finish on the top panel and flat finish on the bottom.
Intel has used a common-part printed circuit board to construct their Larson Creek 311-series SSD. An Intel PC29AS21BA0 SATA 3Gb/s SSD controller powers this drive, identical to Intel X25-M G2 SSDs, which means it's designed to accept 34nm NAND flash preferably of SLC design. The DRAM buffer is Integrated Silicon Solution Inc (ISSI) part IS42S16160D-7TLI, which offers 32MB at 143 MHz.
The key ingredient in all Intel 311-series Larson Creek SSDs is the 32nm SLC NAND flash, which is also produced in-house by Intel. Each module is marked 29F32G08CAND2, which references their IC part number requiring 2.7-3.6V for normal operation. Intel specifies the Larson Creek SSD to produce sequential reads up to 200 MB/s, with 4 KB reads reaching 37,000 IOPS.
In the next few sections we'll test the Intel 311 Series SSD as a stand-alone storage device, comparing this 20GB Larson Creek solid state drive to other retail products. As a final reminder, please remember that the Intel 311 Series SSD is intended to be partnered with a high-capacity hard disk drive using Intel Smart Response Technology with select Intel 6-Series chipsets. The Intel SSD 311 Series combines Intel's 34nm SLC NAND flash memory technology with our innovative high-performance controller to deliver a high- performance, high endurance solid-state drive (SSD) targeted for solutions that use an SSD as a cache for hard disk drives, such as systems with Intel Smart Response Technology, or for high performance embedded solutions. The Intel SSD 311 Series is available in two form factors: 2.5-inch SATA for traditional SATA designs and mSATA for small form factor designs.
Source: Intel Corporation (Intel SSD 311 Series Advanced Product Specification 325035) SSD Testing MethodologySolid 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 HDDs has recently reached 64 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 SSDs 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 (SSDs), while the other is usually going to have higher throughput bandwidth (HDDs). Additionally, there are certain factors which can affect the results of a test which we do our best to avoid. SSD Testing DisclaimerEarly 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
Storage Hardware TestedThe following storage hardware has been used in our benchmark performance testing, and may be included in portions of this article:
Test Tools
Test Results DisclaimerThis article utilizes benchmark software tools to produce operational IOPS performance and bandwidth speed results. Each test was conducted in a specific fashion, and repeated for all products. These test results are not comparable to any other benchmark application, neither on this website or another, regardless of similar IOPS or MB/s terminology in the scores. The test results in this project are only intended to be compared to the other test results conducted in identical fashion for this article. AS-SSD BenchmarkAlex Schepeljanski of Alex Intelligent Software develops the free AS SSD Benchmark utility for testing storage devices. The AS SSD Benchmark tests sequential read and write speeds, input/output operational performance, and response times. Because this software receives frequent updates, Benchmark Reviews recommends that you compare results only within the same version family. Beginning with sequential read and write performance, the 20GB Intel 311 Series SSD produced 181.67 MB/s read speed, and 91.30 MB/s write performance. Single-threaded 4K IOPS performance delivers 21.01 MB/s read and 40.03 MB/s write, nearly matching SandForce SF-1222 SSDs. The 64-thread 4K reads recorded 121.95 MB/s and 63.09 MB/s writes.
Displayed in the chart below, the 64-thread 4KB IOPS performance results for several enthusiast-level storage products helps to illustrate which products offer the best operational input/output under load:
In the next section, Benchmark Reviews tests transfer rates using ATTO Disk Benchmark. ATTO Disk BenchmarkThe 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 2.46 version of the program that allow for test lengths up to 2GB, but all of our benchmarks are conducted with 256MB total length. ATTO Disk Benchmark requires that an active partition be set on the drive being tested. Please consider the results displayed by this benchmark to be basic bandwidth speed performance indicators.
ATTO Disk Benchmark: Queue Depth 4 (Default)Our basic bandwidth speed tests begin with the Intel 311 Larson Creek Solid State Drive attached to the Intel SATA 6Gb/s controller operating in AHCI mode. Using the ATTO Disk Benchmark tool, the test drive performs file transfers ranging from 0.5 KB to 8192 KB. The SSDSA2VP020G2E model we received reveals 204 MB/s maximum read speed that plateaus from 8-8192 KB file chunks, and 114 MB/s peak write bandwidth plateaus from 4-8192 KB. These both exceed Intel's manufacturer specifications.
In the next section, Benchmark Reviews tests sequential performance using the CrystalDiskMark 3.0 software tool... CrystalDiskMark 3.0 TestsCrystalDiskMark 3.0 is a file transfer and operational bandwidth benchmark tool from Crystal Dew World that offers performance transfer speed results using sequential, 512KB random, and 4KB random samples. For our test results chart below, the 4KB 32-Queue Depth read and write performance was measured using a 1000MB space. CrystalDiskMark requires that an active partition be set on the drive being tested, and all drives are formatted with NTFS on the Intel P67 chipset configured to AHCI-mode. Benchmark Reviews uses CrystalDiskMark to illustrate operational IOPS performance with multiple threads. In addition to our other tests, this benchmark allows us to determine operational bandwidth under heavy load. Each of our tests with the Intel 311 SSD were consistent, and the best results obtained were used in the chart below. Sequential tests on this Intel solid state drive produced a maximum read speed of 195.7 MB/s while the write speed was 112.2 MB/s. CrystalDiskMark 3.0 reported 512K results of 161.2 MB/s read and 108.9 MB/s write performance, while 4K tests produced 23.38 MB/s read and 39.95 write performance.
Displayed in the chart below, the maximum 4KB queue depth 32 IOPS performance results for several enthusiast-level storage products illustrate which products offer the best operation under load:
In the next section, we continue our testing using Iometer to measure input/output performance... Iometer IOPS PerformanceIometer 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). There is currently a new version of Iometer in beta form, which adds several new test dimensions for SSDs. 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. 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 at a queue depth of 32 outstanding I/O's per target. The tests are given a 50% read and 50% write distribution. While this pattern may not match traditional 'server' or 'workstation' profiles, it illustrates a single point of reference relative to our product field. The chart below illustrates combined random read and write IOPS over a 120-second Iometer test phase, where highest I/O total is preferred:
In our Iometer tests, which use 32 outstanding I/O's per target and a random 50/50 read/write distribution, SandForce SSDs clearly outperform the competition when tested which a larger queue depth. The latest SATA 6Gb/s storage solutions lead the pack, but Intel's Lasron Creek 311 Series SSD follows closely behind thanks to its SLC NAND flash components. 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 BenchmarkMany enthusiasts are familiar with the Lavalys EVEREST benchmark suite, 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. Linear disk benchmarks are superior bandwidth speed 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 table alignment will occasionally play a role in overall SSD performance (HDDs don't suffer this problem). The high-performance storage products tested with EVEREST Disk Benchmark are connected to the Intel SATA 6Gb/s controller and use a 1MB block size option. Read performance on the 20GB Intel Larson Creek SSD measured an average 227.6 MBps bandwidth with a maximum peak speed of 265.0 MBps. Everest linear write-to tests were next...
The waveform chart below illustrates how the onboard DRAM buffer manages file transfers, and makes linear write transactions appear to have occasional dips in performance. The results seen here are still relatively consistent compared to most other SSD products we've tested in the past. Intel's 311 Series solid state drive recorded an average linear write-to speed of 102.4 MBps, with a very close maximum performance of 104.7 MBps.
The chart below shows the average linear read and write bandwidth speeds for a cross-section of storage devices tested with EVEREST:
Linear tests are an important tool for comparing bandwidth speed between storage products - although HDD products suffer performance degradation over the span of their areal storage capacity. Linear bandwidth certainly benefits the Solid State Drive, since there's very little fluctuation in transfer speed. This is because Hard Disk Drive products decline in performance as the spindle reaches the inner-most sectors on the magnetic platter, away from the fast outer edge. In the next section I share my final thoughts on the struggle between SSD and HDD technology, as well as their new hybrid counterpart, before delivering my conclusion and final product rating. HDD vs Hybrid Drive vs SSDIt's been the same argument for over two years now: SSDs offer the best performance, but HDDs still offer the best capacity and price. Now that Solid State Hybrid drives are available, that argument changes. While the optimal blend of bandwidth speed, operational performance, storage capacity, and price value has yet to be delivered, products like the Seagate Momentus-XT offer an ultra-affordable start in the right direction Installed as a primary drive for notebook and value-conscious enthusiasts, the Solid State Hybrid Drive delivers up high-capacity storage space while starting Windows and opening programs like a SSD. 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 are Indilinx Barefoot-based SSDs, which suffers severely degraded performance when writing to 'dirty' flash NAND. The reason that all of this will matter 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. 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 was on the rise during 2010 and continued into 2011. Nevertheless, solid state drives continue to fill store shelves despite price or capacity, and there are a few SSD products now priced dangerously close to the high-performance storage solutions. Despite being less expensive, the cost of SSDs may still price some budget buyers out of the market. Sales prices notwithstanding, the future is in SSD technology - or possibly a high-capacity SSD hybrid - and the day when HDDs are obsolete is nearing close. Intel SSD Larson Creek ConclusionIMPORTANT: Although the rating and final score mentioned in this conclusion are made to be as objective as possible, please be advised that every author perceives these factors differently at various points in time. While we each do our best to ensure that all aspects of the product are considered, there are often times unforeseen market conditions and manufacturer changes which occur after publication that could render our rating obsolete. Please do not base any purchase solely on our conclusion, as it represents our product rating specifically for the product tested which may differ from future versions. Benchmark Reviews begins our conclusion with a short summary for each of the areas that we rate. Since many visitors tend to gloss over the review details and skip directly to the conclusion, I will take this opportunity to remind readers that the Intel 311 Series 20GB Larson Creek Solid State Drive SSDSA2VP020G2E is designed as a cache drive for Intel Smart Response Technology and not intended as a standalone storage device. Despite this intended purpose, Benchmark Reviews understands the need to answer performance questions for our curious enthusiast audience with head-to-head comparison SSD tests. As a standalone product, our performance rating considers how effective the Intel 311 Series solid state drive performs in operations against direct competitor storage solutions. For reference, specifications for the 20GB Larson Creek model SSDSA2VP020G2E suggest 200 MB/s maximum reads and 105 MB/s writes. In our SSD benchmark tests, the Intel 311 SSD performed at or above these ratings. Our test results proved the Intel 311 was good for delivering 204/114 MBps peak read and writes speeds using ATTO Disk Benchmark SSD speed tests. Transfer speeds were generally high, but were overshadowed by some of the latest competitor SSDs such as those from SandForce. The 20GB Intel 311 Series SSD sent us for testing is specified as capable of 37,000 maximum read and 3300 write IOPS, however it is unclear what method was used to determine these numbers. In our own Iometer operational performance tests using a queue depth of 32 outstanding I/O's per target, the Intel 311 SSD delivered IOPS performance topping 12,136 read and 12,135 write for a combined total of 24,271 IOPS. In this particular test, the Intel 311 SSD actually outperformed most other SATA 3Gb/s storage devices. In the 4K 32QD tests with AS-SSD and CrystalDiskMark, the Intel 311 Series SSD performed well enough to compete with other high-performance consumer storage devices. With the results we've received in our tests, hardware enthusiasts can expect excellent operational performance for demanding applications and extreme I/O environments. Solid State Drives are low-visibility products: you see them just long enough to install and then they're forgotten. Like their Hard Disk Drive counterparts, Solid State Drives are meant to place function before fashion. Anything above and beyond a simple metal shell is already more than what's expected in terms of the appearance. Intel uses a textured metal finish on the Larson Creek SSD, with a branding label on the top for identification. As solid state storage controllers become faster and more advanced, heat dissipation through the enclosure walls may demand that chassis designs become more beneficial than they previously needed to be. This isn't the case yet, and a smooth metal chassis suits modern SSDs nicely. Construction is probably the strongest feature credited to the entire SSD product segment, and Intel products have never offered any exception. Solid State Drives are by nature immune to most abuses, but add to this a hard metal shell and you have to wonder what it would take to make this drive fail. If any Intel 311 Series SSD product fails during the limited 3-year warranty period, end-users can contact customer support. As of February 2012, Intel's 20GB Larson Creek 311-Series SSD costs $119.49 (Newegg). As soon as this SSD reaches retail shelves, we'll update this article with links to their online prices. All on its own, the Intel 311 SSD actually performs fairly well considering it was designed to be a caching drive for Intel Smart Response Technology systems. If you're curious about the performance of this setup, we've got the results published here. Since this is a 20GB storage device, it's hard to imagine many people using it for a primary drive, but our tests show that it's certainly capable. Still, even the most storage-conservative PC user will agree that an Intel 311 SSD paired to a high-capacity hard drive using Intel SRT is the way to go. Let's hope people are willing to give it a try. Benchmark Reviews invites you to leave constructive feedback below, or ask questions in our Discussion Forum.
Related Articles:
|
|||||||||||||
Comments
This doesn't really hold true, in my opinion. Valid competitors should only be those available at $120 or less, since Larson Creek (shortened "LC" below) is designed for low price. That leaves us with the Lite-On SSD, which doesn't appear in many tests, and the HDD based storages.
____________________ _______
Now, if instead of looking at it as a stand-alone unit I prefer validating it as used for SRT.
- Due to the nature of SRT a minimum requirement to make SRT faster than using the HDD alone is that the SSD used is considerably faster than the HDD in reading data, and *at least* as fast in writing data.
- SRT is also supposed to be a way to improve performance at a low cost, so any SSD used should be very affordable to purchase. Total price is far more relevant than the price/storage ratio.
SSDs based on MLC follow the rule that "more is merrier", meaning that the bigger the storage the faster it becomes. (As I've understood it the theoretical bandwidth is somewhat proportional to the number of storage chips, since they to some extent work in parallel.) Therefore low capacity MLC SSDs are not only cheap, but also very slow. Depending on many factors the write speed might drop to, and possibly below, that of HDDs.
SLC, as used in LC, is considerably more expensive per storage volume, but (as shown in the tests) doesn't have it's speed depend nearly as much on the storage space compared to MLC.
I think that keeping the write speed up was the main reason Intel choose to use SLC instead of MLC for this SSD.
It would be very interesting to see performance comparisons, both as stand-alone and in use with SRT, between LC and cheap MLC drives in the about $100 and 32-64GB region. Will LC outperform a cheaper and bigger but slower(?) MLC drive in SRT use?
As I noted in the article, it's difficult to reliably and repeatedly benchmark caching systems, especially "smart" ones whose internal algorithms are unknown. SImply running the benchmarks in a different order will affect the results.
Not only do several SSD tests where different storage size drives of same model show this, but also the somewhat related RAM on nVidia's graphics cards. Notice the different RAM bus width between GTX460 in the 768 vs 1024MB versions? An added RAM/NAND chip makes for more access.
As for Olle's remark about fairly comparing to price-similar competitors, he's dismissed that there are several SSDs that offer a better price per gigabyte than the Intel 311. In fact, the Patriot Torqx 2 (which was included in my results) offers a 32GB version for $90.
I'm well aware that there are plenty of MLC SSDs that offer better price per GB. Most of them are also considerably more than $100 in price.
The Torqx 2 isn't listed on page 4, so it's unclear to me (and all other readers) if it's the 32GB version that's been tested, or if it's another version with different performance.
HM67 and QM67 are notebook chipsets. Or did you mean to write H67 and Q67?