3 ms·

Massively better? No. If you create an imaginary baseline SSD with the X25-M's 80 GB and the Vertex's 9836 PCMarks and then compare both drives against the bas

Massively better? No. If you create an imaginary baseline SSD with the X25-M's 80 GB and the Vertex's 9836 PCMarks and then compare both drives against the baseline you get: Intel: 20% faster OCZ: 50% larger Both cost $350. Given that the slow one is faster than the fastest desktop HD but the big one is only 1/3 the size of a standard laptop HD, I think I prefer the extra space.

blasdel 18y ago
Ignore the 'PCMark' bullshit benchmarks, the point of this article is random write latencies, which are ridiculously awful on a lot of common SSDs, several orders of magnitude worse than common spinning rust! The only non-Intel drive that's not awful at random writes is the OCZ Vertex, and it's a few times better than an HD. The X25s are still an order of magnitude quicker than the OCZ Vertex once used.
- davidmathers 18y ago
  On random writes the Vertex is 48% faster than the VelociRaptor, a 10k rpm hard drive. Right now I have a 5.4k rpm hard drive in my laptop. That kind of performance would make me ecstatically happy. Even if the X25 was overall 100% faster than the Vertex, and according to Anand it isn't, I would still trade that to have 120 GB rather than 80 GB. This is Anand's conclusion: "with the Vertex I do believe we have a true value alternative to the X25-M. The Intel drive is still the best, but it comes at a high cost. The Vertex can give you a similar experience, definitely one superior to even the fastest hard drives, but at a lower price." Similar experience. I can't find the part about massively better.
  - lasthemy1 18y ago
    The X25 comes in 160GB varieties too, but I understand the trade-off at comparable prices. With a technology that changes so quickly, I set myself a couple requirements before I'd buy an SSD: -Performance had to be equivalent or better than a WD Velociraptor across the board (the OCZ Vertex achieves that with firmware updates, the Intel is slightly slower on max sequential writes, but makes up for it in every other benchmark). -It had to be at least 120GB for my personal laptop. -It had to be around $300. I assume any SSD purchase made now is going to be replaced in 1-2 years, so purchasing anything more than necessary is hard to justify.

blasdel 18y ago

Ignore the 'PCMark' bullshit benchmarks, the point of this article is random write latencies, which are ridiculously awful on a lot of common SSDs, several orders of magnitude worse than common spinning rust! The only non-Intel drive that's not awful at random writes is the OCZ Vertex, and it's a few times better than an HD. The X25s are still an order of magnitude quicker than the OCZ Vertex once used.

davidmathers 18y ago
On random writes the Vertex is 48% faster than the VelociRaptor, a 10k rpm hard drive. Right now I have a 5.4k rpm hard drive in my laptop. That kind of performance would make me ecstatically happy. Even if the X25 was overall 100% faster than the Vertex, and according to Anand it isn't, I would still trade that to have 120 GB rather than 80 GB. This is Anand's conclusion: "with the Vertex I do believe we have a true value alternative to the X25-M. The Intel drive is still the best, but it comes at a high cost. The Vertex can give you a similar experience, definitely one superior to even the fastest hard drives, but at a lower price." Similar experience. I can't find the part about massively better.
- lasthemy1 18y ago
  The X25 comes in 160GB varieties too, but I understand the trade-off at comparable prices. With a technology that changes so quickly, I set myself a couple requirements before I'd buy an SSD: -Performance had to be equivalent or better than a WD Velociraptor across the board (the OCZ Vertex achieves that with firmware updates, the Intel is slightly slower on max sequential writes, but makes up for it in every other benchmark). -It had to be at least 120GB for my personal laptop. -It had to be around $300. I assume any SSD purchase made now is going to be replaced in 1-2 years, so purchasing anything more than necessary is hard to justify.