| OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 6G SSD |  |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Storage | |
| Written by Olin Coles | |
| Monday, 01 August 2011 | |
|
Page 6 of 11
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 OWC Mercury Extreme Pro 6G SSD attached to the Intel P67-Express 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. This 120GB model OWCSSDMX6G120T reveals 558 MBps maximum read speed that plateaus from 1024-8192 KB file chunks, and 517 MBps peak write bandwidth plateaus from 64-8192 KB. These results both closely maintain OWC's own specifications for the Mercury Extreme Pro 6G-series solid state drive.
In the next section, Benchmark Reviews tests sequential performance using the CrystalDiskMark 3.0 software tool...
|
|
Comments
First, the comparison of a OWC 120GB drive to OCZ's 240GB drives.
In this class 240GB drives are always faster.
Second, by not testing (or mentioning) the OWC extreme6, you completely missed that it now uses a different Sandforce controller! It uses the 2282, and is (as of now) the only drive to do so.
From your SandForce SF-2000 Series SSD Processor Overview:
"High-IO consumer systems will be well suited for the flagship consumer SSD processor: SF-2282. The SandForce SD-2282 is virtually an eight-channel/sixteen lane enterprise drive with MLC NAND, and won't be produced in the same quantities as other controllers."
What a shame to miss such a useful and helpful opportunity.
Had OWC offer other products or capacities, we'd use them. Besides, the difference would be less than 5% max.
As OWC seems to be a very customer friendly small shop, maybe you could just ask your contact?
This is a potential major difference in hardware, as your site had highlighted in your SandForce Processor Overview.
Kudos on even having that bye the way.
Hadn't seen that elsewhere, even the SandForce site.
I'm like many, who need experts to help find the differences.
I refer to the OWC 240GB and 480GB extreme6 drives with a "-T" part number as using the 2282 controller.
The OWC 120GB extreme6 drives with a "T" part number suffix still use the 2281, as you state in the review.
I should also mention that I have both a OCZ 120GB max IOPS, a OWC 120GB extreme6, and a pair of OWC 240 extreme6 drives.
I cloned my old HD (with Intel RST 10.6) onto all four drives and ran AS SSD benches, which I'll post later.
In brief OCZ 120 max IOPS was slowest, OWC 120GB extreme6 was quite a bit faster, and a OWC 240 extreme6 flat blew the others away.
Mind, this was just a quick test of just my drive set-up, but every thing was at least equal.
I just took the SSDs as shipped, cloned a HD and ran a canned test.
My results were:
OCZ 120GB Vertex 3 MI Overall = 356
OWC 120GB Mercury Extreme6 Overall = 373
OWC 240GB Mercury Extreme6 Overall = 489
Is that much of a difference that I might notice in doing video transcoding?
Thanks