 |
Review: Intel 520 series 240GB SSD |
Back in March 2011, SandForce launched their generation 2 consumer
grade SSD processor the SF-2281. Soon thereafter SSDs based on this new SSD
processor found their way into the market place, some may say prematurely.
Without doubt the SF-2281 was the most powerful consumer grade SSD processor,
but there were some doubts over the robustness of this new platform.
Intel already had a SATA 6Gbps SSD solution in the shape of
the 510 series, which is based on the popular Marvell SSD controller. The 510
was fast, but a long way behind the performance of the SF-2281 based SSDs.
During the summer of 2011, a leaked Intel SSD roadmap document started to
circulate around the Internet, and in that document there was reference to a
new SSD codenamed Cherryville, which Intel had slated for release in Q4 2011.
It was rumoured that Cherryville would be based on the SandForce SF-2281 SSD
processor. The leaked specifications certainly pointed towards a SandForce
SF-2281 based SSD.
In the end, 2011 came and went and there was still no sign
of the Intel 520 series of SSDs. By this time it was very obvious that
Cherryville would indeed be based on the SF-2281 SSD processor, and almost
certainly would be using Intel’s in-house PCB design with a custom SandForce
firmware. It also became obvious that Intel were taking a fair amount of time
validating the 520 series of SSDs. The last thing Intel needed were any doubts
of reliability for the 520 series of SSDs, and the dreaded BSOD that plagued
the early SF-2281 based SSDs from other manufacturers, although to be fair,
updated SandForce firmware and new SATA option ROMS and drivers seems to have
sorted out those early problems.
Finally the Intel 520 series of SSDs has just become
available. The 520 series is available in capacities of 60GB, 120GB, 180GB,
240GB, and finally 480GB. Intel promise excellent performance, reliability, and
stability from the 520 series of SSDs. Intel must certainly be confident about
the 520 series reliability, as the 520 comes with a five year warranty.
Intel was kind enough to send me a review sample of their
520 series of SSD, in actual fact the 240GB version. In this review I will be
taking a look at the performance, and stability of Intel's new range of SSDs.
So, let’s find out how this new SSD performs in our range of
tests.
Intel company information
Intel should need no introduction, but for those of you who
would like to find out more about Intel, you can do so at their website.
The Intel 520 series 240GB SSD
Now it’s time to take a look at the drive itself and what it
came shipped with.
Packaging
Box front
Box rear
Inside the box
The package contained the Intel 520 series 240GB SSD, two
packs of fixing screws, a 3.5 inch to 2.5 inch converter bracket, 4pin to SATA
power connector, SATA cable, mini CD-ROM containing the instruction manual and
a link to the Intel HDD to SSD migration software, quick start booklet, and
finally a bragging sticker to fix somewhere prominent on the case of your PC.
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD
The casing of the Intel 520 series SSD is 7mm thick, and
Intel have fitted a plastic spacer so the drive can be fitted to a standard 9.5mm
2.5 inch drive bay. The spacer can be removed if you intend to fit the SSD to a
slim-line 7mm housing. The case itself is made from aluminium.
From the label on the SSD, we can see the model and serial
number, the drive capacity, and also that the SSD was manufactured in China. We
can also see that the SSD shipped with firmware version 400i.
Drive underside
The underside of the drive is pretty boring; we can see the
SATA power and data connectors, and four drive mounting holes.
Now let's head to the next page, where we look in more
detail at the Intel 520 series SSD.....
Intel 520 series SSD hardware.
Let's take a closer look at the hardware.
Drive internals
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD (PCB top-side)
On the top side of the PCB, we can see eight MLC NAND chip
packages.
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD (PCB underside)
On the underside of the PCB we can see another eight NAND
chips, and the SandForce SF-2281 SSD processor.
SandForce SF-2281 SSD processor.
Above we can see the popular SandForce SF-2281 SSD
processor, designated SF-2281VB1-SDC on the Intel 520 series of SSDs.
Intel 25nm MLC NAND
The Intel 520 series 240GB SSD has 256GB of Intel ONFI 2
synchronous MLC NAND onboard, with a life expectancy of 5000 P/E cycles, and a
user capacity of 223GB. Intel also state that the NAND used on the 520 is
cherry picked highest quality NAND.
Specifications
I found the following specifications at the Intel website.
From the above specifications we can see that the 180GB and the
240GB models of the 520 series SSD are the fastest, the lower capacity drives
and the 480GB model are not quite as fast. This is due to the NAND density and
the available controller channels that can be used to address the NAND array.
Drive maintenance features
For Windows 7 users and some distributions of Linux, the Intel
520 series supports ATA TRIM to keep the NAND clean. The Intel 520 series just
like all SandForce based SSDs, also has advanced garbage collection to clean
the NAND during drive idle periods. You can also use the Intel SSD toolbox to
maintain the 520 series of SSDs.
Intel SSD Toolbox
From the toolbox the user is able to monitor the SSD health
status from the home screen, and via SMART. You can also optimise the SSD, run
a system tuner, securely erase the drive, and update the drive's firmware.
Note: To update the drive's firmware, the drive needs to be
connected as a spare, since Windows cannot flash a drive that is running the
operating system. The same applies to secure erasing the SSD.
The Intel SSD toolbox is very nicely designed with a very
slick user interface, and it works very well indeed.
Let’s head to the next page where we take a look at our
testing methods and the review PC.
Test machine
For this review I will be using a computer with the
following configuration:
Hardware:
- Motherboard: AsRock Z68 Extreme 4 (Intel Z68 chipset)
- Processor: Intel 2nd generation Core i7 2600K
- RAM: 8GB G.Skill RipjawX DDR3 1600MHz (dual channel)
- GFX: Onboard Intel HD 3000
- Sound: Onboard Realtek ALC889 HD audio controller
- Hard disk OS: OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD
- Hard disk storage: 1X 500GB Samsung Spinpoint F3, and 1X 1TB
Samsung Spinpoint F1. - Case: Antec 900
- PSU: Enermax Liberty 620W
- Display: Dell UltraSharp U2412M 24” widescreen IPS LCD (HDCP
compliant) - Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit with Service Pack 1
The Intel 520 series SSD was connected to the Intel native SATA
6Gbps (port 0) on the Z68 motherboard of our review PC and all tests on the drive
were carried out with the drive connected to this port.
AHCI mode was also selected for all drives in the UEFI of
our test PC, and all tests were carried out in this mode.
The SATA 6Gbps drivers used on our review PC were the Intel
Rapid Storage Technology (RST) Version 10.6.0.1002.
Test applications
To test the performance of the Intel 520 series 240GB SSD, I
will be using the following test applications in this review.
- HD Tune Pro
- ATTO
- Iometer
- AS SSD
Benchmark - CrystalDiskMark
- MyCE Reality Suite
- Anvil’s
Storage Utilities
Test procedures
I will start off our testing procedures explanation by
stating that I did not run many synthetic benchmarks on the Intel 520 series
SSD. You may ask why I have run so few synthetic benchmarks?
SSD technology has moved so fast in the last couple of years,
that basic synthetic benchmarks alone are now of very limited use, as they don't
really tell us much about performance and how the drive will behave in the real
world. I have therefore decided to show some basic benchmarks of the Intel 520
series SSD, and will complement this with advanced benchmarks using IOMeter and
AS SSD benchmark. I will also show how the Intel 520 series SSD performs in the
real world with our MyCE Reality Suite test.
The reality of SSD performance
While I can easily show you which SSD is technically the
faster, when you use one of these modern SSDs as an operating system drive it
becomes very difficult to tell them apart as far as performance is concerned.
A typical use of a small capacity SSD at the moment is to
have your operating system and applications installed onto the SSD. The
performance difference compared to a traditional HDD is enormous, however when
you start to compare SSD to SSD the difference becomes almost impossible to
detect.
Let’s look at why this is the case.
Drive A can boot to the desktop in 8.11 seconds, and drive B
can boot to the desktop in 8.12 seconds, the difference in time is
milliseconds, and can one really tell the difference?
The fact is, all modern SSDs are only ticking over when they
are only running the OS and launching applications, it’s only when you get to
some of the larger capacity SSDs, with enough free space to be able to hold the
actual data that you’re going to be working with, be that video, audio or
pictures, for example, that you actually get a tangible difference in
performance. This is where the SSDs with the better sequential performance start
to pull well ahead of the SSDs which have lower sequential read/write
performance.
Small file random IOPS vs sequential performance
IOPS
This is a fairly complex subject, but I will do my best to
explain things in a manner that is easy to understand.
The term IOPS is the amount of input or output transactions
that can take place in a one second interval, so for example, if an SSD is
quoted as being able to cope with 20,000 4K random write IOPS, then the SSD
should be able to cope with 20,000 input transactions in a period of one
second. If the same SSD is said to be able to produce 20,000 4K random read
IOPS, then the same SSD should be able to produce 20,000 4K random read output
transactions in a one second interval.
Ok, now we have some figures to work with, the next question
is how many IOPS are actually required?
This will depend on your usage pattern. If you are a typical
desktop user who browses the internet, does some word processing or perhaps
some audio or video editing, and perhaps plays a few games, then in actual
fact, you don’t need to have massive 4K random read/write performance. The
actual amount of 4K random performance that is required for a fast and smooth
running system for a desktop user with a usage pattern similar to the above
will be well under 1,000 4K IOPS.
On the other hand, if the SSD is being used for running a
large and complex database server, then 4K random performance is the absolute
measurement of how fast that server will run, as this type of application does
most of its input and output transactions in the 4K domain.
So why would I need an SSD with 80,000 4K IOPS for a
desktop?
In fact you don’t need this type of performance for a
desktop, but an SSD which is capable of coping with 80,000 4K IOPS will be
faster than an SSD which can only cope with 20,000 4K IOPS.
OK, I just said if under 1,000 4K IOPS are actually required
for typical desktop usage, why is an SSD with 80,000 4K IOPS faster than an SSD
with only 20,000 4K IOPS, confused?
You may ask, if I only require 1,000 4K IOPS surely the rest
is wasted?
While you may never need 80,000 4K IOPS, IOPS is all about
latency. The reason that an SSD can cope with as much as 80,000 4K IOPS is
because latency in this domain is very low. With 4K files, even if you require
to process 500 of them at the same time, you are not talking about a huge
amount of data, it has far more to do with how long it takes the SSD to process
a single file, and the amount of time required to process a single 4K is all
about how long it takes for the SSD to access or store that data before it can
move on to the next transaction.
In other words an SSD with 80,000 4K IOPS performance will
handle those 500 files faster than the SSD with 20,000 IOPS.
So how will a desktop user even notice this faster speed if
so little 4K random IOPS and data are actually used?
Multitasking is a good example. The more tasks you run at
the same time, you more you will notice the speed difference.
Sequential performance
I have always maintained that sequential performance was
every bit as important as small random file performance for a desktop SSD. Some
highly regarded people on other sites found this statement quite funny a couple
of years ago when I made it, but my, how times have changed in the world of SSD
reviewing.
To me this was always so obvious for a desktop user. For
example, let’s say you want to launch an application or game. Both have some
fairly large files to load, and also a great many small files, but the point
is, even the smaller files are sequential in nature. Now let’s say you’re into
audio or video editing. Video files tend to be huge, and the files are written
or read sequentially. Isn’t this how many users are using their PCs these days?
Summary
So how does this shape up in the real world? Which is
better, massive 4K IOPS or massive sequential performance?
In an ideal world you want both, as an SSD with massive
random 4K IOPS and sequential performance will always be faster than an SSD
that has high sequential performance and moderate 4K random IOPS performance,
and the same applies to an SSD that has massive 4K random performance and
moderate sequential performance. The SSD which has high performance in both
patterns will always be the faster SSD.
However, you can still have an SSD that is very fast for
desktop use that has moderate random 4K performance and massive sequential
performance, the same can be said about a drive having massive random 4K
performance and moderate sequential performance, as it is about getting the
balance right if you have to compromise on one or the other.
Test drives
- 120GB OCZ Vertex SSD (firmware 1.5) SSD
- 500GB Samsung SpinPoint F3 (HD502HJ) HDD
- Seagate Momentus XT 500GB (Hybrid drive)
- OCZ Agility 120GB (firmware 1.5) SSD
- Intel X25-M 80GB (series G1) SSD
- OCZ Vertex 2 100GB SSD
- Plextor PX-256M2S SSD
- Crucial RealSSD C300 128GB SSD
- OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD
- Intel 510 series 120GB SSD
- Crucial M4 256GB SSD
- OCZ Octane 512GB SSD
- Intel 520 series 240GB SSD
Drive preparation for running the tests
All the SSDs used in this article were in a clean and fresh
state when the testing period started. From then on, each drive had to rely on
its own NAND cleaning effectiveness for the remainder of the tests.
- Both our spinning HDD drives were defragged before the
start of each test.
- All SSD and HDD used in this article had their partitions
aligned to the Windows 7 x64 defaults.
Where I use graphs in this article to display results, I
will use the following colours to make it easier, for our readers to see which drive
we are reviewing.
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD
Comparison SSD
Comparison HDD
Now let's head to the next page, where I look at some
basic benchmarks...
Reading Benchmarks
HD Tune
HD Tune – Sequential reading test
I present the graph below for comparison with other recently
tested drives.
The Intel 520 series performance was extremely impressive
with an average reading speed of 520.1 MB/s, but is just beaten by the OCZ
Vertex 3.
ATTO disk benchmark
ATTO has become a standard tool for measuring the data
throughput of HDD and SSD. It measures the performance of reading and writing,
using different file sizes and block sizes.
The reading speed results on the Intel 520 series are
extremely impressive, topping out at just below 558MB/s, and writing speed is equally
impressive topping out at over 527MB/s.
CrystalDiskMark 3.0
Crystal Disk Mark is quite a handy benchmarking application,
as it focuses on the file sizes that can cause a problem on a system drive.
As we can see in the above screenshots, the Intel 520 series
is performing extremely well.
AS SSD Benchmark
AS SSD benchmark is a benchmarking tool specifically
designed to test SSDs. The application tests sequential reading and writing
performance, 4K random reading and writing performance.
AS SSD benchmark also tests 4K threaded performance. This is
very exciting, as this test is the first available test that I am aware of,
that simulates how a PC operating system actually works. A modern PC and OS,
such as Windows Vista/7 does not just run a single thread at a time, it runs
many threads. The AS SSD benchmark "4K 64Thrd" tests run 64 threads
simultaneously throughout the test. If this result is good, then you can be pretty
sure the drive will perform extremely well as a system drive.
After the tests complete, AS SSD benchmark derives a total
score for the drive being tested. This is based on all aspects of the test
results, and gives an indication of how the drive is performing overall.
Now let’s look at the result from the Intel 520 series in
the form of a screenshot. All our other comparison drives’ results are
presented in the form of a graph.
Considering AS SSD benchmark writes data that is mostly
non-compressible, it’s very encouraging to see that the Intel 520 series SSD is
still the fastest in this test.
Summary:
The Intel 520 series SSD has performed extremely well in our
basic synthetic benchmarks, and trades top spot with the OCZ Vertex 3, which is
also equipped with the mighty SandForce SF-2281 SSD processor.
Synthetic benchmarks don’t lie, but they only show what an
SSD can do technically when it’s pushed very hard, and this can have very little
relevance in a normal user's desktop PC, which I will examine a little later in
this article with real world tests.
Let's head to the next page for our IOMeter test
results.....
I/O Performance
There is little point of having an SSD drive that has
blazing sustained reading and writing speeds, if the drive can't handle reading
and writing of small random files. If you intend to use your new SSD drive to
store and run your operating system, then the drive must be able to cope with
the many small random files that Windows will write to the drive continually.
So I feel it is very important to test how many of these random files that a
drive can handle in one second. I believe that anything over 1,000 I/O’s per
second would be enough for most users running a consumer grade mainstream PC,
and should provide a smooth running system. But obviously, the more I/O's that
a drive can handle, the faster the drive will feel and leave more headroom for
those huge multitasking sessions that users sometimes engage in.
The things that I will look at are the total I/O per second and
total MB/s.
Partition alignment and sector boundaries
Windows 7 and Vista will automatically align a partition to
4k boundaries during partition creation, Windows XP won’t. It is imperative
that an SSD’s partition is aligned. Windows XP is also restricted to sector
boundaries, while Windows 7 will use 4k boundaries if it can. The Intel 510 is
4k boundary aware, and will use these boundaries if possible. Of course it will
also remap LBAs for compatibility with the sector boundaries so that the drive
can be used with Windows XP.
IOMeter allows us to set the sector boundaries for
conducting the tests, and I have therefore set the sector boundaries at 4K,
which means the IOMeter tests are valid for Windows 7 and Windows Vista users.
XP users will not be able to obtain such results.
I will provide a screenshot of the tests on the review drive
for those of you who like to see the actual test result. All the comparison
drive results are represented in the form of graphs.
If any of you would like to see a screenshot from any
IOMeter test on a particular drive, please feel free to request one, and I’ll
post the screenshot in the forum thread.
All the IOMeter tests create a 10GB data set on the target
drive, and each test is run for a duration of 3 minutes.
IOMeter 4K random write test with repeating data.
The first test involves creating continual 4KB random files
on the target drive with IOMeter. I use a 4KB file size, as it is believed that
Windows will create and modify many of this size of file constantly in the
background during a typical Windows session. It is said that most 4K random
writes take place at a queue depth of only one, and I have been requested to
include this test in my reviews.
Queue depth 1
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD – 4K random write (QD1)
At 69.61 MB/s the Intel 520 series is performing extremely
well, in fact it is the fastest SSD in this test.
Our next test involves creating continual 4KB random files
on the target drive with IOMeter. I use a 4KB file size, as it is believed that
Windows will create and modify many of this size of file constantly in the
background during a typical Windows session. I will use queue depths of 4 and
32 for these tests.
Queue depth 4
Intel 520 series (Queue depth 4)
At a queue depth of 4, the Intel 520 series performance is
very strong indeed.
Queue depth 32
Intel 520 series (Queue depth 32)
The SandForce SF-2281 SSD processor is known to scale very
well with increasing queue depths, so it’s no surprise to see the two SF-2281
based SSDs out in front, with the Intel 520 being the fastest SSD in this test.
IOMeter 4K random write test with fully random data.
This test is exactly the same as the test above except that
the test data is fully random and is therefore much more difficult to compress.
This test was requested as SandForce based SSDs gain a lot of performance by
being able to compress data on the fly. While the above test shows the
SandForce based SSDs in a best case scenario, the following test will show the
SandForce based SSDs in a much more realistic scenario.
Queue depth 4
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD – 4K random write (QD4 with fully random data)
While fully random data has slowed down the Intel 520 by a
little bit, it is still performing extremely well, and finished this test in 2nd
place.
4K random write queue depth profile
For this test I used various queue depths from 1 – 32 to
give you an idea how this SSD performs at different queue depths. For a normal
desktop user for lightweight multitasking, the queue depth will rarely rise
above 2. For heavy multitasking, the queue depth is unlikely to rise above a
value of 8.
The result is below.
As we can see, the two SF-2281 based SSDs are miles in
front, with the Intel 520 just ahead of the OCZ Vertex 3.
Below I present a table of the results in more detail.
IOMeter 4K random read test.
If there are many 4k files created, then that must also mean
that many 4k files need to be read. This test measures 4k reading performance.
It is said that most 4K random reads take place at a queue
depth of only one, and readers have requested that I include this test in my
reviews.
Queue depth 1
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD (Queue depth 1)
The Intel 520 series can’t quite keep pace with the Crucial
C300 and the OCZ Octane, and finishes this test in third place; however, the
Intel 520 is still performing very well indeed.
Queue depth 4
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD (Queue depth 4)
The Intel 520 series is showing strong performance here. It
isn’t quite as fast as the Crucial SSDs, but it does come close to the
performance of the OCZ Octane in this test, and it also manages to beat the OCZ
Vertex 3.
Queue depth 32
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD (Queue depth 32)
The Intel 520 series has performed very well in this test,
but is still quite a long way behind the Crucial C300; however, it can hold its
own when compared to the Crucial M4 and OCZ Vertex 3.
4K random read queue depth profile.
This test shows how the review drive scales with increasing
queue depths.
Below I present a table of the results in more detail.
The Intel 520 series performs extremely well in this test,
but it just can’t keep pace with the Crucial C300 which has very impressive
random read performance.
IOMeter 512KB write test with repeating data.
Sequential writing performance is also very important; in
this test sequential writing performance is measured.
Intel 520 series 512K Sequential write with repeating data
The Intel 520 series has excellent sequential writing
performance with data that is easily compressed, and finishes this test in
first place.
IOMeter 512KB write test with fully random data.
This test is exactly the same as the test above except that
the test data is fully random in nature. This test was requested as SandForce
based SSDs gain a lot of performance by being able to compress data on the fly.
While the above test shows the SandForce based SSDs in a best case scenario,
the following test will show the SandForce based SSDs in a more realistic light.
In the real world, the data is neither 100% incompressible nor 100%
compressible, it is somewhere in between. So please keep this in mind.
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD – 512K sequential write with fully random data
When the Intel 520 series SSD was faced with small file
random data in a form that wasn’t easily compressible, it didn’t really have
much of an impact on the performance. With sequential data that isn’t so easy
to compress, things are different for the two SandForce SF-2281 based SSDs, and
they couldn’t keep pace with the OCZ Octane.
IOMeter 512KB read test.
This test measures 512k sequential reading performance.
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD – 512K sequential reading test
The Intel 520 series is neck and neck with the OCZ Vertex 3,
with the Intel 520 just shading it.
IOMeter Workstation simulation (outstanding I/Os = 64).
When running applications you will find that there is a
mixture of small random files, and larger sequential files, being created and
read. Not only that, it isn’t just one file at a time. In this test I measure a
simulated workstation pattern, with a queue depth of 64 (threaded).
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD – Workstation simulation
The Intel 520 series SSD was mighty impressive in our
simulated workstation pattern, and finishes a clear winner.
Summary
Overall, the Intel 520 series 240GB SSD has performed extremely
well in the IOMeter tests. It has excellent sequential performance, and astounding
small file random performance, especially when queue depths are high.
Now let’s head to the next page where we will look at how
the Intel 520 series SSD performs using a brand new benchmarking
application....
Anvil’s Storage Utilities
As well as performing SSD endurance tests. Anvil’s Storage
Utilities has a very nice SSD benchmarking application. The SSD benchmark tests
many different aspects of SSD performance, including 4K random at different
queue depths, and also sequential performance, but more importantly than this,
all using real test data.
Another very nice feature of Anvil’s SSD benchmark is the
fact that you can change the compression levels of the test data. The
compression levels of the data sets used for the tests can be varied from 0%
compression right up to 100% compressed data, and there are even a few data profiles
already included, such as database (8%) compression, and also an application
profile (46%) compression, which is designed to simulate real application data
being read and written to the SSD.
Anvil’s Storage Utilities is still in beta at the moment, but
the application is currently solid enough to use in this article, and I have already
verified the results obtained using an SATA analyser.
I will include a screenshot of the review drive, and all
comparison results will be presented in the form of graphs. If you would like
to see screenshots of the test results obtained on the other SSDs in this
article, you can do so by following the link here.
I will also be testing three different compression profiles,
which are as follows.
- 0 fill (100% compressible data)
- Application simulation profile (46% compressed)
- 100% (non compressible data)
So let’s begin the tests.
0 fill
Intel 520 series 240GB (0 fill)
Total score
Writing score
Reading score
With data that is 100% compressible it is no surprise that
the two SandForce SF-2281 based SSDs are out in front, with the Intel 520
series SSD just behind the OCZ Vertex 3, and all the other SSDs in this test
are left well behind.
Application profile
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD (application profile)
Total score
Writing score
Reading score
Once again the OCZ Vertex 3 is slightly faster than the
Intel 520 series, having said that, the Intel 520 is a good deal faster than
the OCZ Octane, Crucial M4, and the older Intel 510 series.
100% incompressible
Intel 520 series 240GB SSD (100% incompressible)
Total score
Writing score
Read score
Even with data that is 100% incompressible, the high queue
depths in some of these tests, and the sheer grunt of the SF-2281 controller
has made sure that the two SF-2281 based SSDs are well in front, with the OCZ
Vertex 3 this time being quite a bit fastest than the Intel 520 series SSD.
Summary
One should keep in mind that although Anvil’s Storage
Utilities SSD benchmark is a very good benchmark, and tests many aspects of SSD
performance, ultimately it is showing which SSD is technically the fastest, and
this may not be showing (for example) which drive will be fastest in the real
world with a home user's work pattern.
The Intel 520 series has performed extremely well in these
tests and while it couldn’t quite keep pace with the OCZ Vertex 3, the 520 is
still an excellent performer.
Now let's head to the next page for some real world tests....
It has become clear that simply conducting endless
benchmarks on SSD drives is pointless. Real users may run a few benchmarks when
they first fit their SSD drive, but most users just want a drive that performs
well in the real world. They want their drive to work "out of the
box" and work fast and smoothly.
Most of the latest SSD drives can deliver very fast
sustained reading and writing speeds, but these alone tell you very little
about how the drive will perform in the real world.
If you intend to use your SSD as your primary system drive,
with an operating system and applications installed and running from the drive,
real world performance becomes much more important than just fast sequential
read and write speeds.
Real world copy
tests
I will now conduct a few real world copy tests. These tests
simulate what real people do with their drives. I will be conducting writing
tests, using a large single file and a multiple file copy of various file sizes.
Then I will round off the tests by copying a folder of MP3 audio files, and
also a folder of JPG pictures.
I should point out that this is not a scientific way of
measuring performance. These timings were taken with a stop watch; I have
however ensured that the reading drive is well able to supply a data stream to
our writing drive, which is high enough not to be slowing down the performance
of the writing drive.
I will once again be comparing the obtained results with our
comparison drives, and will present the results in the form of graphs.
Multiple file copy writing test
For this test I copied the Nero Burning Rom install folder
from our review PC to the OCZ RevoDrive X2 240GB SSD, and then copied the
contents from the OCZ Vertex 3 to the Intel 520 series SSD and our other
comparison drives.
Our test copy contained 1,772 files of various sizes with a
combined capacity of 307MB.
The Intel 520 series 520 series is the fastest is SSD in
this test, just beating the OCZ Vertex 3 and Octane.
Single large file writing test (7.95GB)
For this test I used a single DVD9 ISO file which had been
copied to the OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD. The file was then copied to the Intel 520
series 240GB SSD and our comparison drives.
The large ISO file contains quite a lot of incompressible
data which is quite a handicap to the SF-2281 based SSDs, so much so that the OCZ
Octane steams ahead, and is by quite some margin the fastest SSD in this test.
The Intel 520 series finishes in second place.
Write a folder of JPG picture files.
For this test I copied a folder of JPG picture files from
our OCZ Vertex 3 SSD to the Intel 520 series SSD, and our other comparison
drives. The folder contained 3,714 JPG pictures, with a total capacity of
5.16GB.
Once again, the OCZ Octane proves to be the fastest SSD in
this test, but it only marginally faster than the Intel 520 series SSD.
Write a folder of MP3 audio files.
For this test I copied a folder of MP3 audio files from our
OCZ Vertex 3 SSD to the Intel 520 series SSD and our other comparison drives.
The folder contained 851 MP3 audio files, with a total capacity of 3.85GB.
Once again the OCZ Octane has claimed first place in our
table, with the Intel 520 and the OCZ Vertex 3 close behind.
Summary
With most of the data in the above tests already being
heavily compressed, it’s much harder for the SF-2281 based SSDs to gain an
advantage, and as we can see neither the Intel 520, nor the OCZ Vertex 3 can
keep pace with the Indilinx Everest based OCZ Octane. However, the results are
pretty close, and the Intel 520 series SSD is still showing an excellent turn
of speed.
Single drive copy tests
These tests are to simulate a single drive in a PC or
laptop. In other words, I will copy a series of files from one folder on the
tested drive to another folder on the same drive. This means the drive is simultaneously
reading and writing during the tests. I also want to make this a realistic test,
so I have used a folder of MP3 music files, and then repeated the test with a
folder of JPG picture files.
Single drive copy tests – 851 MP3 song files (3.85GB total)
In this test the Intel 520 series comes very close to
beating the OCZ Octane, but not quite, although it is faster than the OCZ
Vertex 3.
Single drive copy tests – 3,714 JPEG picture files (5.16GB total)
Once again the Intel 520 series SSD takes second place, and
is marginally faster than the OCZ Vertex 3.
Windows start-up and closedown
For these tests, I simply used a stop watch and tested the
amount of time taken for a full installation of Windows 7 to boot to the
desktop, and then timed how long it took for Windows 7 to close down by the
normal start menu method.
The timing was started once the BIOS had initialised and
reached the “loading OS message”.
Windows 7 boot time
Windows 7 closedown
There is very little difference in the time taken to boot
Windows 7 between the modern SATA 6Gbps SSDs, the same applies to the time
taken to shut the PC down.
Installing applications
Installing applications is possibly something you don't do that
often. But should you replace your system disk, then you will most likely have
to re-install your applications. Most of the SSD drives I have tested up until
now are quite slow at installing applications, most likely because their I/O
performance was quite limited.
For these tests, we picked some popular applications and
copied the entire contents of the CD or DVD media to an OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SSD.
We did this to make sure that the reading speed of our CD/DVD reader would not
hamper the performance of the target drive.
We then installed these applications onto our comparison HDD
drives, which were all running mirror image installations of our Windows 7 Home
Premium 64-bit installation, and timed the amount of time taken to install the
application with a stopwatch on each of the drives.
MS Office 2007 Professional (full install)
MS Office is another of those applications that make you
cringe at the thought of re-installing it.
Let's find out how our drives coped with the MS Office 2007
full install.
The Intel 520 series was the fastest when installing this
large office suite.
Adobe Fireworks CS3
Adobe Fireworks CS3 is another popular package. Let's find
out how our drives coped with installing this application.
There isn’t a huge margin in the amount of time taken to
install this application with our modern SSDs. However, the Intel 520 series is
in second place in our table.
Summary
Our real world tests, though not scientific in nature, I
feel are more realistic than simply running benchmarks. What is clear from these
tests is that the Intel 520 series 240GB SSD has excellent performance in the
real world.
Let’s check out application and game loading performance
on the next page of this article.....
These tests are very simple tests, but very important to
some users of SSD drives.
We simply started an application or game, and measured the
time taken for the application or game to fully load and start.
Application loading times
Adobe Fireworks CS3
These types of tests are becoming pretty pointless, as there
is so little difference in tangible performance between the modern SSDs, but
for the record, the Intel 520 and the OCZ Octane tied for first place.
Corel PaintShop Pro 12
Again, I doubt anyone could tell difference from the fastest
to the slowest modern SATA 6Gbps SSD, as they are all very close.
Games loading times
FAR CRY 2
Once again, the results are all so very close. Too close to
make any tangible difference between the fastest and slowest modern SSD, but
just for posterity, the Intel 520 and OCZ Vertex 3 both launched this game in
exactly the same amount of time.
F.E.A.R. 2
It’s the same story again; the modern SSDs are all so very
close in terms of loading performance.
Now let’s round off this article with the MyCE Reality
Suite tests on the next page.....
MyCE Reality Suite (storage).
So what is the MyCE Reality storage test?
The MyCE Reality Suite of tests is made from real everyday
applications and real data, there are no simulated tests, and everything is in
the real world. The only thing that's synthetic is that everything is automated
to make the tests fair, no matter which drive the tests are run on.
Recorded user sessions, by means of a script, are used to
launch the applications, load data, edit data, and then finally write that data
back to the target drive. The scripts do load the system much more than a human
could with these tests, as the scripts do not make mistakes, or pause to think
about what has to be done next.
Measurement system (revision 2)
The measuring system is part hardware and part software. The
hardware is proprietary and under an NDA, but what I can tell you is: The
measuring system can now accommodate SATA2, SATA3, USB3, PCIe, and DMI.
Testing method.
Once all the test data files were complete, they were then
copied to a single folder. I then fitted an old 80GB HDD into the PC and did a
clean install of Windows 7 Home Premium x64. The latest hardware drivers were
installed and Windows update was run to install any new updates that were
available up to 08/01/2012. At this point the applications that were to be used
in the tests were installed and updated with the latest patches.
The folder containing the application test data files was
then copied over to our fresh Windows 7 HDD. The drive was cleaned up and then
the four test scenarios were recorded, with the scenario playback data file
which will run each test scenario saved to the desktop. A drive snapshot was
then taken of the complete HDD and the drive snapshot image copied to a second
HDD for safe keeping.
The image is then simply restored to each of the drives on
test. In the case of SSDs the partition is then realigned “on the fly” and for
SSDs that support TRIM, the free space is filled and then deleted to force
TRIM. All other HDDs and SSDs in the system are then disconnected to make sure
the complete test can only run on the drive I am testing.
A 20 minute settling time is allowed before the tests are run,
then each of the 4 tests is run and the results gathered. This process is
repeated for each of the drives I am testing.
The test scenarios are as follows.
- Graphics content
- Video editing
- Audio import and compression
- Application multitasking
Let’s begin the tests.
MyCE Reality Suite – Graphics content.
Using ACDSee Pro 3, 100 JPG pictures with an average size of
10MB are imported into the ACDSee library, and then 12 of these JPG files are
then selected for a batch process, of resize, compress the quality to 80%, and
finally write the edited pictures back to the drive. The test is approximately
78% read and 22% write.
The OCZ Octane has excellent reading performance and writing
performance with largely incompressible data, so it’s no real surprise to find
the Octane is out in front, and is quite a bit faster than the Intel 520 and
the OCZ Vertex 3.
MyCE Reality Suite – Video editing.
Using Vegas Pro, a 14GB HD MPEG2 video stream is loaded into
the editor, from which 2 segments are then cut and pasted into new segments. There
is a lot of disc caching going on in this test, and the test is approximately
55% read and 45% write.
This time the Intel 520 series is in third place, but it’s
only marginally slower than the two fastest drives, and the Intel 520 series is
still showing excellent performance in this test.
MyCE Reality Suite – Audio import and compression.
Using Sony Sound Forge 10, a batch process is run consisting
of 30 24bit (192000 Hz sample rate) .wav files, and 100 16bit (44100 Hz sample
rate) .wav files are imported and then converted to MP3 audio files with a bit rate
of 128kbps, and the converted files are written back to the drive. The test is
approximately 72% read and 28% write.
This OCZ Octane is once again the fastest, but Intel 520
series is close behind.
MyCE Reality Suite – Application multitasking.
For this test I used several popular applications, Microsoft
Word 2007, Microsoft Access 2007, Microsoft Excel 2007, Microsoft Outlook 2007,
Adobe reader, Adobe Photoshop CS3, uTorrent, Windows media player, and Internet
Explorer 8.
This session runs for approximately 12 minutes. The test is
started by downloading a Linux distribution via uTorrent, Windows media player
is then opened and a 1080p video file is opened and played for the duration of
the test. Microsoft Outlook is opened and any new emails are received, read,
then replied too, a document in Adobe reader is opened and scrolled from start
to finish, 3 Microsoft Word documents with graphics content are opened, browsed
and some sections of the documents are copied and pasted into a forth document
and then saved back to the drive. The same applies to Microsoft Access and
Excel. 100 MP3 files are imported into Windows media library. Six JPG images
are loaded into Adobe Photoshop and some minor editing is done and the files
saved back to the drive.
Finally, Internet Explorer 8 is opened with 10 tabs, and the
contents of the 10 tabs refreshed, and browsed while the other applications are
busy in the background.
I would describe the multitasking pattern as moderate to
heavy.
During this test there is approximately 85% reading and 15%
writing.
This time the Intel 520 series is the fastest SSD, with the
OCZ Vertex 3 close behind, in fact both of the SF-2281 based SSDs are quite a
bit faster than their closest rival.
Summary
I firmly believe that the MyCE Reality Suite gives a very
good overall picture of how a drive can perform in the real world, and in this
case, the Intel 520 series 240GB SSD is performing extremely well.
Now let’s head to the next page, and see how well the
drive performs after heavy use....
Speed degradation after heavy testing
On this page I will test how the SSD performs after heavy
testing and usage.
I now have a new policy as to how I go about testing an SSD.
In the past I would deliberately try and get an SSD into a “used state”, by
filling the drive several times before starting the tests. This seemed to work
quite well up until the SandForce based SSDs appeared, but because of the way
the SandForce controller works, it was near impossible to tell if deliberately
trying to get a SandForce based SSD into a “used state” had actually worked or
not.
A new strategy was required. So now I begin the tests with
the SSD in a clean state and allow it to look after itself during the testing
period. I start off the tests by running AS SSD benchmark. This gives me the
“as new” reading and writing performance of the SSD.
Once all the tests have been completed, the drive is then
tested as a system drive, and just used normally for many days which will also
includes idle time (which is something I have always done with a review
sample). At the end of the period, the drive is filled to capacity and then all
files are deleted from the drive and then a “quick format” is performed.
The last test is a rerun of AS SSD benchmark, and the result
from the final test is compared with the first run when the SSD was in an “as
new” state.
New state 13/02/2012
Used state 28/02/2012
With 2.84 Terabytes of data already written to the drive
during the testing period, performance has dropped a little bit. Sequential
reading and writing speeds have dropped a little, as has 4K random read/write
speeds. Having said that, it is nothing to worry about, and such slight drops
in speed are very likely to go unnoticed in the real world.
Intel Toolbox optimised
Since the Intel 520 series of SSDs is supported by the Intel
SSD Toolbox, I decided to run the SSD optimiser to see if performance could be
restored to an “as new state”, and below is the result.
Intel SSD Toolbox – SSD optimiser
Sequential read and write speeds are up, but not to the
level of when the drive was new. It’s the same with small file random
performance at a queue depth of 1. The reading score in AS SSD has gone up, and
that is why the overall score in AS SSD has also gone up to a level not even
achieved when the SSD was new.
Overall, I would say that even after some heavy use, the
Intel 520 series SSD is still performing extremely well.
This concludes our review. To read the final thoughts and
conclusion, click the link below....
Final thoughts and the conclusion
User experience
A modern operating system such as Windows 7 rarely does one
thing at time; it processes hundreds of threads at once. Just take a look at
the processes and services that are running in task manager for an idea of how
much is going on, even with the PC idling at the desktop. When you start
running applications on top of this, the workload increases in line with the number
and type of applications you are running. It’s also fair to say that many of
these processes are already loaded into system RAM, but many are also loaded into
and unloaded from RAM from the system drive as and when they are required.
The fact of the matter is this. If you are running a mainstream
or high end modern PC with a powerful CPU and graphics card, and are still
running a traditional HDD as a system drive, regardless of how fast that HDD
is, it is still bogging the system down substantially. It has long since passed
the stage where one can meaningfully debate if an SSD is really faster than a
traditional HDD. The fact is they are, and not just by a little bit: they are
much faster.
If we look at the 3 basic requirements for a fast SSD, they
are as follows.
- Small file threaded performance needs to be high
- Small random file performance needs to be high
- Sequential read and write speeds needs to be high
The Intel 520 series 240GB SSD has all of the above
attributes in abundance. The SandForce SF-2281 is quite simply a powerful SSD
processor, and at the moment, there is nothing else that can really compete.
Stability
Last year (2011) was a good year for SSD innovation, with
SSDs based on the SandForce SF-2281 showing unheard of performance from a single
SATA SSD solution. The Crucial M4 was also another big star of 2011, offering
excellent performance.
Unfortunately 2011 was a bad year for SSD reliability. Every
single SATA 6Gbps SSD platform had problems with the new Intel Sandy Bridge
motherboards, including BSOD problems from SF-2281, Crucial M4, and the Samsung
830, and also the Intel 320 series having problems with the so called 8MB bug.
Generally all these problems have been sorted out with firmware updates.
It has taken a long time for Intel to get the Intel 520
series SSD to the market, in fact almost a year after the first SandForce
SF-2281 based SSDs appeared. Intel has stated that it wanted to make sure that
the 520 would have the customary Intel reliability, and this took time to
ensure. I would say that the 5 year warranty expresses Intel’s confidence in
the 520 series SSD.
The Intel 520 series is as “plug n play” as it gets. There are
no special tweaks needed other than simply making sure that AHCI SATA mode is
enabled in the system UEFI (BIOS) if you want to get the best performance and
compatibility out of this SSD.
I have only had the Intel 520 series SSD for a couple of
weeks, so it’s not possible to comment on the drive's long term reliability.
But what I can tell you now is that during the testing period, the Intel 520
series has been 100% stable, with not a single issue to report.
Long term testing on the Intel 520 series begins now, and I
will report back if I should encounter any reliability issues with the SSD.
Conclusion:
Let us summarise the most important positive and negative
points below:
Positive:
- Silky smooth operation as a system drive.
- Excellent sequential reading and writing performance.
- Excellent 4K random I/O performance.
- SATA 6Gbps support.
- The drive is supported by the excellent Intel SSD Toolbox.
- TRIM support under Windows 7.
- Lightning fast access times.
- Completely silent operation.
- Fast operating system start-up and shutdown times.
- 5 years warranty.
Negative:
- Expensive.
To sum up, this is what I would
say:
Throughout this review, the Intel 520 has gone head to head
with the OCZ Vertex 3, which is really the only other SSD that I have tested
that can compete directly with the Intel 520 240GB SSD. In some cases the Intel
520 was faster than the Vertex 3, and in other cases the Vertex 3 came out on
top. Let’s call it a draw by stating that performance wise, both these SSDs are
very close.
The competition in this market segment is very fierce, and
there are many other SandForce SF-2281 based around that are every bit as fast
as the Intel 520 series. There is also strong competition from the Marvell
based SSDs, such as the Crucial M4, Corsair Performance Pro, and the Plextor
M3, and let’s not forget about the Indilinx Everest based OCZ Octane, which in
the real world is a very strong performer.
Where the Intel 520 certainly does come out on top is that
very nice 5 year warranty, and it also has Intel’s name on it. The only real
problem with the Intel 520 series is the price. Let’s not split hairs here, the
Intel 520 series is expensive.
Price aside, the Intel 520 series 240GB SSD is an
outstanding SSD, and quite possibly the best SSD to date.
Price
As I write this article, I found the Intel 520 series 240GB
SSD at scan computers for £405.77 Inc VAT, which translates to €478.73 at
the current exchange rate.
|
Model |
User capacity |
Price |
Cost per GB |
|
Intel 520 series |
223GB |
£405.77 |
£1.69 |
|
OCZ Octane 512GB |
477GB |
£655 |
£1.28 |
|
OCZ Vertex 3 |
223GB |
£266.15 |
£1.11 |
The parting sentence is
“The Intel 520 series 240GB is an outstanding SSD; it has
excellent performance, and is backed by a 5 year warranty”.
You may comment on this review below.
Thanks to:
|
|
EFD Software for |
|
|
Alex |
|
|
