|
|
Review: SanDisk Extreme – 120GB SSD |
It's always nice to get something a little different to
review, as it makes life interesting. The SanDisk Extreme SSD range is somewhat
different from the usual run of the mill SSDs. At its heart is the familiar SandForce
SF-2281 SSD processor, but SanDisk has kitted this SSD out with its own 24nm
Toggle mode MLC NAND. Toggle mode NAND is quite similar to DDR2 memory, in that
you can get up to twice the data throughput.
Manufacturers will almost always send you the fastest SSD in
their range for review, and for SandForce based SSDs, the fastest models are
the 240GB versions. The SanDisk Extreme range of SSDs come in three different
capacities. 120GB, 240GB, and 480GB.
SanDisk was kind enough to send me a review sample of their
Extreme series of SSDs, in actual fact the 120GB version. In this review I will
be taking a look at the performance, and stability of this new range of SSDs.
It's exciting to get hold of an SSD for testing that has a
capacity and price that is most likely to end up as an system drive in a mainstream
PC, and that capacity is most likely to be a 120GB model rather than 240GB, or
480GB versions. The downside of this is the SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD is going
to have to go head to head with larger capacity SSDs in our range of tests,
which will set the SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD at a disadvantage regarding
performance. So I ask you to keep this in mind when reading this review.
So, let’s find out how this new SSD performs in our range of
tests.
SanDisk company information
SanDisk should need no introduction, but for those of you
who would like to find out more about SanDisk, you can do so at their website.
The SanDisk Extreme series 120GB 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 SanDisk Extreme series 120GB SSD, and
that is basically all you get. There is no 2.5 inch to 3.5 inch converter bracket,
although you do get an installation guide (not shown), and warranty
information.
SanDisk Extreme - 120GB SSD
The top of the SanDisk Extreme case is made from a strong
metal.
Drive underside
The underside of the drive we can see the SATA power and
data connectors, and four drive mounting holes. We can also see the drive's
model and serial number, and that the drive was manufactured in China on the
first of February 2012. The bottom of the case is also made from strong metal.
Now let's head to the next page, where we look in more
detail at the SanDisk Extreme SSD.....
A closer look at the SanDisk Extreme hardware.
Let's take a look at the hardware found inside the SanDisk
Extreme SSD.
PCB
PCB topside
The top of the PCB is sparse to say the least. We can see
the familiar SandForce SF-2281 SSD processor, the SATA data and power
connectors, and spaces for eight NAND chips.
PCB underside
The underside of the PCB is once again sparsely populated.
Since this is the 120GB model, we can see four 24nm toggle mode NAND chip
packages, with each package having a capacity of 32GB. Interestingly, the NAND
is manufactured by SanDisk themselves.
The SandForce SSD processor
The SSD processor used in the SanDisk Extreme is the popular
SandForce SF-2281, designated SF-2281VB1-SDC.
The NAND on the review sample was SanDisk's own 24nm toggle
mode MLC NAND.
SanDisk 24nm toggle mode MLC NAND
There are four 32GB NAND chips onboard giving a total of
128GB of NAND flash memory, and approximately 111GB available to the user once
the SSD is partitioned and formatted.
Specifications
As we can see from the specifications, the 240GB model is
the fastest.
Drive maintenance features
For Windows 7 users and some distributions of Linux, the SanDisk
Extreme SSD supports ATA TRIM to keep the NAND clean. The SanDisk Extreme also
has advanced garbage collection to clean the NAND during drive idle periods.
SanDisk SSD Toolkit
From the toolkit the user is able to monitor the SSD health
status via SMART, and update the drive's firmware. However, there is no drive
maintenance features from within the toolkit. The SanDisk Extreme does support
"internal secure erase". So it is possible to secure erase the drive
via a live Linux distribution such as Parted Magic, for example.
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: Asus P8Z77 V Deluxe (Intel Z77 chipset)
- Processor: Intel 3nd generation Core i7 3770K
- RAM: 16GB Samsung Green DDR3 1600MHz (dual channel)
- GFX: Onboard Intel HD 4000
- Sound: Onboard Realtek ALC898 HD audio controller
- Hard disk OS: OCZ Octane 512GB SSD
- Hard disk storage: 1X 500GB Samsung Spinpoint F3, and 1X 1TB
Samsung Spinpoint F1. - Case: Antec Performance One P280
- PSU: Antec True Power modular 550W
- Display: Dell UltraSharp U2412M 24” widescreen IPS LCD (HDCP
compliant) - Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit with Service Pack 1
The SanDisk Extreme SSD was connected to the Intel native SATA
6Gbps (port 0) on the Z77 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 11.1.0.1006
Test applications
To test the performance of the SanDisk Extreme 120GB 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 SanDisk Extreme 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 SanDisk
Extreme SSD, and will complement this with advanced benchmarks using IOMeter
and AS SSD benchmark. I will also show how the SanDisk Extreme 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
- 500GB Samsung SpinPoint F3 (HD502HJ) HDD
- 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
- Plextor PX-256M3 256GB SSD
- OCZ Vertex 4 512GB SSD
- Kingston Hyper X 3K 240GB SSD
- SanDisk Extreme 120GB 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.
For the sake of clarity, I now only include SATA 6Gbps SSDs
in these tests, and all were connected to the native Intel SATA 6Gbps (port 0)
of my motherboard for these tests.
- The spinning HDD drive was 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.
SanDisk Extreme 120GB
SSD
Comparison SSD
Comparison HDD
Now let's head to the next page, where I look at some
basic benchmarks...
Synthetic Benchmarks
HD Tune Pro sequential read test.
SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD
For comparison with other drives, I include the table below.
With an average sequential reading speed of 523.6 MB/s, the
SanDisk Extreme 120GB is the fastest SSD in this test.
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 SanDisk Extreme are
extremely impressive, topping out at just under 560 MB/s, and writing speed is also
very impressive topping out at over 523MB/s. One must keep in mind that the
test data created by ATTO is very easy to compress. So you are seeing the
SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD in a best case scenario.
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.
The test data created by Crystal Disk Mark is not so easy to
compress, so this test is a little more realistic in terms of the performance
you can expect in the real world.
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 SanDisk Extreme in the
form of a screenshot. All our other comparison drives’ results are presented in
the form of a graph.
The SanDisk Extreme is showing good performance in the AS
SSD test run, but is unsurprisingly outgunned by the larger capacity SandForce
based SSDs, and of course by the mighty OCZ Vertex 4.
Summary:
The SanDisk Extreme 120GB got off to a flying start in the
HD Tune Pro sequential reading test, and the ATTO test, but unsurprisingly,
couldn't really compete with the larger SandForce based drives when the data is
not so easy to compress.
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 SanDisk
Extreme 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
SanDisk Extreme SSD – 4K random write (QD1)
At 67.39 MB/s the SanDisk Extreme is showing very good
performance at this queue depth, and is about neck and neck with the other
SF-2281 based SSDs.
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
SanDisk Extreme (Queue depth 4)
At a queue depth of 4, the SanDisk Extreme performance is
very strong indeed, and is the second fastest SandForce SF-2281 based SSD.
Queue depth 32
SanDisk Extreme (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 four SF-2281
based SSDs doing very well in this test, and in fact the SanDisk Extreme is 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
SanDisk Extreme SSD – 4K random write (QD4 with fully random data)
The SandForce SF-2281 based SSDs pays a big penalty when
having to deal with data that isn't so easy to compress, and to compound
matters even further, the small capacity SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD pays a
bigger penalty than the larger SF-2281 based SSDs, with largely incompressible
data.
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.
The SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD has the highest peak
performance of all the SSDs in this test, reaching 341.74 MB/s at a queue depth
of 32. However, it is no match for the Everest 2 based Vertex 4 at lower queue
depths.
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
SanDisk Extreme SSD (Queue depth 1)
The SanDisk Extreme is quite a bit behind most of the other
SSDs in this test.
Queue depth 4
SanDisk Extreme SSD (Queue depth 4)
Once again the SanDisk Extreme is being outgunned by most of
the other SSDs in this test.
Queue depth 32
SanDisk Extreme SSD (Queue depth 32)
There are no surprises here, and once again the SanDisk
Extreme is outgunned, although with 23,909 IOPS, it has surpassed the figures
that SanDisk claim for the 120GB model.
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.
If we look at the SanDisk Extreme 4K random read performance
in detail, it is not that far behind the larger capacity SandForce SF-2281
based SSDs at lower queue depths, but it doesn't scale very well with
increasing queue depths.
IOMeter 512KB write test with repeating data.
Sequential writing performance is also very important; in
this test sequential writing performance is measured.
SanDisk Extreme 512K
Sequential write with repeating data
The SanDisk Extreme has excellent sequential writing
performance when the data is easily compressed, and is well up to the
performance level of the three larger SF-2281 based SSDs.
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.
SanDisk Extreme SSD – 512K sequential write with fully random data
With data that is not so easy to compress, the SandForce SF-2281
based SSDs take a big hit in performance, and once again the lower capacity
SanDisk Extreme pays a big penalty.
IOMeter 512KB sequential read test QD1.
This test measures 512k sequential reading performance at
very low queue depths.
SanDisk Extreme SSD – 512K sequential reading test QD1
The SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD has excellent sequential
reading performance at low queue depths, and is the fastest SSD in this test.
IOMeter 512KB sequential read test (dual threaded).
This test measures 512k sequential reading performance QD2.
SanDisk Extreme SSD – 512K sequential reading test QD2
There isn't a huge difference in performance between most of
these SSDs in this test, but for the record the SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD
finishes this test in sixth place.
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).
SanDisk Extreme SSD – Workstation simulation
Once again the lower capacity SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD
can't keep pace with the higher capacity SandForce based SSDs, or the mighty
Everest 2 based Vertex 4, although it has done better than the Crucial M4
256GB, and the OCZ Octane 512GB SSDs. Overall, I'd say the SanDisk Extreme has
done fairly well in this test.
Summary
Overall the SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD has done well in the
IOMeter tests. It has been outgunned in many situations by the larger capacity
SandForce based SSDs, and not even its very fast toggle mode NAND can overcome
the performance hits associated with not being able to access all the eight
channels of the SandForce SF-2281 SSD processor.
Now let’s head to the next page where we will look at how
the SanDisk Extreme 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
SanDisk Extreme 120GB (0 fill)
Total score
Writing score
Reading score
With a total score of 3819.52, the SanDisk Extreme is about
middle of the pack.
Application profile
SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD (application profile)
Total score
Writing score
Reading score
With data that isn’t so easily compressible, the SanDisk
Extreme begins to struggle a little bit, but is still in front of the ever
popular Crucial M4 256GB SSD.
100% incompressible
SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD (100% incompressible)
Total score
Writing score
Read score
With test data that can't be compressed at all, the SanDisk
Extreme 120GB SSD is once again struggling to keep pace with the higher
capacity SandForce SF-2281 based SSDs. However, it is still performing fairly well
in this test.
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 demonstrating 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 SanDisk Extreme has performed well, but it can't quite
keep pace with most of the larger capacity SSDs.
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 RevoDrive X2 to the SanDisk Extreme SSD and our other
comparison drives.
Our test copy contained 1,772 files of various sizes with a
combined capacity of 307MB.
The SanDisk Extreme is in the middle of the pack.
Single large file writing test (7.95GB)
For this test I used a single DVD9 ISO file which had been
copied to the OCZ RevoDrive X2 240GB SSD. The file was then copied to the SanDisk
Extreme 120GB 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, and once again the
SanDisk Extreme is quite a bit slower than the larger capacity SSDs.
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 SanDisk Extreme SSD, and our other comparison
drives. The folder contained 3,714 JPG pictures, with a total capacity of
5.16GB.
Once again, the SanDisk Extreme is in the middle of the pack.
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 SanDisk Extreme SSD and our other comparison drives.
The folder contained 851 MP3 audio files, with a total capacity of 3.85GB.
Once again, the SanDisk Extreme finds itself in the middle
of the pack.
Summary
What we can see from the above tests is that the 120GB
SanDisk Extreme struggles a little to keep pace with the larger capacity SSDs.
However, in most cases it proved to be the fastest 120GB SSD in these copy
tests.
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 SanDisk Extreme has done well, and is
faster than the larger capacity Plextor PX-256M2S.
Single drive copy tests – 3,714 JPEG picture files (5.16GB total)
Once again the SanDisk Extreme SSD is performing very well
indeed.
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, and 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 one 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 SanDisk Extreme showed an excellent turn of speed 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 SanDisk Extreme is
in the middle of the pack.
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 SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD has very good 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.
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, but for
posterity the SanDisk Extreme is once again in the middle of the pack.
Games loading times
FAR CRY 2
The OCZ Vertex 4 is the fastest, with the SanDisk finishing
in fourth place in this test, and is as fast as the larger capacity SandForce
SF-2281 based SSDs.
F.E.A.R. 2
Once again the results are so very close, and once again the
SanDisk Extreme is showing a very good turn of speed.
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, and USB3.
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 SanDisk Extreme has done extremely well in this test,
and finishes in sixth place.
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.
With data that isn’t compressible you would have expected
the SanDisk Extreme to struggle a little. It is a bit behind the larger
capacity SSDs, but nonetheless is showing good performance.
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.
Once again, the SanDisk Extreme is a little bit behind the
larger capacity SSDs, but is once again proving to be the fastest 120GB SSD.
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 9.
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 9 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 is another very clear demonstration of how fast the SanDisk
Extreme is, and its miles ahead of the other 120GB SSDs in this test, and even
beats the 256GB Plextor SSD.
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 SanDisk Extreme is clearly the fastest 120GB SSD, and 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.
Given that the SanDisk Extreme has less capacity to play with
compared to most of the other SSDs in this article, one would have expected the
SanDisk Extreme to struggle a little after heavy use.
Let's find out.
New state 10/05/2012
Used state 17/05/2012
With 2.61 Terabytes of data already written to the drive
during a testing period of just seven days, one would have expected the
performance to have dropped off slightly. I have to say there is no real evidence
of this having taken place, in fact the overall score has only dropped
marginally.
If this is an indication of how the SanDisk Extreme will
behave in general use, then there is no need to worry about the drive grinding
to halt caused by dirty NAND, as the SanDisk Extreme seems very capable of maintaining
performance even after being pushed very hard.
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 4 basic requirements for a really 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.
- Fast access times.
The SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD has all of the above
attributes, and feels as snappy as any other SSD I have tested this year.
Stability
I have only had the SanDisk Extreme SSD for a few days, 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 SanDisk Extreme has
been 100% stable, with not a single issue to report.
The SanDisk Extreme 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) and installing the latest Intel RST SATA
drivers if you want to get the best performance and compatibility out of this
SSD.
Long term testing on the SanDisk Extreme 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 performance.
- Very good sequential writing performance.
- Outstanding 4K random I/O performance at high queue depths.
- SATA 6Gbps support.
- TRIM support under Windows 7.
- Fast access times.
- Excellent price.
- Completely silent operation.
- Fast operating system start-up and shutdown times.
- 3 years warranty.
Negative:
- Including a 3.5 inch to 2.5 inch drive converter bracket,
would have been a nice addition.
To sum up, this is what I
would say:
Throughout this review, the SanDisk Extreme has gone head to
head with the best and fastest SATA SSDs currently available. The SanDisk isn't
the fastest SSD in this article, however, it is the fastest 120GB SSD I have
tested, and with very aggressive pricing, it is most certainly the cheapest SSD
I have tested.
It's been refreshing to be able to test an SSD at a price
point that most mainstream users will be able to afford. As mentioned above,
the 120GB SanDisk Extreme isn't the fastest SSD, but it has competed extremely
well in these tests, even when up against SSDs that cost up to five times more
than the SanDisk Extreme 120GB SSD.
I'm very impressed.
Price
As I write this article, I found the SanDisk Extreme 120GB
SSD available for £84.95
including VAT, which makes the 120GB SanDisk Extreme an absolute bargain.
The prices in Euro and US Dollar are derived from the
current UK pound to Euro/US Dollar exchange rate.
|
Model |
User capacity |
Price |
Cost per GB |
|
|
|
£84.95 |
£0.76 |
The parting sentence is
“The SanDisk Extreme 120GB is an excellent performer, and
with very aggressive pricing it's an absolute bargain”.
You may comment on this review below.
Thanks to:
|
|
EFD Software for |
|
|
Alex |
|
|
