Sequential Read/Write Speed

To measure sequential performance I ran a 1 minute long 128KB sequential test over the entire span of the drive at a queue depth of 1. The results reported are in average MB/s over the entire test length. These results are going to be the best indicator of large file copy performance.

Desktop Iometer - 128KB Sequential Read (4K Aligned)

Desktop Iometer - 128KB Sequential Write (4K Aligned)

Again we see that low queue depth transfers don't stress the Z-Drive enough to flex its muscles.

Sequential Performance vs. Transfer Size (ATTO)

I stopped putting these charts in our reviews (although I do include the data in Bench) because they are generally difficult to read. Here we're only going to look at three drives though: a Vertex 3, RevoDrive 3 X2 and the Z-Drive R4 CM88:

Now we're starting to see something. If you can't scale with queue depth, scaling up the transfer size seems to do the trick. After about 64KB the Z-Drive R4 starts to pull away fro the RevoDrive 3 X2, peaking at just over 2.5GB/s!

Read performance is even more impressive: the Z-Drive R4 manages just under 3GB/s for 2MB transfer sizes.

Random Read/Write Speed AS-SSD Incompressible Sequential Performance
POST A COMMENT

57 Comments

View All Comments

  • geddarkstorm - Wednesday, September 28, 2011 - link

    ^ This Reply
  • cervantesmx - Wednesday, September 28, 2011 - link

    I agree 100% Reply
  • GTRagnarok - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link

    "We have a preproduction board that has a number of stability & compatibility OCZ tells us will be addressed..."

    I think a word is missing here.
    Reply
  • icrf - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link

    Also, you missed the protocol on the last link on the first page (the one to ssd bench) and it 404's now Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link

    Fixed both! Thank you!

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • FATCamaro - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link

    OOH OOH Let me guess!!!
    Never??

    As in :
    "We have a preproduction board that has a number of stability & compatibility OCZ tells us will NEVER be addressed..."
    Reply
  • vodkapls - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link

    Isn't it the fact that the revodrive 3 x2 use asynchronous memory that makes it so much slower than the r4 ? Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link

    Great catch! I hadn't even thought of that but it's definitely a possibility :)

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • jebo - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link

    I just can't take OCZ seriously from a reliability standpoint. I would love to know what the failure rate is like on OCZ's desktop offerings. I personally am in the process of my 3rd RMA of an OCZ SSD during the past 2 years.

    I think Intel, Crucial (or, judging by the last review, Samsung) will make my next SSD. I can only rebuild windows and piece together backups so many times before I say enough is enough.
    Reply
  • dilidolo - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 - link

    What's the point to develop enterprise product if no enterprise is going to buy?
    I don't think any enterprise will trust OCZ.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now