SanDisk Ultra Plus SSD Review (256GB)
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 7, 2013 9:00 AM ESTPerformance vs. Transfer Size
ATTO does a good job of showing us how sequential performance varies with transfer size. Most controllers optimize for commonly seen transfer sizes and neglect the rest. The optimization around 4KB, 8KB and 128KB transfers makes sense given that's what most workloads are bound by, but it's always important to understand how a drive performs across the entire gamut.
Ah that's a pretty read curve. Other than Samsung's SSD 840 Pro, none of the other vendors here deliver as good and consistent performance at smaller transfer sizes.
The write curve isn't as impressive. It starts out nicely but does lose out to the higher performers with larger transfer sizes - that 4-channel controller is likely to blame here.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
38 Comments
View All Comments
Samus - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
I'm just dying for a mainstream Intel S3700 to hit the consumer corner...Beenthere - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
Few if anyone would be able to differentiate a noticeable actual system performance change no matter which one of the listed SSDs they chose. SanDisk hasn't yet learned how to dupe the benches but in due time their numbers will increase similar to the others.If you're going to buy an SSD you should do your homework so you know the liabilities and realities including reliability and campatibility issues, lost data, drive size change, etc. If you want an eye opener read the warranties on SSDs at the respective SSD mfg. websites.
mrdude - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
"The drive PCB itself is very small, potentially paving the way for some interesting, smaller-than-2.5" form factors."That's the most interesting bit, I find. Those things are absolutely tiny. So tiny that it kind of makes you wonder if standardizing the NGFF cards is even worth it going forward. If you need small storage then you can just stick with the standard SATA connectors on an itsy bitsy drive.
Very cool :)
vol7ron - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
n-TB sizes that much more of a coming realitySmCaudata - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
I picked up a SanDisk extreme 240 last year for about 50¢ per GB and I'm happy. Even during black Friday I didn't see anything cheaper and this drive is fast. The difference between most ssd now is academic. User experience is nearly the same for average consumers.mayankleoboy1 - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
Isnt it the same that OCZ implemented in Vertex4 f/w 1.4 ?blowfish - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
So for XP users, would a drive that doesn't support Trim be the way to go, since MS decided not to add Trim to XP in order to push Win7?randinspace - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
Upgrading to Windows 7 (and pretending like 8 didn't happen even though it has enviable features...) is the way to go. Seriously speaking (upgrade), it's not like a drive that has TRIM support is going to be a bad thing even if you can't use it, but see the above comments about Sandforce controllers in general/Intel's 335 series SSDs in particular. Or even see the comments about hacking in TRIM support, IF YOU DARE!FWIW I'm very happy with the performance of my (240GB) 335. I'd probably buy another one to put in my laptop if they weren't going for $40 more than what I paid last month...
dave_the_nerd - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
They all support TRIM. None REQUIRE it.If your OS doesn't support TRIM commands, you just have to find the drive with the best built-in GC routines. That used to be Sandforce, but I don't know anymore.
kmmatney - Monday, January 7, 2013 - link
With Samsung and Intel SSDs you can just run their toolbox software to do a manual TRIM. Iknow you can schedule it automatically with the Intel SSD Toolbox, and I think you can do that with the Samsung software as well. I've had a 40GB Intel SSD running on Windows XP for 2+ years and the TRIM scheduler works great.