The Intel SSD 540s (480GB) Review
by Billy Tallis on June 23, 2016 9:00 AM ESTRandom Read Performance
The random read test requests 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test spans the entire drive, which is filled before the test starts. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.
The random read speed of the Intel 540s is a significant improvement over both SM2256 drives and Phison S10 TLC drives, but isn't quite as fast as the MLC drives or SanDisk and Samsung TLC.
Power usage of the Intel 540s was slightly higher than the SP550, but given the performance increase their efficiency is similar and good overall.
 |
|||||||||
The Intel 540s drew more power and delivered more performance than the SP550 at every queue depth until QD32, where the SP550 performed slightly better.
Random Write Performance
The random write test writes 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test is limited to a 16GB portion of the drive, and the drive is empty save for the 16GB test file. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.
The Intel 540s shows almost double the performance on the random write test that the SM2256 drives did. This puts it well ahead of the Phison-based TLC drives and close to SanDisk's TLC drives.
The Intel 540s had relatively high power draw during the random test, but it certainly wasn't the least efficient drive.
 |
|||||||||
The random write performance of the Intel 540s increases moderately from QD1 to QD2 and only very slightly after that. The SM2256 drives started out slower and stayed there, though the BX200 drew more power with higher queue depths. Most budget TLC drives show relatively little scaling with queue depth here, with a few exceptions like the OCZ Trion 150 jumping up from QD4 and QD8.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
77 Comments
View All Comments
Notmyusualid - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
Ya saved me from writing it...shelbystripes - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
Intel is considered a reliable brand to OEM PC makers and other bulk purchasers. Offering a low-end part means capturing business that might go to a second-tier manufacturer. For builders with a use case where any modern SSD is fast enough, and you care about reliability without breaking the bank, this will be the #1 choice. You get the Intel name and the things INCLUDED with that, like solid customer support and timely firmware updates, at a lower price point.Nobody buying this is expecting it to be a performance part. Intel is the company that sold Celerons with no L2 cache, that sells cut-down Atom CPUs and Core CPUs under the same Pentium brand name. Intel doesn't always mean performance. It does mean confidence that what you're buying actually works, though.
BurntMyBacon - Friday, June 24, 2016 - link
@shelbystripes: "Offering a low-end part means capturing business that might go to a second-tier manufacturer. For builders with a use case where any modern SSD is fast enough, and you care about reliability without breaking the bank, this will be the #1 choice."You know, Intel used to cater to this market, ... , with their 300 series drives. Interestingly, the relative performance of this drive matches up to where their 300 series used to slot in as well. Why is this not a 300 series drive?
vladx - Friday, June 24, 2016 - link
My tablet running an Atom quad-core works great. To compare this joke of a SSD from Intel to that is a fucking joke.plopke - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
Won't the 540 be shortlived? Shouldn't we be seeing 3d nand drives of intel soon followed by optane?https://i0.wp.com/benchlife.info/wp-content/upload...
A5 - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
This is for a different market segment.Billy Tallis - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
That roadmap shows the 540s sticking around at least through Q1 2017, and merely being joined by some Optane and 3D TLC NVMe drives. The actual replacement of the 540s is at an indefinite point in the future.The determining factor will be how long it takes 3D NAND to get cheap enough to displace 15/16nm TLC. I don't think that will be happening any time soon; even Samsung apparently can't pull it off yet, since they introduced the 750 EVO.
Mobile-Dom - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
IIRC Samsung used planar NAND in the 750 because they wanted lower capacity without the performance degradation, as by using the high layered 3D NAND they used fewer packages resulting in worse performance for drives that had 1 or 2 packages for the entire SSDextide - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
Nah, both their planar 15/16nm and their 3D NAND use 128Gb dies -- so same amount of dies in either product. It's purely a cost thing. It will probably take until we get into the 100+ layers of 3D NAND for it to be competitive, cost wise, with that 15/16nm planar TLC.Billy Tallis - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
That's what they said at first, but then they introduced a 500GB 750 EVO while the 850 EVOs on the market are still using the 32-layer VNAND.