The Intel SSD 540s (480GB) Review
by Billy Tallis on June 23, 2016 9:00 AM ESTAnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer
The Destroyer is an extremely long test replicating the access patterns of very IO-intensive desktop usage. A detailed breakdown can be found in this article. Like real-world usage and unlike our Iometer tests, the drives do get the occasional break that allows for some background garbage collection and flushing caches, but those idle times are limited to 25ms so that it doesn't take all week to run the test.
We quantify performance on this test by reporting the drive's average data throughput, a few data points about its latency, and the total energy used by the drive over the course of the test.
On The Destroyer, the ADATA SP550 was able to punch above its weight and perform on par with planar TLC drives of twice the capacity, while the Crucial BX200 performed below expectations. The Intel 540s unfortunately demonstrates more of the latter, with an average data rate that is not as bad as the BX200 but is still clearly outclassed by the Phison S10 TLC drives and the SP550.
As with the average data rate, the average service time of the 540s is poor but not quite as bad as the BX200. The SP550 didn't rank much higher on this metric, but in absolute terms it was significantly faster.
The frequency of latency outliers shows similar rankings, with the Intel 540s near the bottom of the chart and between the two SM2256 drives.
Power efficiency has regressed slightly compared to the SP550, but the Intel 540s clearly doesn't have anything horribly wrong going on the way the BX200 did.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
77 Comments
View All Comments
redzo - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
About the same price as a 850 EVO. The 540s is not worthy of your $$.Anato - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
Why this is 540, not 340 or even 140?BurntMyBacon - Friday, June 24, 2016 - link
Apparently, their 300 series has fallen off of their roadmap. Someone please link me to a roadmap that counters this statement.pwil - Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - link
Because 140 would have 1y warranty, and 340 - 3y warranty.nismotigerwvu - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
The idea of Intel, owner of the most advanced foundries on the planet, buying chips from the open market is oddly humorous to me. I understand why, and honestly it makes logical sense, but it's still an interesting quirk in an industry where quirkiness has mostly vanished.bloodinmyveins - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
Why is it so hard to dethrone Samsung 850 EVO and PRO? :(redzo - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
They've just designed a product and are 100% sure that they are going to sell it overpriced based on brand name only. It's business.Vlad_Da_Great - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
That was a bummer. I bought that with the notion that inside was Intel parts. I guess, they are trying to bang on their name now. 540s has been great so far, but I could have saved about $20 for the 120GB, I bought. AnandTech you are late!cm2187 - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
With Samsung about to introduce 4TB SSDs, a 1TB max size seems to be behind...Ej24 - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link
Wow. Not only would I not purchase one of these, but I'm now convinced I need to buy several mx200's as it seems crucial isn't going to release another MLC drive. TLC simply doesn't impress me. The bx200 I put in my mother-in-law's pc was a disaster (granted its a worst case scenario). It's enough to demonstrate the shortcomings of tlc though. They're only able to make up for it with black magic and sophisticated controllers. No thank you.