The Intel SSD 545s (512GB) Review: 64-Layer 3D TLC NAND Hits Retail
by Billy Tallis on June 27, 2017 6:00 AM ESTLooking Forward
Our first look at the Intel SSD 545s with Intel's new 64-layer 3D TLC NAND flash memory has been very promising. Compared to its predecessor based on 16nm planar TLC NAND, the 545s is a big leap forward in performance. Where the Intel 540s was really only suitable as an entry-level consumer SSD, the 545s is a much better all-around performer.
The launch last year of the first generation of Intel/Micron 3D NAND did little to challenge Samsung's dominance at the high end of the SSD market. The onset last fall of an industry-wide NAND flash memory shortage drove prices higher and put many new products on hold, but a few models based on the Intel/Micron 32-layer 3D TLC were able to establish solid positions as great value options.
The Intel 545s hints that this generation of 3D NAND may have a much bigger impact on the market. Even with the limited testing we had time for, it is clear that the Intel 545s does not suffer from the performance pitfalls that mar the Crucial MX300 and ADATA SU800, both based on Micron's 32L 3D TLC. On some tests, the Intel 545s appears to be the first serious challenger to the Samsung 850 EVO's combination of high performance and good power efficiency in a TLC SATA SSD. The surprisingly strong performance of the Intel 545s on The Destroyer shows that Intel's new 3D TLC NAND can handle heavy workloads, while the drives based on the previous generation of Intel/Micron 3D TLC tend to only be competitive on lighter workloads. We eagerly await the announcement of a NVMe SSD based on this 3D NAND.
The Intel 545s also challenges some of our assumptions about Silicon Motion's controller and firmware. Silicon Motion was one of the best options for mainstream SSDs back when the market was dominated by MLC NAND, but their first two generations of solutions for TLC NAND sacrificed performance and power efficiency in a race to the bottom. With planar NAND on the way out and with a new iteration of 3D NAND and the controller and firmware solutions to support it, this may be the time for Silicon Motion to reestablish their reputation for great power efficiency and good mainstream performance at highly competitive prices.
However, it's too soon to determine whether the Intel 545s will actually be competing in the right price range. Based on the testing so far, the Intel 545s should be targeting a price near the Crucial MX300, which has spent most of the past year as one of the cheapest SATA SSDs available despite offering performance a step up from the entry-level planar TLC SSDs. The MSRP of $179 for the 512GB model is significantly higher than that target, but a fair price comparison will have to wait a few weeks for broader availability of the Intel 545s.
Intel has successfully launched a new generation of flash memory and a new mainstream consumer SSD. They haven't completely upended the SSD market like some of their SSD launches in the past and the impact will be muted at first due to limited supply, but this is still clearly a step forward. The bar has been raised a bit higher for the upcoming 3D NAND SSDs from Toshiba and Western Digital, and by the end of the year Samsung's SSD division should be feeling a lot more pressure than they have in a long time. Even if the NAND shortage will be keeping prices elevated into 2018, the market is moving forward in ways that will benefit consumers.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
74 Comments
View All Comments
woggs - Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - link
Once a nand factory is running on a new generation, it has to sell components. The only path out the door for nand is an SSD (for Intel). A product like this gets out quicker and starts the flow. Not a big money maker but gets the factory running in it's early stages.nevcairiel - Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - link
I hope 64-layer TLC brings us closer to more affordable consumer "mass storage" SSDs. I would love to replace my 3TB storage spinning drive with a SSD, but I would need at least that space again - and right now thats still very expensive.MajGenRelativity - Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - link
That is definitely needed. SSD prices need to continue to decline in order to finally finish off HDD's once and for allHomeworldFound - Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - link
That's going to be a slow process, one the mechanical storage companies are going to want to slow down even further.mkozakewich - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
Why not a 6TB HDD?Mechanical drives look like they'll keep their edge on raw capacity for the foreseeable future. You're best off with a dual system.
Drumsticks - Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - link
The SSD 540 was a disappointing product that honestly should have pretty much never been released. It sucked. This one is much better! It's not the best, but it's certainly competitive, and that performance on the destroyer looks great. Kudos to Intel.We just need the price to go down. I bought a 512GB Crucial MX100 years ago for $163 on sale. It's crazy how high prices have gotten recently.
mkozakewich - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
Ha, I remember just a few years ago when the prices were hovering around $1/GB! It kind of feels weird to hear people complaining about high prices at 30-40¢/GB.Remember the Intel X25-M in 2009 for over $500? For 60 GB? AnandTech covered that by benchmarking application start times compared to HDDs. There was this whole problem with janky SSDs, so they described the problem and ran tests on those other low-end SSDs.
We've come so far!
eddieobscurant - Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - link
The bapco benchmark is useless. The differences are negligible . Please don't include it in the new 2017 benchmark suite.lilmoe - Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - link
Totally disappointed. This just gets a tiny bit closer to the 850 EVO, yet it's a bit more expensive ($20 more for 512GB drives).I was hoping Samsung would be under real pressure to lower prices, but this just makes the 850 EVO seem a bit more competitive; it's a bit cheaper, proven for a while to be reliable (ie: a safer bet), and supports more features like encryption.
Seriously, are they even trying? Hoping some REAL competition is on the way shortly from the others...
I smell price fixing shenanigans.
Impulses - Tuesday, June 27, 2017 - link
It's kind of startling how long the 850 EVO has dominated for... It launched at the end of 2014, over 2.5yrs ago now, and pricing has remained more or less constant for the last 2 years (at least for the 1TB I've bought, same today as in the summer of 2015).When has a single storage product ever had that long of a run without a serious challenger? Even Samsung decided to ride it after quickly iterating (and suffering some issues along the way) thru the 430 - 830 - 840.