Final Words

If you've seen one SF-2281 drive with synchronous NAND, you've seen them all. From a performance perspective, the ADATA XPG SX900 is as fast as every other SF-2281 SSD with synchronous NAND. The only thing that separates ADATA from the competition is the fact that they have disabled RAISE and hence offer 8GB more capacity than other drives.

Since we are dealing with such similar drives, it all boils down to price. This is where ADATA appears to be making a mistake. With higher capacities than the competition, ADATA's advantage should be lower price per GB, but it's not. Instead, the SX900 series is either more expensive or equivalent to other SF-2281 drives.

The only scenario where I can see ADATA XPG SX900 being better than the rest is if you seriously need or want a SandForce drive with a tiny bit more capacity than the others. However, that's unlikely because if you know you need more than 120GB, then it's likely that 128GB won't suffice either. It's better to buy 180GB or 240GB straightaway so you won't have to deal with a constantly full drive.

In any other case, you will get a better dollar per GB ratio by going with another brand, and on other SF-2281 drives you also get support for RAISE (outside of the 60GB models). While RAISE may sound a bit useless, it's something you won't appreciate unless something goes bad. My feeling is that it's better to have it and not need it than to not have it and need it. It comes down to the importance you place on reliability and data integrity, and right now there's just not enough data to really let us know how non-RAISE SF-2281 will compare over the long haul. Ideally, RAISE would be something that the end-user could trigger on or off depending on one's workload and setup but apparently that is not possible, or at least no manufacturer has offered a tool for that.

At the end of the day the SX900's appeal is determined entirely by price. As noted in the introduction, keeping an eye on SSD prices for at least a few days before pulling the trigger is a good idea because prices fluctuate all the time. If price is a major factor, Crucial's m4 along with the asychronous NAND Mushkin Chronos and OCZ Agility 3 are generally the drives to beat. They may not be the fastest offerings, but unless you really need every last bit of performance, they're still substantially better than any HDD and nearly as good as other offerings.

Power Consumption
Comments Locked

58 Comments

View All Comments

  • XZerg - Friday, June 8, 2012 - link

    But at least include Mushkin in the benches, after all that's the cheapest SSD out there. This would give a better picture of $/performance.
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, June 8, 2012 - link

    We don't have any Mushkin drives in our labs. I have asked Mushkin for a review sample but I have yet to receive a reply.
  • CeriseCogburn - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    I hate to say it but "good !" - that's what keeps their asynchonus prices so low. :-)
  • Belard - Friday, June 8, 2012 - link

    Considering the history and being a favorite, I think the Intel X25-M G2 120GB should be included in the benchmarks. So many of us can track the improvements and see if its a good time to upgrade or not.

    The G2 still does pretty good for its slow-interface, since its not a SF drive.
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, June 8, 2012 - link

    Bench also works :-)

    http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/605?vs=126
  • Belard - Monday, June 11, 2012 - link

    Thanks... Its still easy to forget that function is on the website.
  • Assimilator87 - Friday, June 8, 2012 - link

    There's no point in including more than two, MAYBE three SandForce drives. One with synchronous NAND, one with asynchronous, and the Intel cuz it has a different firmware. They're all the same hardware with a different sticker.
  • iceman98343 - Friday, June 8, 2012 - link

    when are you going to rereview vertex 4? new fw was released.
  • UltraTech79 - Friday, June 8, 2012 - link

    Where are you guys getting these numbers? One place? The suggested retail price? The 256GB M4 is going for $0.70 per GB at amazon.
  • Kristian Vättö - Friday, June 8, 2012 - link

    We used DynamiteDeals to hunt for best deals. However, the table is a bit outdated (the prices are from May 22nd). I know it should be more up-to-date, but the problem is that DynamiteDeals does not work for me as it's tied to one's IP address. Since I'm located in Finland, it only finds Finnish stores (well, there is only one it finds...). Jarred made the pricing table but in the end, Anand was the one who posted this article (it's been ready for ages, just needed Anand's final look at it).

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now