Performance 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.

In the initial 525 review I compared the SSD to other drives including the 520:

As you can see there's little difference between the 525 and the 520. SandForce also does a good job of performing well across all transfer sizes, which seems to be less common in some of the newer controllers.

ATTO uses easily compressible data so if we toss all of the 525 capacities into the mix we end up with a bunch of curves that nearly overlap one another:

The 30GB model's peak write speed is capped noticeably lower than the rest as it only has a total of four NAND die to stripe across, but the rest are bound by the speed at which the DuraWrite engine can do its job.

Random & Sequential Performance Performance Consistency
Comments Locked

26 Comments

View All Comments

  • Shadowmaster625 - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    So intel is serious about ultrabooks? Their actions seem to prove otherwise.

    That SSD controller should be integrated into all their i-series cpus. Windows is slow and unwieldy in large part due to intel not providing an efficient nonvolatile storage platform. If every windows installation had guaranteed access to even a small amount of fast nonvolatile memory, then maybe we would see less cpu cycles wasted moving data around from HDD to RAM to another part of RAM and then back to HDD then back to RAM 50 million times.
  • FunBunny2 - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    Here's what Linus said back in 2007:
    ... but Flash-based storage has such a different performance profile from rotating media, that I suspect that it will end up having a large impact on filesystem design. Right now, most filesystems tend to be designed with the latencies of rotating media in mind.
  • melgross - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    I don't understand why mSATA drives seem to cost more than regular drives. Most drives come in an aluminum case, which isn't cheap to make, plus the assembly that's then required. I would think that these, being just chips on a circuit board, without even the soldered on sockets a regular drive has, would be a good 10% less, not more.
  • mcnabney - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    Manufacturing cost frequently has little to do with MSRP.

    An obvious example of cheaper to produce media selling for more would be compact disks and DVDs versus their predecessors using magnetic tape. The digital media had a significant upcharge despite production costs being significantly lower.
  • DanNeely - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    Probably lower sales volumes. Even if the total sales volumes (and marginal development cost per unit) are similar, relatively few consumers are buying mSata vs 2.5" models. This results in less competition between retailers to push margins down and higher expenses for the same (because of the longer time periods between when they buy and sell the devices that their purchase costs have to be covered by borrowing).
  • melgross - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    Manufacturers will be the main customers for these drives. But price also determines sales volume. Price them too high and volume drops. There couldn't have been too much extra R&D on these, as they are basically the same as drives inside a case. The small circuit boards cost little to design and manufacturer, and Intel is paying the same thing for the chips.
  • RU482 - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    good to see that newegg is off to some early profiteering with the 120GB version on sale at $169.99
  • philipma1957 - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    Simple make a mobo that runs them at sata III speeds. I have yet to find one.

    A small form itx with a 480gb crucial m500 running at full sata III would be a reason to buy a mSata.

    I really quite a bit frustrated as this block to my build in the coolermaster elite 120 cases. the case allows

    an i7 3770k

    a full sized psu

    a full sized bluray

    a full sized hd7970

    the better itx mobos have a msata slot that boots but they are sata II.

    it is a real shame as this case allows for high over clock speeds with easy mods.

    you can have an almost perfect one card machine with the msata ssd.

    you can fit a 2.5 inch sata ssd so you can have a very powerful machine but a power wire a sata wire and the drive case itself do make the case more crowded.
  • Jaseemxx91 - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    Can anybody tell me if this will fit inside my Ux31e Ultrabook?

    Anand have said that it has a different port than that of an Mac book Air here

    www.anandtech.com/show/5854/asus-zenbook-ssd-and-apples-macbook-air-ssd-are-not-compatible

    My Zenbook ssd is dead, and i dont know which one to get, that is compatible in my system.

    Could somebody help me with this?

    I would really love an Answer from Anand himself, as he has already seen and inspected the Connector himself. But as i am not So Lucky guy, i dont really think Anand would even read this :/

    Btw, Congrats on this extremelY informative Site of yours. Keep up the Great Work. :)
  • Death666Angel - Monday, February 4, 2013 - link

    Asus uses a proprietary connector as well, so any off the market mSATA drive will not work. Look for specific UX31 drives. Email ASUS, they should be able to provide you with information and maybe even a replacement (for free or for money). If you want to reach Anand directly, try Twitter. :)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now