AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy

Our Heavy storage benchmark is proportionally more write-heavy than The Destroyer, but much shorter overall. The total writes in the Heavy test aren't enough to fill the drive, so performance never drops down to steady state. This test is far more representative of a power user's day to day usage, and is heavily influenced by the drive's peak performance. The Heavy workload test details can be found here.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy (Data Rate)

On the Heavy test, the Intel 540s achieves an average data rate that is once again between the two SM2256 drives, but this is also par for Phison TLC drives.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy (Latency)

The average service time of the Intel 540s is actually slightly better than the SP550 and significantly better than the BX200, but still poor compared to the best planar TLC drives.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy (Latency)

The frequency of high-latency outliers for the 540s is half that of the BX200, but still clearly worse than the other TLC drives and more than an order of magnitude higher than the MLC drives.

AnandTech Storage Bench - Heavy (Power)

The Intel 540s managed to improve on power efficiency compared to either SM2256 drive, putting it around the middle of the rankings.

AnandTech Storage Bench - The Destroyer AnandTech Storage Bench - Light
Comments Locked

77 Comments

View All Comments

  • doggface - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link

    I am ... Amazed that Intel would dirty their brand name like this. Truly a terrible controller, terrible flash, and a terrible idea.

    Intel has a brand name that generally speaks to quality parts. They should never have dabbled in the arena of TLC.
  • ddriver - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link

    Reveals optane, releases mediocrity... come on.
  • Drumsticks - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link

    I actually worked on this for a short time last year, and I can say - working with SMI definitely is not as easy (at least for Intel) and was certainly more frustrating than developing in house.
  • BurntMyBacon - Friday, June 24, 2016 - link

    Any reason they didn't label a drive with this level of performance a 300 series drive?
  • Drumsticks - Friday, June 24, 2016 - link

    No idea, honestly. I think everything is just a 5xx SSD now (at least the SATA stuff). I think it's priced well above what I was expecting it to be priced at though, tbh.
  • pwil - Wednesday, July 27, 2016 - link

    300 series had 3y warranty.
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link

    HERE COMES THE SSD MEMES!

    >Muh MLC!
    >Muh endurance!
    >Muh data retention!
    >Muh reliability!
    >Muh random I/O!
    >Muh this drive isn't exactly what I want in my PC, so instead of using PC Part Picker to find a suitable drive for my incredibly critical tastes, I'm going to post a comment on a news article expressing how disgusted I am by how this drive isn't up to _MY_ standards.

    FUN FACT: Did you know that companies design products for people besides yourself?
  • b4bblefish - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link

    Meh... it's not that they make products for people besides us. It's that for the price it's a horrible deal. You can buy better more reliable drives for a lot cheaper especially if it's targeting the entry level consumer market. So why bother entering this segment and offer something without any value?
  • JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link

    Because these drives are likely aimed at bulk government/corporate purchases, not really for consumers as the price/performance ratio is terrible. Government/corporate entities will end up buying bulk, even when the price isn't the best available, from what the business analysts approve as reputable companies; not because it's a wise purchase from an IT perspective.

    I guarantee you this: It's got an Intel sticker, so it'll be bought in droves by people who don't know, even if it sucks. See: Pentium 4.

    And secondly, nobody should ever care for brand image. Every brand releases crap products from time to time. Some brands do this more often than others. Always evaluate products on an individual level, not because they happen to come from some "reputable" brand.
  • techconc - Thursday, June 23, 2016 - link

    I agree with most of your post. However, you went off the rails with regard to brand image. Yes, you shouldn't buy based on brand image alone. However, all things being equal, brand reputation does come into play. Companies earn a reputation, for better or worse, based on the quality of the product they produce. Completely disregarding that history isn't very good advice.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now