The mSATA standard - also known as mini-SATA - was officially introduced in September 2009. It was intended for laptops and other compact PCs, in which there was not enough space for a 2.5-inch drive. Now on sale you can even find motherboards equipped with this port. Outwardly, this interface is similar to the PCI Express Mini-Card slot, but at the electrical level there is a difference that cannot be noticed from the outside. In order to be able to install an mSATA drive in the PCI-E Mini-Card slot, the manufacturer must intervene. Namely, the installation of multiplexer chips. These microcircuits will monitor which card is connected to the PCI-E Mini-Card slot, and depending on this, connect this connector to a PCI-E controller or to SATA. Such an upgrade is always done at the factory, during the assembly of a particular board, and, as a rule, the purpose of the Mini PCI-E slot is either reflected in the specifications or signed near the port itself.
As for the mSATA drives themselves, now they can be found in almost every Ultrabook, because they are much smaller and thinner than their 2.5-inch counterparts.
Bottom up: regular 3.5-inch hard drive; SSD 2.5 inches; mSATA solid state drive
In addition, it is cheaper to use a ready-made mSATA connector in an ultrabook than to invent your own port, as well as manufacture drives for it. Although some ASUS ultrabooks or Apple laptops use their own proprietary connector and drives of the same type.
MSATA connectors are extremely rare in desktop motherboards. But if such a port is unsoldered, then the drive installed in it can be used either as a system disk or as an SSD cache. Intel Smart Response is a good example of this technology, although you can get by with a regular 2.5-inch drive instead of mSATA.
If we talk about the disadvantages of mSATA drives, then, besides the low prevalence, there are only two of them: the volume and the price. Due to the size of the drive, it is impossible to solder more than four memory microcircuits to it, which means that some of the controller channels will not be used, and in theory, the read and write speeds of such drives may not be very high. However, the manufacturer can to some extent compensate for the small number of involved channels by installing fast memory or one of the LSI SandForce controllers, which supports on-the-fly compression of the data stream.
⇡ Test participants
In this benchmarking test, we decided to go against the rules a little. This time, along with mSATA drives, we will test ordinary SSDs. This is to see if there is a performance difference between the two formats. And if there is, how big it is.
Here is a list of devices representing the mSATA camp:
- mSATA Crucial M4 256GB (CT256M4SSD3)
- mSATA Kingston SSDNow mS200 120 GB (SMS200S3 / 120G)
- mSATA Plextor M5M 256 GB (PX-256M5M)
- mSATA Transcend 128 GB (TS128GMSA740)
As for 2.5-inch drives, we have recently tested a lot of such devices, but for this comparison we decided to take only two of them:
- 2.5-inch SSD Kingston HyperX 3K 120GB (SH103S3 / 120G)
- 2.5-inch SSD Plextor M5 Pro 256GB (PX-256M5P)
The first one, Kingston HyperX 120GB (SH100S3 / 120G), was chosen because of the LSI SandForce SF-2281 controller - a similar controller, LSI SandForce SF-2241, is installed in one of the mSATA drives. Another drive, the Plextor M5 Pro 256GB (PX-256M5P), is also selected for its controller. It uses Marvell 88SS9187-BLD2. The exact same chip is in another mSATA drive, the Plextor M5M. The 256GB Crucial M4 (CT256M4SSD3) also uses a Marvell controller, but the previous generation is the Marvell 88SS9174-BLD2. For SSD Transcend, there was no analogue in the list of devices we tested. Alas, a rare JMicron controller is used there.
| Manufacturer | Crucial | Kingston | Plextor | Transcend | Kigston | Plextor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Series | M4 | mS200 | M5M | HyperX | M5 Pro | |
| Model number | CT256M4SSD3 | SMS200S3 / 120G | PX-256M5M | TS128GMSA740 | SH100S3 / 120G | PX-256M5P |
| Form factor | mSATA | mSATA | mSATA | mSATA | 2.5 inch | 2.5 inch |
| Interface | SATA 6Gb / s | SATA 6Gb / s | SATA 6Gb / s | SATA 6Gb / s | SATA 6Gb / s | SATA 6Gb / s |
| Capacity, GB | 256 | 120 | 256 | 128 | 120 | 256 |
| Configuration | ||||||
| Memory chips: type, interface, process technology, manufacturer | MLC, ONFi, 25 nm, Micron | MLC, Toggle-Mode DDR 2.0, 19 nm, Toshiba | MLC, Toggle-Mode DDR, ND, SanDisk | MLC, ONFi 2 (sync.), 25nm, Intel | MLC, Toggle-Mode DDR 2.0, 19 nm, Toshiba | |
| Memory chips: number / number of NAND devices in a chip | 4 / ND | 4/2 | 4/4 | 4 / ND | 16/1 | 8/4 |
| Controller | Marvell 88SS9174-BLD2 | LSI SandForce SF-2241 | Marvell 88SS9187-BLD2 | Jmicron JMF667H | LSI SandForce SF-2281 | Marvell 88SS9187-BLD2 |
| Buffer: type, size, MB | DDR3 SDRAM, 128 | No | DDR3L-1333 SDRAM, 256 | DDR3-1066 SDRAM, 128 | no | DDR3 SDRAM 512 |
| Performance | ||||||
| Max. sustained sequential read speed, MB / s | 500 | 550 | 540 | 530 | 555 | 540 |
| Max. sustained sequential write speed, MB / s | 260 | 520 | 430 | 270 | 510 | 460 |
| Max. random read speed (4 KB blocks), op./s | 45 000 | 86 000 | 79 000 | 68 000 | 87 000 | 100 000 |
| Max. random write speed (4 KB blocks), op./s | 50 000 | 48 000 | 77 000 | 69 000 | 70 000 | 86 000 |
| physical characteristics | ||||||
| Power consumption: idle / read-write, W | ND | 0,4/1,8 | 0.2 / ND | 0,3/2,1 | 0,46/2,0 | ND / 0.25 |
| Impact resistance | ND | ND | 1500 g | 1500 g | 1500 g | 1500 g (1 ms) |
| MTBF (mean time between failures), h | 1.2 million | 1 million | 2.4 million | 1 million | 1 million | \u003e 2.4 million |
| AFR (annualized failure rate),% | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND |
| Overall dimensions: LxHxG, mm | 50.88x29.88x3.6 | 50.88x29.88x3.6 | 50.8x29.8x3.6 | 50,8x29,85x4 | 100x69.85x9.5 | 100x70x7 |
| Weight, g | ND | 6,86 | 9 | 8 | 97 | 70 |
| Warranty period, years | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Average retail price, rub. | 7 100 | 4 200 | 7 300 | 4 800 | 6 500 | 8 400 |
⇡ Crucial M4 256GB (CT256M4SSD3)
The first mSATA SSD we are reviewing, the Crucial M4 CT256M4SSD3, uses a Marvell 88SS9174 controller. At the time of this writing, it can be considered morally obsolete, because there are already solid-state drives with a Marvell 88SS9187 controller on the market. However, the use of the old controller is fully justified by the fact that this drive was introduced in mid-2012.
We will be testing a 256GB Crucial M4 drive (CT256M4SSD3) but there are also 128GB, 64GB and 32GB SSDs available for sale. The latter model, in our opinion, is best suited for SSD cache, not for OS installation.
Crucial M4 CT256M4SSD3
The Crucial M4 CT256M4SSD3 is equipped with four Micron ONFi 2.x memory chips. The exact version of the interface is not listed, although this is not surprising: many SSD manufacturers have been doing this recently.... The number of NAND devices in each memory chip is also unknown. The controller is paired with 128 MB DDR3 cache memory.
|
|
|
As for the memory, we can say that it is MLC memory made using the 25 nm process technology. Well, the speed: the established read speed should be 500 MB / s, and writing - only 260 MB / s. As for the speed of random read and write, then, according to the manufacturer, it reaches 45,000 IOPS when reading and 50,000 writes.
If we talk about the number of rewriting cycles, then the manufacturer does not directly declare them, although on the official website you can find information that the drive will withstand a daily recording of 40 GB for 5 years.
If we talk about cost, then the average price for the Crucial M4 CT256M4SSD3 will be about 7,100 rubles at the time of writing this review. Although in Moscow online stores you can buy this drive a little cheaper - for 6 600 rubles.
⇡ Kingston SSDNow mS200 120 GB (SMS200S3 / 120G)
If a manufacturer wants to make an SSD based on the SandForce platform, then in the vast majority of cases he will choose the LSI SandForce SF-2281 controller. In the case of the Kingston SSDNow mS200, a different controller was chosen - the LSI SandForce SF-2241. As with all SandForce controllers, the SF-2241 uses compression of all recorded information. If the data lends itself well to compression, then the speed of the drive should be good, otherwise it will drop dramatically.
The 120 GB model we are considering is considered the largest in the lineup. In addition to it, on the market you can find Kingston SSDNow mS200 mSATA drives with a volume of 60 and 30 GB.
Kingston SSDNow mS200 120 GB (SMS200S3 / 120G)
The differences between the LSI SandForce SF-2241 and SF-2281 are that the 41st controller supports MLC and SLC chips with capacities up to 128 and 64 Gb, respectively. As for the LSI SandForce SF-2281, it does not have such strict restrictions - it can work with MLC and SLC microcircuits with capacities up to 512 and 128 Gbit. In general, the SF-2241 and SF-2281 controllers are very similar to each other.
LSI SandForce SF-2241 controller
Four Flash memory chips with Toggle-Mode DDR 2.0 interface are soldered on the drive's board, which is very unusual for a SandForce controller - usually ONFi chips are used in tandem with it. The memory manufacturer is Toshiba, all chips are made according to the 19-nm process technology. Judging by the marking of the chip cases, each of them contains two NAND devices and, as a result, all eight controller channels are involved (except that the SSD has lost the advantages of interleaving NAND devices on the channels, which would have been possible if these devices were in twice more). Unfortunately, the manufacturer does not report on the number of rewriting cycles. Kingston says it should have 500MB / s write speeds and 520MB / s read speeds. The speed of random reading and writing of blocks of 4KB reaches 86,000 and 48,000 IOPS, respectively.
Memory Kingston SSDNow mS200
The average retail price for a 120GB Kingston SSDNow mS200 drive at the time of this writing is RUB 4,200. But if you look properly in Moscow online stores, you can buy this drive cheaper - about 3,950 rubles.
⇡ Plextor M5M 256GB (PX-256M5M)
The Plextor M5M PX-256M5M uses a Marvell 88SS9187 controller, which replaces the outdated Marvell 88SS9174, which we have already seen in the Crucial M4 256GB (CT256M4SSD3). The new controller features support for SATA 3.1 specifications and also allows the TRIM command to be queued along with read / write commands. In addition, the developers of Marvell 88SS9187 promise to increase performance and reduce power consumption - the latter should please the owners of ultrabooks and other mobile PCs. Also, the memory card contains DDR3L-1333 SDRAM cache memory with a volume of 256 MB.
The Plextor M5M 256GB (PX-256M5M) is the largest in the lineup. In addition to the 256 GB model, you can find mSATA SSDs of 128 and 64 GB on sale.
Plextor M5M 256GB (PX-256M5M)
|
|
|
The memory used in the Plextor M5M PX-256M5M is of the Toggle Mode DDR 2.0 type. It is manufactured by Toshiba using the 19 nm process technology. Each chip contains four NAND devices, therefore, all eight controller channels, and even with alternation. As always, the memory manufacturer is silent about the number of rewriting cycles. As for the speed characteristics, the established read speed should be 540 MB / s, and write - 430 MB / s. The random read and write speeds of this drive are similar. So, the declared speed of reading blocks of 4 KB is 79,000 IOPS, and writing - 77,000 IOPS.
At the time of this writing, the average price of a drive is 7,300 rubles, although it is possible to find this drive in Moscow online stores for about 400 rubles cheaper.
⇡ Transcend 128 GB (TS128GMSA740)
The last drive considered in this test - Transcend SSD TS128GMSA740 - is equipped with a Jmicron JMF667H controller, which has four channels for Flash memory, and each channel can be "hung" up to eight NAND devices. Not forgotten is the wear leveling function and support for Toggle Mode DDR 2.0 memory made using the 19 nm process technology. Also, this controller can blink with LED indicators, if they are soldered on the board.
128GB is the maximum capacity for this line of Transcend mSATA drives. Also on sale you can find SSD from the same series with a volume of 64 and 32 GB.
Transcend SSD 128 GB (TS128GMSA740)
|
|
|
About the memory chips soldered on this SSD, at the time of this writing, it was not possible to find exact information. It is only known that the memory interface is Toggle Mode DDR, although it is not clear what version it is and by what technical process the memory was produced. As for the speed characteristics, the established read speed should be 530 MB / s, and the write speed should be 270 MB / s, which is not very much. The random read speed is 68,000 IOPS, and the write speed is 69,000 IOPS.
|
|
|
At the time of this writing, the average price for a 128 GB Transcend drive (TS128GMSA740) is about 4,800 rubles, but if you try, you can find this drive in Moscow online stores at a lower price: about 3,600 rubles.
That is where we finish the description of mSATA drives and pass on to the story about other test participants. All the drives described below have already participated in our group testing of 14 SSDs with a volume of 240-256 GB, so we will simply provide excerpts from this article.
⇡ Kingston HyperX 3K 120GB (SH100S3 / 120G)
|
|
|
Simple calculations show that an SSD in a client computer will become obsolete long before its memory cells wear out. This means that you can save part of the cost of the drive by using chips with a smaller resource of rewriting cycles. The number in the name Kingston HyperX 3K means exactly that - 3 thousand rewriting cycles, in contrast to the “simple” HyperX, which has a resource of 5 thousand cycles. The interface and technical process for the production of microcircuits remained the same. There is also almost no difference in performance between them, but 3K is still cheaper.
⇡ Plextor M5 Pro 256GB (PX-256M3P)
|
|
|
The M5 Pro is the first SSD to replace the well-deserved Marvell 88SS9174 with the Marvell 88SS9187 controller, designed to boost performance and reduce power consumption.
The Plextor M5 Pro is equipped with Toshiba's Toggle-Mode DDR 2.0 memory, manufactured using the 19 nm process technology. The M5 Pro also features up to 768MB of DDR3 chips in the 512GB model. With such a buffer size, it is obvious that, in addition to the service information, the controller also stores user data there.
Plextor M5 Pro supports AES-128 and AES-256 full disk encryption. To control data integrity, along with the 128-bit ECC mechanism, a certain algorithm is used in the firmware called Robust Data Hold-out. According to the manufacturer, each device undergoes rigorous hardware testing before delivery.
The performance data shown in the table is valid for devices with firmware version 1.02, which the manufacturer also calls Xtreme. With earlier firmware versions, the speed is not much, but still lower. Therefore, all M5 Pro buyers, as well as OCZ Vertex 4 owners, are advised to check the firmware version and update.
If you are building a powerful computer or want to speed up an old one, then an SSD will come in handy. Finally, the cost of these drives has dropped so much that they can be considered as a reasonable alternative to hard disk drives (HDD).
The following SSD features will help you choose the best drive that is compatible with your computer and meets your needs.
1. Which form factor to choose: SSD 2.5 ″, SSD M.2 or another
SSD 2.5 ″
This form factor is the most common. The SSD looks like a small box that resembles an ordinary hard drive. SSD 2.5 ″ is the cheapest, but at the same time their speed is enough for most users.
2.5 ″ SSD compatibility with computers
An SSD of this form factor can be installed in any desktop or laptop computer that has a free 2.5-inch drive bay. If your system only has room for an old 3.5 "hard drive, you can fit a 2.5 ″ SSD in that too. But in this case, look for an SSD model that comes with a special latch.
Like modern HDDs, a 2.5 ″ SSD is connected to the motherboard using the SATA3 interface. This connection provides bandwidth up to 600 MB / s. If you have an old motherboard with a SATA2 connector, you can still plug in a 2.5 ″ SSD, but the storage bandwidth will be limited by the old interface version.
SSD M.2
More compact form factor, due to which it is suitable even for especially thin ones, in which there is no room for a 2.5 ″ SSD. It looks like an oblong stick, it is installed not in a separate compartment of the case, but directly on the motherboard.
To connect to the board, each M.2 drive uses one of two interfaces: SATA3 or PCIe.
PCIe is several times faster than SATA3. If you choose the first one, then it is worth considering a few more things: the version of the interface and the number of lines connected to the connector for data transmission.
- The newer the PCIe version, the higher the bandwidth (data exchange rate) of the interface. Two versions are widespread: PCIe 2.0 (up to 1.6 GB / s) and PCIe 3.0 (up to 3.2 GB / s).
- The more data lines are connected to the SSD connector, the higher its bandwidth is. The maximum number of lines in an M.2 SSD is four, in this case, in the description of the drive, its interface is referred to as PCIe x4. If there are only two lines, then - PCIe x2.
M.2 SSD Compatibility with Computers
Before purchasing an M.2 SSD, you need to make sure that it will fit your motherboard. To do this, you first need to check the physical and then software compatibility of the connector on the drive with the slot on the board. Then you need to find out the length of the drive and compare it with the allowable length of the slot allocated for M.2 in your system.
1. Physical compatibility of interfaces
Each connector on the motherboard for connecting M.2 drives has a special cutout (key) of one of two types: B or M. At the same time, the connector on each M.2 drive has two B + M notches at once, less often only one of two keys: B or M.
The B-connector on the board can be connected with a B-connector. To the M-slot, respectively, a drive with a M. SSD type connector, the connectors of which have two M + B cutouts, are compatible with any M.2 slots, regardless of the keys in the latter.
M.2 SSD with B + M key (upper) and M.2 SSD with M key (lower) / www.wdc.com So, first make sure your motherboard has an M.2 SSD slot at all. Then find out the key of your connector and select the drive, the connector of which is compatible with this key. Key types are usually indicated on connectors and slots. In addition, you can find all the necessary information in the documents for the motherboard and drive.
2. Logical compatibility of interfaces
For an SSD to fit your motherboard, it is not enough to take into account the physical compatibility of its connector with the connector. The point is that the drive connector may not support the logical interface (protocol) that is used in the slot of your board.
Therefore, when you understand the keys, find out which protocol is implemented in the M.2 connector on your board. It can be SATA3 and / or PCIe x2 and / or PCIe x4. Then choose an M.2 SSD with the same interface. See the device documentation for the supported protocols.
3. Dimensional compatibility
Another nuance that affects the compatibility of the drive with the motherboard is its length.
In the specifications of most motherboards, you can find the numbers 2260, 2280 and 22110. The first two numbers in each of them indicate the supported width of the drive. It is the same for all M.2 SSDs and equals 22 mm. The next two digits are the length. Thus, most boards are compatible with 60, 80 and 110 mm drives.
Three M.2 SSD drives of different lengths / www.forbes.com Before purchasing M.2, be sure to check the supported length of the drive, which is indicated in the documents for the motherboard. Then choose the one that matches this length.
As you can see, the M.2 compatibility issue is very confusing. Therefore, just in case, consult the sellers on this matter.
Less popular form factors
Your computer may not have a 2.5 ”SSD bay, and your motherboard will not have an M.2 slot. The owner of a thin laptop may face such an atypical situation. Then for your system you need to choose SSD 1.8 ″ or mSATA - check in the documents for your computer. These are rare form factors that are more compact than a 2.5 ”SSD, but are not as fast as M.2 drives.
Plus, Apple's thin laptops may not support traditional form factors either. In them, the manufacturer installs a proprietary SSD format, the characteristics of which are comparable to M.2. So, if you have a thin laptop with an apple on the lid, check the supported SSD type in the documentation for your computer.
External SSD
Besides the internal ones, there are also external drives. They vary greatly in shape and size - choose the one that is most convenient for you.
As for the interface, they are connected to computers via the USB port. For full compatibility, make sure that the port on your computer and the drive connector support the same USB standard. The fastest data exchange rates are provided by the USB 3 and USB Type-C specifications.
2. Which memory is better: MLC or TLC
According to the number of bits of information that can be stored in one flash memory cell, the latter is divided into three types: SLC (one bit), MLC (two bits) and TLC (three bits). The first type is relevant for servers, the other two are widely used in consumer drives, so you have to choose from them.
MLC memory is faster and more durable, but more expensive. TLC is correspondingly slower and withstands fewer rewrite cycles, although the average user is unlikely to notice the difference.
TLC memory is cheaper. Choose it if economy is more important to you than speed.
The description of the drive can also indicate the type of mutual arrangement of memory cells: NAND or 3D V-NAND (or just V-NAND). The first type implies that the cells are located in one layer, the second - in several layers, which allows you to create an SSD of increased capacity. According to the developers, the reliability and performance of 3D V-NAND flash memory is higher than that of NAND.
3. Which SSD is faster
In addition to the type of memory, other characteristics, such as the model of the controller installed in the drive and its firmware, affect the performance of an SSD. But these details are often not even mentioned in the description. Instead, endpoints of read and write speed appear, which are easier for the buyer to navigate. So, choosing between two SSDs, all other things being equal, take the drive whose declared speeds are higher.
Remember that the manufacturer indicates only theoretically possible speeds. In practice, they are always lower than stated.
4. How much storage is right for you?
Of course, one of the most important characteristics when choosing a drive is its volume. If you buy an SSD, a 64GB device is sufficient to make it a fast operating system. If you are going to install games on an SSD or store large files on it, then choose the volume that suits your needs.
But keep in mind that storage capacity greatly affects the cost.
Buyer's checklist
- If you need storage for office tasks or watching movies, choose a 2.5 ″ or M.2 SSD with SATA3 interface and TLC memory. Even a budget SSD like this will run much faster than a conventional hard drive.
- If you are in the business or other applications where high performance is critical, opt for an M.2 SSD PCIe 3.0 x4 with MLC memory.
- Please carefully check the compatibility of the drive with your computer before purchasing. If in doubt, consult your dealer.
Testing technique
Iometer 1.1.0 RC1
- Sequential data read / write in blocks from 512 bytes to 2 MB and a request queue depth of 4 (typical depth for desktop tasks). The test run with blocks of each size continues for 30 seconds. The result is a plot of data rate versus block size.
- Random read / write of data in the entire disk space in blocks from 512 bytes to 2 MB and a request queue depth of 4. The test sample with blocks of each size lasts for 30 seconds. Block boundaries are aligned relative to the ruler in 4 KB increments. Since SSDs read and write information as so-called 4 KB pages or multiples, load balancing eliminates situations where a logical block occupies an odd number of pages and the write speed decreases.
- Response time. Random read / write of data is performed in the entire disk space in blocks of 512 bytes and a request queue depth of 4. Since the test lasts 10 minutes, the disk buffer fills up, which makes it possible to estimate the drive response time. The data blocks are also aligned with respect to the 4K markup.
- Sequential access speed depending on the length of the request queue. The speed of reading and writing 64 KB blocks is measured with a queue length from 1 to 8 with a step of 2 and from 8 to 32 with a step of 4.
- Multi-threaded load. From one to four copies of the utility that generates the load (workers, in Iometer terminology) work simultaneously with the disk. Each worker performs sequential reading / writing of 64 KB blocks with a request queue depth of 1. Workers have access to non-overlapping 16 GB address spaces, which are located in the disk space close to each other, starting from sector zero. The total productivity of all workers is measured.
After each test that involves writing a significant amount of data, the disk is cleared using Secure Erase. The lengthy write tests are divided into several parts, interspersed with cleaning, so that the first test samples filling the disk do not affect the speed of the subsequent ones.
⇡ PCMark 7
A synthetic test that emulates the load of real applications and various patterns of using PC resources. The benchmark is installed on the main drive of the stand. The drive under test creates a single NTFS partition for the entire available space, and PCMark 7 runs the Secondary Storage test. As the test results, both the final score and the speed of completing individual subtests are taken into account.
⇡ Dependence of performance on free space
To check how much the write speed on the SSD decreases as it fills up, we gradually fill it with random data at the block level and use Iometer to test random write 4 KB blocks with a request queue depth of 4. Then the TRIM command is sent to the disk (using the utility Diskpart, a partition is created and formatted for the entire disk space) and the write speed is measured again.
For SSDs performing write data compression, write speed tests are performed on both repeating data and randomized data.
⇡ Test stand
A computer with an MSI 890GXM-G65 motherboard, an AMD Phenom II X2 560 Black Edition processor and 4 GB of 1600 MHz DDR3 RAM is used as a test platform. The drive connects to a controller built into the motherboard chipset and operates in AHCI mode. Operating system - Windows 7 Ultimate X64.
To connect mSATA drives, we used a Minerva AD963FD9 adapter.
The volume and data transfer rate in benchmarks are indicated in binary units (1 KB \u003d 1024 bytes).
⇡ Performance, Iometer
Sequential reading
In this test, the performance of all our test subjects is practically at the same level.
Sequential write
In the next test, only one mSATA drive managed to stay in the lead - Kingston SSDNow mS200. Together with him, only Kingston HyperX 3K showed good results. However, it should be noted that when writing data that is difficult to compress, this test would not be so favorable to the drives on the SandForce platform, which both of these devices are.
The rest of the mSATA SSDs did not perform well. For example, the Crucial M4 has virtually no sequential write speed gains after increasing the block size to 16 KB. Much the same can be said for the Transcend SSD. However, there is nothing wrong with that - the declared sequential write speed coincides with the one we got. The Plextor M5M proved to be much more interesting - the speed of this solid-state drive grows almost as slowly as that of the Plextor M5 Pro. Probably, the point here is in the identical Marvell 88SS9187-BLD2 controllers. However, the good news is that the mSATA drive is not that much different from its full-size cousin.
Settled response time
In this test, almost all drives performed well. The only exception is the Crucial M4 mSATA drive, which has a sustained write response time of almost half a second. However, it is not a fact that such a strange feature will somehow manifest itself in real applications or even in subsequent iometer benchmarks.
Random read
In this test, all drives we tested perform similarly. Nobody got out of the crowd, and the speed spread was not too great.
Arbitrary recording
This is where it becomes clear why the Crucial M4 had such a slow write response time. The fact is that this drive does a poor job of writing small blocks - that is, blocks less than 4 KB. Recall that we used 512-byte blocks in the test for the established response time.
By the way, if we talk about 4 KB sectors, then when writing such sectors, the speeds of all our drives were practically the same, except that Kingston HyperX 3K showed the best results, thus outperforming its analogue of the mSATA format.
Reading with different command queue lengths
Here again we see almost the same results. Only the reading speed of the Plextor M5 Pro grows a little slower than the others, so when reading with a queue of four commands, which is typical for a consumer load, its performance potential is not fully revealed.
Recording at different command queue lengths
But with the recording, everything is not so smooth. For example, the Crucial M4 again has the worst results in terms of maximum performance, but to work at full speed, it needs a queue of even two teams long.
Another mSATA, Plextor M5M, shows a gradual increase in random write speed as the queue grows. The Plextor M5 Pro behaves in much the same way. Both devices require at least 20-24 commands to achieve their ultimate performance! With four commands typical for a desktop, the read speed is about 50 MB / s lower than the peak.
The rest of the drives are doing well. Both Kingston drives performed almost the same, peaking on four teams, with the Transcend TS128GMSA740 keeping up with them.
Multithreaded read
Again a reading test and again nothing interesting. The results of most of our test subjects are almost identical: when reading in two streams, a jerk of speed occurs, and then it slightly increases with the addition of the third and fourth streams.
Multithreaded recording
Again the write test, and again the Crucial M4 has the worst overall performance, and it reacts sluggishly to additional streams. However, it has two unfortunate brothers - Transcend TS128GMSA740 and Plextor M5M. But if the write speed of Transcend even drops during multi-threaded access, then at the Plextor it at least grows.
As for the latest mSATA SSD, the Kingston SSDNow mS200, its results are on the same level as the Kingston HyperX 3K.
⇡ PCMark 7
PCMark 7 benchmarks have never been difficult, and nearly all SSDs perform similarly here. Our case is no exception.
Judging by the Finnish benchmark, mSATA drives are not far behind their "older brothers", and the Plextor M5M drive even managed to outperform Kingston HyperX 3K.
If you look at each PCMark 7 subtest separately, it becomes clear that in the subtests for "adding music", Windows Defender and Windows Media Center all drives showed almost the same results.
But in tests for importing pictures and launching applications, the gaps between our experimental subjects are especially noticeable.
Dependence of performance on free space
In the last test, we got very interesting results. For example, the Kingston SSDNow mS200 has the smallest drop in speed with decreasing free space - let's say, thanks to the data compression that the SandForce controller performs on the fly. SSD performance when writing poorly compressible data is no doubt more responsive to free space.
As for outsiders, only one SSD was included in this list - this is the Transcend TS128GMSA740. Judging by our results, its speed not only drops faster than others, but also does not recover after the TRIM command. Something like this could be seen with some solid state drives at a time when support for this command was not yet widespread.
The rest of the test takers predictably crash down when they hit the 8GB free space, but dutifully revert back to their original performance after receiving the TRIM command.
⇡ Conclusions
While modern full-size SSDs can be chosen on the basis of "I liked the design", this does not work with mSATA yet. When choosing a drive, it is better to familiarize yourself with its technical characteristics in detail. Particular attention should be paid to the sequential write parameters, and if there are no financial constraints, then it is better to choose the mSATA SSD, whose random read and write speeds will not differ very much.
If you make a sample of the drives that we tested, then we recommend only the Kingston SSDNow mS200 for purchase, if, of course, 120 GB is enough for you. Unfortunately, 120 GB is the limit for the SSDNow mS200.
The second place goes to the mSATA Plextor M5M 256 GB drive (PX-256M5M). Unfortunately, in some tests, this drive showed far from the best results, but if you need to choose an mSATA SSD, the volume of which exceeds 120 GB, then it is worth taking a closer look.
As for the other two participants, Crucial M4 256 GB (CT256M4SSD3) and Transcend 128 GB (TS128GMSA740), the first drive showed, perhaps, the worst results (which, by the way, coincided with the declared characteristics), and the second drive had problems using TRIM commands. However, this is comparative testing, which means that someone must definitely lose.
In general, judging by our results, the performance of mSATA drives can be on the level of conventional 2.5-inch SSDs. But there are still quite a few such drives on the market, and there are even fewer motherboards with appropriate connectors. Therefore, unfortunately, you will now have to pay from four to eight thousand rubles for upgrading an ultrabook in the form of an mSATA drive. Depending on the size of the drive, of course.
Test 10 SSD mSATA | SSD responsiveness on a miniature board
The idea of \u200b\u200binstalling an SSD with an interface mSATA into the motherboard of a computer is pretty good, but only if the drive is as fast as the more common 2.5 "models. And its cost per gigabyte should be at the same level. Paying extra for a slower drive simply does not make sense, even if it is small SSD used solely for caching More and more SSDs are available for less than $ 1 / GB, so now it is quite easy to find a drive with at least 128 GB for a personal computer.
Dell XPS 13, Ultrabook
But in conditions where additional physical space is a luxury (and in some cases it is completely absent), mSATA might be the only way to install a solid state drive. Ultrabooks are a prime example of this. With very limited space, you can consider installing one 2.5 drive, a drive based on mSATA, or some combination of the two. In such a small form factor, a combination of a fast boot drive and a slower drive for storing user data will do just fine, but it comes at a premium.
Connector mSATA we first considered in the article "Intel SSD 310 80 GB: Little Notebooks Get Big Storage Flexibility (eng.)" almost two years ago. This physical interface is very similar to mini-PCIe. Nevertheless, mSATA Uses typical SATA wiring. Fortunately, some of the boards currently have adapters required to install full-size mini-PCIe cards or drives. mSATA in the same slot. In this regard, many are faced with a performance problem: some motherboards, for example, DH61AG Intel, support mSATA with a data transfer rate of 3 Gb / s, which slows down the performance of drives designed for 6 Gb / s connections.
Finding out what the choice of SSDs designed for use in slots mSATAquite small, we decided to consider all the options provided to us by ADATA, Crucial, Mushkin and OCZ.
Test 10 SSD mSATA | Configuration and tests
While the greatest benefit from compact SSDs mSATA get ultrabooks (and other thin and light form factors), they are not very suitable as a test bench, since drives have to be constantly installed and removed during testing. Therefore, on our test desktop, we are using an mSATA-to-SATA adapter. There is no performance penalty associated with this configuration, as the adapter simply changes the physical interface, not the connection. In addition, this setting allows us to correctly compare drives based on mSATA with a larger 2.5 "SSD.
| Test configuration | |
| CPU | Intel Core i5-2400 (Sandy Bridge) 32nm, 3.1GHz, LGA 1155, 6MB Shared L3 Cache, Turbo Boost incl. |
| Motherboard | Gigabyte G1.Sniper M3 |
| Memory | Kingston Hyper-X 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1333 @ DDR3-1333, 1.5V |
| System disk | OCZ Vertex 3 240GB SATA 6Gb / s |
| Video card | Palit GeForce GTX 460 1 GB |
| Tested drives | Adata XPG SX300 64 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: - Adata XPG SX300 128 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: - Adata XPG SX300 256 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: - Crucial m4 mSATA 64GB SATA 6Gb / s, Firmware: - Crucial m4 mSATA 128GB SATA 6Gb / s, Firmware: - Crucial m4 mSATA 256GB SATA 6Gb / s, Firmware: - Mushkin Atlas m4 mSATA 60GB SATA 6Gb / s, Firmware: - Mushkin Atlas m4 mSATA 120GB SATA 6Gb / s, Firmware: - Mushkin Atlas m4 mSATA 240GB SATA 6Gb / s, Firmware: - OCZ Nocti 120GB SATA 6Gb / s, Firmware: - Intel SSD 310 80 GB SATA 3Gb / s, Firmware: - Intel SSD 320 300 GB SATA 3Gb / s, Firmware: 1.92 Intel SSD 320 80 GB SATA 3Gb / s, Firmware: 1.92 Intel SSD 330 180GB SATA 6Gb / s, Firmware: 300i Intel SSD 330 120GB SATA 6Gb / s, Firmware: 300i Samsung 830 256 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: CXMO Samsung 830 64 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: CXMO Crucial m4 256GB SATA 6Gb / s Firmware: 0309 Crucial m4 64gb SATA 6Gb / s Firmware: 0009 OCZ Vertex 3 240 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 2.15 OCZ Vertex 3 120 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 2.22 OCZ Vertex 3 60 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 2.15 OCZ Agility 3 240 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 2.22 OCZ Agility 3 120 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 2.22 OCZ Agility 3 60 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 2.22 OCZ Vertex 4 256 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 1.5 OCZ Agility 4 256 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 1.5 OCZ Agility 4 128 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 1.5 OCZ Vertex 4 64 GB SATA 6 Gb / s, Firmware: 1.5 |
| Nutrition | Seasonic 760 W, 80 PLUS Gold |
| Software and drivers | |
| operating system | Windows 7 x64 Ultimate |
| DirectX | DirectX 11 |
| Driver | Graphics: Nvidia 270.61 RST: 10.6.0.1002 Virtu: 1.1.101 |
| Tests | |
| Iometer 1.1.0 | # Workers \u003d 1, 4 KB randomly LBA \u003d 8 GB, variable queue depth, 128 KB sequentially, Logical LBA Span |
| PCMark 7 | Storage suite |
| Tom "s Hardware Storage Bench v1.0 | Trace Based Test |
Test 10 SSD mSATA | Adata XPG SX300 mSATA SSD
Family Adata XPG SX300 - these are relatives of the 2.5 "SX90 drive line, only with a connector mSATA, which we considered in the article "Test 10 SSD with a capacity of 240 - 256 GB" ... Both lines are powered by the second generation SandForce controller, so you can expect the smaller version to deliver the performance levels of the conventional models we've been using for over two years.
In fact, the XPG SX300 is slightly different from most standard SandForce SSDs. As with the SX900, Adata took the opportunity to completely disable the backup data area through a controller firmware update from the manufacturer. In our SX900 review, we saw how redundancy can help restore drive speed when all cells are busy. Failure to use this feature under certain conditions can negatively impact performance.
You will notice that the XPG SX300 (all three SSDs in 64GB, 128GB and 256GB) use four BGA memory chips, each of which communicates with the controller via two channels. Thus, all three SSDs mSATA use the eight channels available on the controller. According to Adata, the company is using IMFT's 25nm synchronous flash memory, which should provide high performance.
Why is there such a big difference between three SSDs in the 4KB random read test? With low queue depths, which are most common on Ultrabooks or mid-range desktops, these drives are pretty close. The 256 GB model comes out ahead with only eight or more commands. With high queue depths, larger SSDs make better use of the interface between the SandForce controller and flash memory.
Recording the compressible information on the XPG SX300 (in the graph below with solid lines) leaves no room for interleaving, which improves performance. SandForce DuraWrite technology delivers similar results to all three SSDs.
However, we know that the SandForce architecture does not handle compressed data very well. Therefore, the 128GB and 256GB models deliver noticeably faster speeds than a 64GB SSD with fewer NAND blocks. Moreover, the test performance of this triple is noticeably lower when the drives have to work with incompressible data (they are shown with a dotted line on the graph).
The sequential read speed is noticeably higher. All three drives deliver impressive throughput of up to 500 MB / s with two commands queue depth.
The speed when sequentially writing compressed data in blocks of 128 KB is also very high.
