OCZ Summit 2.5” (120GB)
The OCZ Summit series weighs in at 60GB, 120GB, and 250GB capacities. We received the 120GB model, which is rated at 220 MB/s read and 200 MB/s write performance. Our benchmarks returned 167 to 208 MB/s read throughput and 189 to 43 MB/s for writes. The minimum result obviosuly is a bump, but is has to be considered should you require sustained performance.
This SSD comes with 128 MB cache memory and is based on a Samsung controller, which doesn’t deliver particularly great I/O or application performance. However, the drive is power efficient, requiring only 0.2W at idle and a maximum of 1.4W during intensive I/O operations. This is less than the 2W active power specified by OCZ, but results may vary from model to model.
The low I/O performance results prevent a good ranking in our I/O workstation performance per watt analysis, but the drive does well in performance per watt for sequential throughput. One differentiator is OCZ’s 1.5 million-hour MTBF (mean time between failure) spec. Most of the other SSDs are rated at 1 million hours or only slightly more.
Latest Internal Storage News
- 09/02 – Laser Heat Used to Make HDD Write Transfers Faster
- 07/02 – Intel Introduces New 520 Series Line of SSDs
- 02/02 – Seagate Believes HDD Supply Disruption to Continue in 2012
- 01/02 – Other World Computing (OWC) Reveals Two New SSDs
- 28/01 – Cleversafe Announces 10 Exabyte Storage System Configuration
Latest Internal Storage reviews
- 09/02 – Momentus XT 750 GB Review: A Second-Gen Hybrid Hard Drive
- 06/02 – Intel SSD 520 Review: Taking Back The High-End With SandForce
- 01/02 – Upgrade Advice: Does Your Fast SSD Really Need SATA 6Gb/s?
- 26/01 – Install A Hard Drive Or SSD In Your Notebook's Optical Bay
- 24/01 – Best SSDs For The Money: January 2012
shit review, the G1 is alot worse then the G2 over time/use and intel won't be giving the G1 the Trim command
Would have been helpful to have a hard drive in there for comparison just to reflect just how far SSDs improve performance.
Where are the comparisons at empty verses used? This is a key differentiator at the moment and you seem to have missed the point completely. Its not how well a drive performs out of the box its how far it degrades once time has taken its toll.
There is a lot missing from this article. TBH, I wouldn't use this as a basis for making a decision on what SSD to buy.
One of your competitors has a superb article on SSD that they published recently, that delves into new vs used performance, and a good explanation of TRIM, and why it's important.
IMO, this article is not up to the usual THG high standard.
Why is the Vertex doing so extremely bad in the write-test?? Just 74MB/s write?? Is that a typo and is it suposed to be 174MB/s?
Fail, Fail, Fail.
Once again THG resorts to lots of silly benchmarks but misses the point... I wouldn't pick a drive based on this roundup!
Where, or where are the degradation of write performance tests... Thinking where all the Flash blocks are used and write cycles become Write-Read-Write cycles. (heading off to AnandTech again...)
Where is the Patriot Torqx M28 SSD (128Mb cache & 10 year warranty) in this "roundup"??
If you want a fast boot drive for "desktop usage" you'll surely want more I/O performance emphasise.
Bob
... Thinking where all the Flash blocks are used and write cycles become Write-Read-Write cycles. ...
I meant Read-Modify-Write of course!!
It's like you guys haven't read Anand's articles on SSDs or intentionally ignoring it. SSDs with JMicron controllers are automatically crippled SSDs. At least until JMicron cleans up their shoddy work, but then they'd have to fight against a bad reputation.