Defective Samsung 256GB SSD?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by omegasyn, Mar 12, 2009.

  1. omegasyn macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #1
    Intel 80GB SSD xbench = 140-150 range

    Samsung 256GB SSD xbench = 100-110 range

    Aren't the samsungs suppose to outperform the intel ssd's or is there something wrong with my drive?
     
  2. emt1 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #2

    Could you be any more vague?
     
  3. omegasyn thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #3
    Do you want me to post screens or something? What else is there to elaborate for you?
     
  4. emt1 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
  5. omegasyn thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #5
    Alright, I don't know how MANY samsung 256GB SSD and 80GB SSD there are but here you go:

    SSDSA2MH080G1 - Intel SSD
    Max Read = 250mb/s
    Max Write = 70mb/s

    MMDOE56G5MXP-0VB - Samsung SSD
    Max Read = 220mb/s
    Max Write = 200mb/s
     
  6. omegasyn thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #6
    Here are the latest xbench trials. I've included the two to show you the horrible results.... Should've just upgraded to a intel ssd 160gb instead....

    Samsung 256GB SSD Trials

    Test Samsung 1:
    [​IMG]

    Test Samsung 2:
    [​IMG]

    Intel 80GB SSD Trials

    Test Intel 1:
    [​IMG]

    Test Intel 2:
    [​IMG]
     
  7. Aboo macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    #7
    Isn't the Samsung an MLC drive, whereas the Intel is an SLC drive? That could explain the diffeence in performance (I am guessing....)
     
  8. omegasyn thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #8
    No, they're both MLC drives. Only the intel extreme ssd's have SLC's
     
  9. emt1 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    #9
  10. MikhailT macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #10
    Did you do a full zero write on the Samsung when you installed it? you should be getting twice the write speed for sure, but it looks like the drive is in the performance degradation state due to the drive has been written all across, making it perform very badly since it has to rewrite each block. You should do a full erase on it to reset it to default all zero bits which will gain all the speed back since it has nothing to rewrite to.
     
  11. omegasyn thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #11
    No I did not but will try it overnight tonight..... Will report back tomorrow to post the results.
     
  12. omegasyn thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #12
    Just completed a zero-day format with clean install and results are identical. If anyone have any suggestions, keep me update.
     
  13. NATO macrumors 68000

    NATO

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2005
    Location:
    Northern Ireland
    #13
    I'm pretty sure the Intel X25 SSDs are head and shoulders above anything else out there right now. I know Samsung's SSDs are very good, they're not as good as the Intel ones (but much better than the vast majority of other SSDs out there using the JMicron controller).
     
  14. MikhailT macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    #14

    Samsung should be so much better than Intel in write speed. there's no question about that, no doubts. It should atleast outspeed Intel in every write speeds test. Intel is an older generation behind Samsung's new MLC controller. The IOPS may still be Intel's advantage but write is its weakness.

    Even OCZ Vertex with the new firmware is now very close to 250MBps/160MBps and good IOPS results.

    The SSD market is about to take another step forward very soon with new controllers from everywhere and Intel may lose it's place at the top.
     
  15. omegasyn thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #15
  16. rojames30 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2007
    #16
    i ran xbench on the vertex 250gb SSD drive and here are the results. i was very impress. this drive beats the samsung handsdown!!! the proof is right here!!!

    Results 216.99
    System Info
    Xbench Version 1.3
    System Version 10.5.6 (9G2141)
    Physical RAM 4096 MB
    Model MacBookPro5,2
    Drive Type OCZ VERTEX 00.PT1
    Disk Test 216.99
    Sequential 166.54
    Uncached Write 225.70 138.58 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 151.01 85.44 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 95.73 28.02 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 396.82 199.44 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Random 311.27
    Uncached Write 117.20 12.41 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Write 391.13 125.22 MB/sec [256K blocks]
    Uncached Read 1781.24 12.62 MB/sec [4K blocks]
    Uncached Read 833.19 154.60 MB/sec [256K blocks]
     
  17. omegasyn thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2007
    Location:
    New York
    #17
    Here is the latest xbench I ran on my Intel 80GB SSD on the MBP 17 Unibody

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page