1
00:00:00,480 --> 00:00:07,599
today I've got a pretty interesting video for you guys this is featuring the

2
00:00:03,639 --> 00:00:11,160
Intel SSD 510 series

3
00:00:07,599 --> 00:00:13,599
SSD anyway I ran some PC Mark Vantage

4
00:00:11,160 --> 00:00:18,680
benchmarks on these particular ssds I actually ran them with an Intel p67

5
00:00:16,600 --> 00:00:24,160
motherboard so I've got a few different configurations to show you first of all

6
00:00:20,920 --> 00:00:25,760
I ran single drive on the SATA 36 gbit

7
00:00:24,160 --> 00:00:30,960
per second controller as well as on the SATA 2 3 GB per second controller and

8
00:00:28,400 --> 00:00:35,879
the objective of that was to demonstrate how much of a performance Advantage you

9
00:00:32,960 --> 00:00:41,039
get by pairing this SSD up with a proper SATA 3 6 GB per second controller versus

10
00:00:38,440 --> 00:00:46,239
running it on an older Legacy SATA 2 controller I also ran the two Drives

11
00:00:43,680 --> 00:00:50,120
together in raid zero again in both configurations so on both different

12
00:00:47,920 --> 00:00:56,280
speed controllers to see what kind of a performance benefit we get from jumping

13
00:00:52,039 --> 00:00:57,840
from one SSD to two ssds uh just as a

14
00:00:56,280 --> 00:01:04,559
point of comparison I compare the onboard raid against an LSi 926 8i raid

15
00:01:01,800 --> 00:01:09,560
card um which I believe is configured optimally but I'm not actually an expert

16
00:01:06,880 --> 00:01:13,520
at configuring The Raid bio so I'm sure as the community plays around with these

17
00:01:11,720 --> 00:01:18,320
more they will find ways to eek more performance out of it and also for

18
00:01:15,479 --> 00:01:24,200
context I've compared these two ssds against an ocz Revo Drive X2 to 40 gig

19
00:01:22,560 --> 00:01:28,759
so that's going to show us what four sand Force drives so that is 4 60 gig

20
00:01:26,560 --> 00:01:33,880
sand Force drives essentially in raid zero will be able B to do against these

21
00:01:32,320 --> 00:01:38,680
all right so you can come in close here and have a look but basically I'll we'll

22
00:01:36,280 --> 00:01:41,880
go we'll go from by column so the First Column here is our single drive

23
00:01:40,079 --> 00:01:48,079
performance and you can see that we actually gain 30% performance going from

24
00:01:45,079 --> 00:01:51,040
a SATA 2 3 GB per second connection to a

25
00:01:48,079 --> 00:01:56,360
SATA 3 6 GB per second connection now when we actually go down to the hard

26
00:01:53,840 --> 00:02:00,320
drive Suite results we can see which applications are really making use of

27
00:01:58,159 --> 00:02:05,640
this extra bandwidth so there's certain things that actually don't get nearly as

28
00:02:03,000 --> 00:02:11,120
much benefit as others so when you're talking small files okay so such as

29
00:02:08,720 --> 00:02:15,120
adding music to Windows Media Player you're not going to see as huge a

30
00:02:13,000 --> 00:02:20,200
performance benefit as when you look at much bigger files like say for example

31
00:02:17,360 --> 00:02:24,360
video editing using Windows Movie Maker so basically the larger the files are

32
00:02:22,599 --> 00:02:27,879
and the more sequentially we're reading from them or writing to them the more

33
00:02:26,319 --> 00:02:32,000
benefit we're going to get from that wider interface so as we move over here

34
00:02:30,599 --> 00:02:36,560
I'm just going to bring these back up to show you guys the total scores as we

35
00:02:34,080 --> 00:02:41,040
move over we find our raid zero results so you can see that on the SATA 2

36
00:02:39,080 --> 00:02:46,080
connection we actually get more benefit from raid Zero versus on the SATA 3

37
00:02:43,800 --> 00:02:51,040
Connection and I guess the reason for that would be that what we're doing when

38
00:02:48,159 --> 00:02:54,200
we add raid zero is we are doubling the amount of bandwidth available although

39
00:02:52,440 --> 00:02:57,640
we're doubling the number of drives so certain things are going to be less

40
00:02:56,280 --> 00:03:02,599
bottlenecked and certain things are going to be equally bottlenecked so

41
00:02:59,560 --> 00:03:04,680
let's have a look at where the SATA 3 6

42
00:03:02,599 --> 00:03:09,879
GB per second interface is really able to pull away from the slower interface

43
00:03:07,640 --> 00:03:15,159
and there aren't as many huge examples of that but you look

44
00:03:13,080 --> 00:03:20,920
at video editing again so that's where you're looking at a huge performance

45
00:03:17,200 --> 00:03:23,120
benefit from The Wider interface okay

46
00:03:20,920 --> 00:03:26,120
Vista startup once again gets a lot of benefit actually I'm going to scroll

47
00:03:24,360 --> 00:03:30,920
down over here and let's see how much Vista start up yeah so that one actually

48
00:03:28,200 --> 00:03:35,040
didn't improve much from the sing Drive configuration H

49
00:03:33,080 --> 00:03:40,239
interesting okay so let's move over let's have a look at our raid Card

50
00:03:36,760 --> 00:03:43,040
results so here we can see that it

51
00:03:40,239 --> 00:03:49,280
actually doesn't score as high as the onboard raid okay but some of the

52
00:03:46,400 --> 00:03:53,280
results here are actually better so you can see here Windows Defender actually

53
00:03:51,439 --> 00:03:58,959
performed significantly better than the onboard raid we're talking on the order

54
00:03:55,239 --> 00:04:00,840
of about 15% better so the reason for

55
00:03:58,959 --> 00:04:05,760
that I would spe calculate based on the crystal dis Mark results that we saw

56
00:04:02,760 --> 00:04:07,360
before is that the onboard the onboard

57
00:04:05,760 --> 00:04:12,000
RAID controller doesn't perform as well as the dedicated RAID controller in

58
00:04:09,200 --> 00:04:15,840
random reads and writes gaming once again the dedicated RAID controller

59
00:04:13,760 --> 00:04:20,799
absolutely blows away the onboard in fact many of these results are

60
00:04:18,479 --> 00:04:25,600
significantly better than the onboard raid the only reason that we're seeing

61
00:04:23,320 --> 00:04:30,039
this low overall score seems to be that Windows Media Center doesn't perform

62
00:04:27,520 --> 00:04:33,639
nearly as well on the dedicated raid card so that's something to bear in mind

63
00:04:32,199 --> 00:04:39,479
when you're looking at the overall results where you see the onboard raid

64
00:04:36,880 --> 00:04:44,520
just destroying well you know hundreds of dollars dedicated RAID controller so

65
00:04:42,840 --> 00:04:50,600
let's move on down here to the revo Drive X2 once again we see a very low

66
00:04:46,759 --> 00:04:51,639
overall score but as we move down and

67
00:04:50,600 --> 00:04:55,160
try it here you know what I'm going to move this one next to it or above it so

68
00:04:53,960 --> 00:05:00,320
that we can have an easier point of comparison so this is the revo Drive X2

69
00:04:57,440 --> 00:05:04,400
this is 2 510s on the board RAID controller because that's sort of the

70
00:05:02,039 --> 00:05:09,479
configuration I'd consider most likely we see that there oh okay that won't fly

71
00:05:07,080 --> 00:05:14,600
okay we see that the revo Drive X2 actually does outperform the Dual 510s

72
00:05:12,520 --> 00:05:20,039
in some applications but there are others where it just gets demolished

73
00:05:17,479 --> 00:05:24,960
such as the video editing uh Benchmark where yeah there's absolutely no

74
00:05:22,680 --> 00:05:29,720
comparison but you look at some things like application loading as well as the

75
00:05:27,520 --> 00:05:34,600
antivirus test and it actually outper performs it so that probably again also

76
00:05:32,319 --> 00:05:42,000
reflects the better performance that the revo Drive X2 has in random uh heavy

77
00:05:38,759 --> 00:05:44,000
usage scenarios versus the Dual Drive

78
00:05:42,000 --> 00:05:50,759
config so thank you for checking out my PC Mark comparison uh of the Intel SSD

79
00:05:47,440 --> 00:05:52,560
510 against itself on a SATA 2 versus a

80
00:05:50,759 --> 00:05:55,720
SATA 3 interface as well as a couple other points of reference for us don't

81
00:05:54,160 --> 00:06:00,720
forget to subscribe to Linus Tech tips for more unboxings reviews and other

82
00:05:57,160 --> 00:06:00,720
computer videos