1
00:00:00,680 --> 00:00:06,600
so today I actually have something pretty interesting to show you guys I

2
00:00:04,480 --> 00:00:13,120
recently did my unboxing of the Intel SSD 510 series a code name Elm Crest SSD

3
00:00:11,559 --> 00:00:17,400
and I've actually got some results for you guys so this video is going to focus

4
00:00:14,679 --> 00:00:22,160
on crystal dismark which is a pretty wellestablished uh dis benchmarking tool

5
00:00:20,439 --> 00:00:26,039
these days and I've benchmarked a variety of different configurations for

6
00:00:24,359 --> 00:00:30,039
the purpose of finding out a couple of things this is a synthetic Benchmark

7
00:00:28,359 --> 00:00:34,719
okay so bear in mind that the result to not necessarily always comparable from

8
00:00:32,040 --> 00:00:38,960
one drive to another and it's not always necessarily an indication of real world

9
00:00:36,600 --> 00:00:45,120
performance but I wanted to find out in a synthetic Benchmark how a single 510

10
00:00:42,239 --> 00:00:53,559
series SSD compares to two 510 series ssds as well as how using the

11
00:00:49,480 --> 00:00:56,239
onboard SATA 3 6 gbit per second Port

12
00:00:53,559 --> 00:00:59,640
versus using the onboard SATA 2 3 gbit per second ports affect the performance

13
00:00:58,039 --> 00:01:04,519
of this drive so I'm going to walk you guys through this one by one here we

14
00:01:01,480 --> 00:01:06,720
have a single drive with uh SATA 3 6

15
00:01:04,519 --> 00:01:13,119
gbit per second you can see here that the right speeds are largely unaffected

16
00:01:09,119 --> 00:01:15,360
by the uh The Wider uh data bus however

17
00:01:13,119 --> 00:01:20,159
the read speeds especially these sequential results are well mostly the

18
00:01:17,920 --> 00:01:24,759
sequential results are significantly higher if you give it a pipe that's

19
00:01:22,400 --> 00:01:30,280
twice as wide to move the data through so that's uh that's how the performance

20
00:01:27,000 --> 00:01:31,759
compared as far as single Drive goes

21
00:01:30,280 --> 00:01:36,280
okay so then we've got our dual Drive configuration so here I've configured it

22
00:01:34,040 --> 00:01:42,079
in raid Zero running off the integrated SATA 3 6 GB per second controller on my

23
00:01:38,720 --> 00:01:43,479
p67 motherboard you can see right here

24
00:01:42,079 --> 00:01:47,240
that the sequential read scale incredibly well this is the best results

25
00:01:45,880 --> 00:01:53,280
I've seen out of a two Drive configuration for straight reads ever

26
00:01:49,799 --> 00:01:56,119
we're up near a 1 gbyte per second read

27
00:01:53,280 --> 00:02:01,159
speed sequential and we're over 400 megab per second right speed so it's

28
00:01:58,840 --> 00:02:05,320
phenomenal ever you can see here that once again WR speeds are largely

29
00:02:03,119 --> 00:02:09,640
unaffected by the larger datab bus and it's mostly the read speeds especially

30
00:02:07,759 --> 00:02:13,360
once again sequential that are going to benefit from that larger datab bus the

31
00:02:11,760 --> 00:02:20,280
reason for that is that when you're writing reading and writing more complicated data it becomes more

32
00:02:16,920 --> 00:02:23,560
controller bound and less Bound by the

33
00:02:20,280 --> 00:02:25,640
actual uh by the actual interface itself

34
00:02:23,560 --> 00:02:31,519
so just as points of comparison I have included results with these dual 510

35
00:02:28,879 --> 00:02:36,519
series ssds running off an LSI 9268 I RAID controller card these are

36
00:02:34,640 --> 00:02:40,879
the best results that I was able to obtain with the raid card over here so

37
00:02:38,879 --> 00:02:44,000
you can see that there are slight differences actually here I'm going to

38
00:02:42,159 --> 00:02:48,440
move this window over so you can compare them a little bit more easily between

39
00:02:45,680 --> 00:02:54,400
the onboard raid and the raid cards particularly uh in the 512k sequential

40
00:02:51,840 --> 00:02:59,200
results right here uh everything else is pretty close although we did manage to

41
00:02:56,280 --> 00:03:02,879
get better 4K reads but actually slower 4K r rights now that was with a fair

42
00:03:01,000 --> 00:03:07,239
amount of tinkering around with the settings but I'm sure as the firmware

43
00:03:05,280 --> 00:03:10,680
gets updated on these on the high-end RAID controller cards and as the

44
00:03:08,760 --> 00:03:14,560
community Tinkers around with them and finds out how to get the most

45
00:03:12,280 --> 00:03:17,920
performance out of a 510 series SSD we're probably going to see better

46
00:03:15,720 --> 00:03:23,360
results I've also included the results from a Revo Drive X2 240 gig so that's

47
00:03:21,239 --> 00:03:28,120
what I've actually got on the test bench down here right now and you can see that

48
00:03:25,799 --> 00:03:32,200
sequentially bearing in mind we're using random data with Crystal mark this time

49
00:03:30,120 --> 00:03:36,519
around so sandforce is at a bit of a disadvantage here but you can see that

50
00:03:34,159 --> 00:03:43,480
sequentially it is not as strong of a performer as two 120 gig SSD 510 series

51
00:03:40,000 --> 00:03:47,239
drives however when you look at the high

52
00:03:43,480 --> 00:03:51,319
load random reads and wrs it absolutely

53
00:03:47,239 --> 00:03:53,360
destroys the Dual 510 series SSD setup

54
00:03:51,319 --> 00:03:58,159
so it's all about what kind of workloads you're going to be using and thank you

55
00:03:55,280 --> 00:04:02,040
for checking out my video on the crystal Mark performance of the Intel sist d510

56
00:04:00,400 --> 00:04:07,200
series don't forget to subscribe to lineus Tech tips for more unboxings

57
00:04:03,480 --> 00:04:07,200
reviews and other videos