Discussion in 'Reviews' started by W1zzard, Sep 18, 2012.
To read this review go to: http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Mach_Xtreme/MX-DS_Turbo_120_GB_SLC/
Holy peanut butter batman dat performance!
Price is too damn high and i think we shall all wait to see the samsung 840 Pro's review
My recently purchased Plextor M5 Pro comes with a 5 year warranty as well... for a lot less money
But it's not SLC.
Excellent performance but the price offsets the numbers. You can potentially buy 2x120GB drives to run in RAID 0 for less money with better results.
not better results. check the corsair neutron gtx review. i got raid 0 numbers in there.
Dang thats fast, but should cost Max $145. Will wait for the Sam 840 pro.
It's actually quite cheap for SLC.
Intel's eMLC 710 costs $400 for 100GB.
There's a HUGE difference between SLC and MLC endurance and latency.
From Anandtech's Samsung SSD 840 Review:
Seriously at this point its all benchmark e-penis bull, i do quite a bit on my machine and i cant justify upgrading my "slow" Agility 2 90GB, the samsung 830 in my laptop does NOT feel any faster for daily tasks its like getting 140 FPS vs 200FPS. If your daily computer usage is running benchmarks then by all means its a life changer
SSD is for time saving. Difference between faster SSD and slower isn't very big and not very noticeable during everyday activities. However, after a period of time faster SSD will prove to be faster and save more time. TH sums it up nicely:
Maybe had something to do with the P67 chipset? Intel released a new set of RST drivers that enable TRIM on RAID arrays using a Z77 chipset. Maybe something to explore?
IMO the primary advantage to SLC isn't about benchmarks, it's about endurance. Most users probably won't see any difference, but I see this as an enterprise drive on the cheap.
The company I work for develops and manages database software for stuff like hospitals and city planning. There is a TON of data that comes in and out needing fast access, and we can't have drives failing. Most of our database servers are still on Intel X25-Es, and at the time those cost something like $1000 for each 64GB drive.
Granted, the upgrade to the production server will probably be a bunch of Intel 720s, but I can see development and backup workstations ending up with the Mach Xtreme.
Unfortunately, we don't find this kind of product in Brazil.
Until it arrives here (maybe never, haha), just going to use my newly-acquired Vertex 4. But certainly this MX-Turbo SSD is worth the investment.
Love to have one but I cant afford that price.
This drive is Vapor Ware
Good choice when I buy My next SSD it will be one with a 5 yrs warranty except Intel which has limit on it's warranty which can make it less that a 5 yrs warranty.
The reason I called this drive vapor ware is try and find one. It's not even list on the company web site. If they do make such a drive it's price is very reasonable for a SLC as you can pay that much and more for a 32 GB SLC drive,
another 120gb SLC.. =/
very interesting drive, very nice review too although I'd prefer to see some more benchmark from programs such as HDT or CDM etc, and not something like window index score.. most of the sata III drive above 250mb/s with sufficient 4k above the 25mb/s should hit at least 7.6+ anyway lol
here is another SLC 120gb SSD, http://www.rwlabs.com/article.php?id=701 SuperSSpeed S301 i think its called. very fast bench results and I wish to compare to this particular drive.
It's the exact same drive with a different name , fancy meeting you here also
I will also vouch for what W1zz is saying, no matter what you add latency due to RAID controller calculation overhead, or you add unneeded commands to the queue of a RAID 1 array member that slows the performance, and there will always be some sort of issues at hardware level with odd sized writes, my Agility drives suffer with this during writes more due to lack of cache, but it will still be noticeable on other drives.
In synthetic benchmarks you may achieve higher numbers, but real world there are some glaring and obvious shortcomings.
how is it the same drive when its released by two different company? could be different firmware too. and firmware clearly stated 5.0.2 but thats only sandforce firmware alone. on top of that supersspeed s301 doesn't have 240gb version, only 128gb version/120gb and 64gb as well lol
edit: i just went to mach extreme product page and their DS Turbo drives listed showing MLC for 60/120/240 and 480gb drives.
where can i find 240gb SLC on their website?
Maybe you are right, I was under the impression that someone we both know from another forum told me it was the same drive. I am most probably wrong then, I am an old fart, I cant remember what I did yesterday LOL. Could you give me an idea where there is a 480gb SLC SSD?
They can't do these drives in 240GB unless they use an enterprise controller. If they use the 2500 then the price for the controller will tack on another 100-125 Dollars.
If Mach is releasing this drive with 502 then they will have pissed on customers. Just look at the SanDisk forums, those guys are ready to file a class action suit for SanDisk dragging their ass. Any company still putting out drives with broken TRIM should be sued.
If you look at the sticker on Wiz's drive and the drive at RWL, http://www.rwlabs.com/article.php?cat=&id=711&pagenumber=4, the sticker is the same. Mach just went to SuperSSpeed to have the drives made. They should of went with a different color case. Everyone knows that the Chris Ram Edition is the hottest looking SSD on the market today
Good thing ScanDisk Updated the firmware for the one I just bought...I almost didnt get it because of that..
Your new drive already has it.
Separate names with a comma.