Happened to come across this and thought I would throw in my two cents. I don't agree at all with this statement and think, quite honestly, that such negates a very important piece of the pie when we speak of benchmark testing and it's relationship to computer use. In simple terms, the importance of testing in 0Fill, or highly compressible data, cannot be understated for the consumer side of things, just as testing in incompressible data (or random data samples) holds a more specific value for the enterprise side of things.
I can go back to the beginning of testing with this same argument and, quite honestly, would have believed the naysayers of testing in highly compressible data (OFill) would have seen the light by now. WE went head to head for years now with many berating the ideal that reviewers, myself included, would test in highly compressible data and show it's meaning and value on a review.
Imagine if you would how confused the consumer would be if we had never shown that side of things and explained the difference between the two.
Moving on, PCMark Vantage is recognized by all reviewers as being the 'industry standard' of consumer SSD testing and, well the simple facts show that the scoring realized through Vantage follows that of testing highly compressible data (OFill) much more accurately than testing that of incompressible data. Actually the new Vertex 4 is pretty much the icing on the cake with respect to an example on this one.
I know I may be going against the views of two very good friends on this one but, the truth is that, for the typical consumer, oFill (or testing with highly compressible data) is just as important as testing with incompressible data for more specific needs such as video and photography and even reaching right into the business and enterprise side of things.
To make a statement that says that you believe that testing with oFill data should be outlawed (colorful term) shows a very close minded attitude and really negates the entire side of the debate. Quite frankly, it goes so far as to even put the credibility of the person making the statement into jeopardy.
Just my thoughts! It is kind of amusing actually because I can probably pull up threads on this forum just over two years ago where I stood strong on this exact subject. To my advantage, test results show a very clear picture.
As for SandForce and their marketing, as much as many might not like hearing it, it borders on brilliance. There have been very few in technology (much less the storage industry) to make the steps that they did over the course of just under three years. They have become a part of every consumer SSD manufacturer today EXCEPT for Samsung and Crucial. Yup, that includes Intel. They were then purchase by LSI to top things off. Just how big would the line have been if they went public before the LSI purchase?




Reply With Quote


Bookmarks