I haven't testet it myself, but from what I can see, they have an IOmeter aproach to their testing, looks ok to me from a server perspective if it uses correct compression levels, allthough I do not agree that the Workstation pattern copy real world correctly if they do intensive reads and writes at the exact same time. The reason, is that a typical workstation may have the same daily pattern of the test's 80/20 R/W, but not R&W at the same time like I think they do here. A typical SSD freak like me, have RR(+some sequential read) QD#1-6 in short burst, all day, with a tiny amount of mainly 4-32kb RW QD#1-2 more or less always in the background. Some writes during work/surfing and other stuff (downloads goes to HDD storage), but seldom or never at the same time as the intensive read. This, in my case, amounts to ~90/10 R/W per day, so not far off the workstation 80/20, so in theory the test is correct, but not in execution. This is why the QD1&QD4 RR results of the 840P looks so tempting for my usage, writes RW&SW have been more then good enough for a long time among the good SSD's, and have lower priority for me, for an OS SSD... My old C300, wich up to now has been the king in RR QD1-6, is as fast or faster then a Intel 520 at boot and apploading, thanks to it's strengths at low QD RR. And, the Intel is twice as fast in vantage..
The X25-E SLC was also a monster in workstation, so if heavy intensive reads during intensive writes is the usagepattern in question, SLC is sweet.. Thats why everyone should know their usagepattern before they buy...
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks