REAL WORLD FILE TRANSFER
We also wanted to see how performance was in a real world use when transferring large files to the SSD. For this test we are going to simply stress write performance by transferring over a 30GB folder of movies off of a 512GB Samsung 950 Pro to the test SSDs and time how long it takes. Once complete we can calculate the average speed. For reference we have included both a 2.5″ and 3.5″ WD Blue HDD.
As expected, the RAID 0 array demolishes the single SATA SSD results. Reaching an average of 1007MB/s puts this config in line with the high performance PCIe SSD options out there, but at a much lower cost when factoring price per GB. Looking at one SSD’s performance we can see that it averaged 530MB/s, which is actually slightly slower than the 750GB, but that difference very minuscule and can change based on the number of passes we make with this benchmark.
For our power consumption testing, we have the drive connected to the system as a secondary drive. To record the wattage, we are now utilizing a Quarch Technology Programmable Power Module. It allows us to accurately measure power consumption over time and is flexible enough to allow us to test any SSD that comes our way.
Our power analysis may change as time goes on, but for now we are looking at just a few metrics with the main goal of measuring our results against the manufacturer’s ratings. Because most consumer systems are at idle for about 80% of the time, idle power consumption is an important measure to look at when understanding the efficiency of a drive.
In the chart above we can see that SSDs are magnitudes more efficient than standard HDDs. The 1050GB Crucial M300 has very good idle power consumption. It averages 40 milliwatts, which is near the best that we have seen.
Finally, we wanted to post up a graph of the power efficiency of the SSDs in comparison. We are looking at MB/s per Watt in this graph. The higher the result, the better.
Finally, in the chart above we can see that Micron’s 3D TLC provides high power efficiency. Now that we have apples to apples capacities to compare, however, we can see that the Samsung 850 EVO offers a little bit better efficiency over the MX300. Still, the MX300 does extremely well here, especially compared to the planar NAND options in the market.