SanDisk Extreme PRO 480GB Review

Comments 1 to 8 of 8

Hustler 11th July 2014, 09:15 Quote
never mind...too early
[USRF]Obiwan 11th July 2014, 09:57 Quote
I wonder if SATA III by now is the limiting factor for speed. I recently came across an interesting read about SATA Express (SE). A completely different beast then SATA and seems it will kill the whole previous SATA standards by using PCI-Express as base and moving the controller bakc to the storage device (like IDE was).

In theory this means that the device is directly communicating with the CPU and not have to go through some in between connection chip. for more info on the subject: Sata 3.2 SE specs. There you find a good explanation why they will drop the current SATA way of thinking.
leexgx 13th July 2014, 06:08 Quote
if your talking about Sequential speeds SATA 3 is a speed limit, but Random Read and Write access is the NAND/Controller itself not SATA 3 interface

SE is a massive improvement due to Directly connected to the PCI-Express but not for random access

but as it stands only server related stuff is where you would notice this, your typical any normal/workstation/gaming pc computer you not notice it (more bragging rights that mine is faster then yours but does lead over to server based SSDs improvements) better data protection is what i be more interested in
[USRF]Obiwan 14th July 2014, 09:58 Quote
Your note on random access got me searching and found that you are indeed right about that. Anandtech did a testbench on a Samsung SSD XP941 and it is slow on Random reads and writes, although the sequential r/w makes up for it as noted by Kristian Vatto. They also tested it recently on the latest ASRock z97 Extreme 6, which has a SE slot that can use M.2 x4.

I think in a while it will be a big step forward for SSD performance. And hopefully we also see a boost in price/GB values.
Phil Rhodes 14th July 2014, 10:29 Quote

Not quite seeing why I'd pay £2xx for 4xx gigabytes of SSD, when I could pay £1xx for 2xx gigabytes of SSD. Operating systems aren't that huge.
[USRF]Obiwan 14th July 2014, 10:35 Quote
Well If you are like me, heavy in music creation and recording with multitrack HD 24bit wav files. Large SSD is a blessing in performance compared to HD. But I agree 128GB is enough for a C: drive OS boot configuration.
Harlequin 14th July 2014, 10:53 Quote
until 4k read and writes get near sata 2 speeds , then sata 3 is not the limitation.
Phil Rhodes 14th July 2014, 12:48 Quote
Obiwan, I work mainly in video - I have an 8-disk, 4TB raid (Yes, that could cheaply get bigger now - it's a couple of years old. But it'll still be some time before my main media storage becomes SSD, so right now, it's an OS proposition only.

Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.

Discuss in the forums