Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

A place to give your thoughts on our reviews!

Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

Postby Apoptosis » Fri May 22, 2009 8:53 am

Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

The UltraDrive ME series of Solid State Drives are the fifth-generation of MLC SSDs to be released by Super Talent. These drives have read speeds up to 260MB/Sec and write speeds up to 200MB/Sec thanks to the fact that they use the Indilinx barefoot controller and 64MB of cache. Read on to see how this drive does against nine other 2.5" storage devices.

Image

The UltraDrive ME series of Solid State Drives are the fifth-generation of SSDs to be released by Super Talent. These drives are said to offer leading-edge performance for high-end notebook computers and desktops with read speeds up to 260MB/Sec and write speeds up to 200MB/Sec. With drive speeds like that you know the UltraDrive ME series has a great controller and indeed it does as the UltraDrive ME series uses the Indilinx 'Barefoot' internal controller that has been paired with an 64MB Elpida IC for internal cache. This setup is very similar to the OCZ Vertex SSD Series, so if you don't know about SSDs with the Barefoot controller that would be a great place to start reading.


Article Title: Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks
Article URL: http://legitreviews.com/article/974/1/
Pricing At Time of Print: $195.99 plus shipping
Find us on Facebook to discover the faces behind the names!
Follow Me on Twitter!
User avatar
Apoptosis
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 32935
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

Re: Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

Postby Major_A » Fri May 22, 2009 10:20 am

I want a SSD but the price is keeping me away. For that price you can get 2 1TB drives and still have the money to go buy a nice dinner.

What I do find disturbing (even though I probably shouldn't) is the warranty on these drives. The manufactures are claiming 1.5 million hours of operation which equals 62,500 years of continuous use but the warranty is only 2 years. Seagate offers 5 year warranties on their mechanical drives. Is this just a case of a newer tech that they aren't really sure how they will hold up?

Another question, why do the larger drives seem to perform better than smaller drives (i.e. 256GB vs 64GB)? Is it the amount of onboard cache or something else entirely?
User avatar
Major_A
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 3793
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

Postby FZ1 » Fri May 22, 2009 12:14 pm

Major_A wrote:Another question, why do the larger drives seem to perform better than smaller drives (i.e. 256GB vs 64GB)? Is it the amount of onboard cache or something else entirely?


I have been told that it is due to the density of the NAND chips used on the larger drives.
Joe
User avatar
FZ1
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4434
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:49 pm
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

Re: Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

Postby Apoptosis » Fri May 22, 2009 12:27 pm

Major_A wrote:IAnother question, why do the larger drives seem to perform better than smaller drives (i.e. 256GB vs 64GB)? Is it the amount of onboard cache or something else entirely?


Like FZ1 said it's due to the density of the NAND flash being used for the drive. The UltraDrive ME/Vertex have four channels for data transfer, but the difference is both the density of the NAND and the channels. 32GB and 64GB SSD's with the Barefoot controller do not support interleaving because there are not enough chips (1 bank only). With 128GB you get 4 channels plus interleaving, which improves performance. 256GB models have two PCB's and thus the performance is lower than the rest which are single PCB storage drives.

The UltraDrive ME/Vertex use Samsung MLC NAND ICs and I have been told by sources wanting to remain anonymous that changing brands of the NAND results in up 10-15% performance differences... Samsung is the fastest and the reason they are being used. I wonder if performance SSDs will ever used binned MLC NAND chips down the road...
Find us on Facebook to discover the faces behind the names!
Follow Me on Twitter!
User avatar
Apoptosis
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 32935
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

Re: Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

Postby FeRaL » Fri May 22, 2009 1:39 pm

Nice review. This looks to be a great drive to get your feet wet with based on the performance and price.

I have a question that is more site related than anything else. Instead of just having a link on the last page of a review to the forum for discussion of the review, do you think you could put a link on every page of a review that will allow you to go straight to the forums?
Last edited by FeRaL on Fri May 22, 2009 3:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
FeRaL
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 355
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: So Cal

Re: Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

Postby Major_A » Fri May 22, 2009 2:25 pm

Apoptosis wrote:
Major_A wrote:IAnother question, why do the larger drives seem to perform better than smaller drives (i.e. 256GB vs 64GB)? Is it the amount of onboard cache or something else entirely?


Like FZ1 said it's due to the density of the NAND flash being used for the drive. The UltraDrive ME/Vertex have four channels for data transfer, but the difference is both the density of the NAND and the channels. 32GB and 64GB SSD's with the Barefoot controller do not support interleaving because there are not enough chips (1 bank only). With 128GB you get 4 channels plus interleaving, which improves performance. 256GB models have two PCB's and thus the performance is lower than the rest which are single PCB storage drives.

The UltraDrive ME/Vertex use Samsung MLC NAND ICs and I have been told by sources wanting to remain anonymous that changing brands of the NAND results in up 10-15% performance differences... Samsung is the fastest and the reason they are being used. I wonder if performance SSDs will ever used binned MLC NAND chips down the road...

Thanks for explaining that. Seems like two boards with the right controller would actually make it faster. I guess that's the idea with the OCZ Z-Drive and the integrated RAID controller.
User avatar
Major_A
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 3793
Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 2:11 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Re: Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

Postby stopthekilling77 » Fri May 22, 2009 11:17 pm

Having installed 3-4 SuperTalent SSDs in customers computers already, I'm glad you guys like them as much as I do!
Great simple upgrade for anyone wanting a sizeable increase in general computing performance, and even better an upgrade for gamers. If I had the coin I'd drop it on two of these but I think just about everyone can empathize on tight budgets! Great review!
Gigabyte GA-MA770T-UD3P
AMD Phenom II X4 965BE @ 3.5 GHz
10 GB DDR3 1333 CAS-7
GeForce GTX 650 Ti 2GB
WD 1TB HDD, Corsair HX620
Antec P-180B
Samsung 21.6" LCD
Razer DeathAdder V2, MS 360 Controller
User avatar
stopthekilling77
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 2186
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 2:08 pm
Location: Virginia Beach, VA

Re: Super Talent UltraDrive ME 64GB MLC SSD Benchmarks

Postby leexgx » Tue May 26, 2009 4:32 am

the price of that Super Talent UltraDrive ME seems very well to bad its the price for the 64gb version (still 50 cheaper then the vertex as thats what the ME drive is any way)

maybe in an year we get flash down to an price where 256gb is less then £/$ 200 for one
leexgx
Legit Enthusiast
Legit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:42 am


Return to Legit Reviews Review Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests