Super Talent MasterDrive SX SAM28GM25S 128GB SSD
Jul 21st, 2009 | By SimonThere’s not much to share with installation. The drive gets installed like any other and at most you may wish to obtain a 2.5″ to 3.5″ bracket for a sturdy installation. Once installed, I compared the power consumption of the Torqx to a few other SSDs and a conventional 500GB Seagate hard drive. With no surprise, the SSDs are a few watts below the conventional hard drive. It also appears that the Indilinx controller requires a few more watts than the original JMicron controller but the Torqx shows no difference between the OCZ and G.Skill Indilinx based drives.
I will be testing the Super Talent MasterDrive SX on my test bed as the primary drive with the OS installed on it. Here are my system specification:
Control
- CPU: Intel C2D Q6600 (G0 SLACR L731B434) @ 2.71 GHz
- MB: Asus P5E3-Dlx Wifi-AP Edition
- GPU: Sapphire HD 4850 X2 Catalyst
- RAM: Aeneon 2×2GB XTune DDR3-1600 (AXH860UD20-16H) @ 1800 MHz 10-10-10-30 1T
- PSU: Cooler Master Real Power Pro 850W
- CPU Cooling: Thermalright HR-01 w/ 120mm Antec Tri-Cool Fan
- PWM/NB/SB Cooling: Stock/Stock/Stock
- OS: Windows Vista x64
Hard Drives
- Super Talent 128GB MasterDrive SX (SAM28GM25S)
- Patriot Memory 64GB Torqx SSD (PFZ64GS25SSDR)
- G.Skill FM-25S2S-64GB
- Seagate Barracuda SATA 500GB 7200.11 (ST3500320AS)
To test out the drive we’ll be using DiskBench, Crystal DiskMark, SiSoft Sandra, HD Tune 3.10, ATTO, HDTach, IOMeter and Boot Timer. All benchmarks were executed 5 times and the average result was recorded. The system was reset between each benchmark.
To add a little flavour to the review, I’m going to benchmark the Super Talent MasterDrive SX twice – once when the drive has only Windows Vista and the benchmarking software installed, denoted “New” in the benchmarks, and once when the drive is completely full with files then deleted to make room for the benchmark test files. These results will be denoted “Full”. I’m doing this to see what the performance impact is once the drive is full of files.
There’s a problem with the power consumption chart. The numbers can’t be right unless you’re measuring the power consumption of the system that hosts the drives (but then that’s not clearly stated and it’s confusing)
mitrax wrote:
Sorry for the confusion, the result listed is the power consumption for the entire PC.
why are you showing the old gskill?….
why not post the top (new) drives against new ssd reviews?
also 128gb differs greatly from 64gb as cache doubles etc…
thanks
showtime wrote:
For comparison between various types of SSD’s available, not necessarily to compare different manufacturers selling the same SSD. Those numbers will be pretty much the same, it is more interesting to compare old J.Micron vs Indilinx vs Samsung for those looking to upgrade.