E4200 128GB SSD Speed?

Does anybody have HD Tune or HD Tach benchmark for 1.8" 128GB SSD that comes in E4200 ?

I originally ordered refurbished E4200 with 64 GB SSD because I read it has better performance compared to 128GB model, but canceled the order because I realiezed 4 cell battery might be too small and the one I ordered does not come with fingerprint reader and bluetooth.

I ordered another one with 128GB SSD, fingerprint reader, 6 cell battery and bluetooth for just $40 more. (at cost of a little slower processor and no DVD-RW and latitude on capability )

I found HD Tune bechmark result for 64GB SSD, but I don't see benchmark for 128GB model.

I will be great if someone with 128GB SSD post HD Tune benchmark or at least post its modem number so I can read specifications.

R173J Module,Solid State Drive,128G S2,Thin Micro Sata,Samsung,XLO

This is what it says on my order, which is not very helpful in figure out what this SSD really is, other than its samsung model.

 

Probably an RBX MLC. I don't think they make the PB22-J in 1.8" yet. It's not that fast, but fast enough such that you won't notice much difference between it and say, an X25-M. You should see speeds along these lines...

If it's somehow a 1.8" PB22-J derivative, you'll see faster sequential speeds, but a tad slower random write speeds.

 

This is the datasheet for the older SSD and this is the datasheet for the PB22-J, which appears to be available in 1.8" and slim versions.

John

 

I received E4200 today, and ran HD Tune. Result is not so impressive.



The part number is:
MMCQE28GTMUP-MVAD1

Model name is: Thin 128GB uSATA MLC.

This drive is not much better than a HDD.

 

It's an RBX MLC, and those are fairly typical speeds. It's much better than an HDD, but HDTune doesn't tell you anything about random reads and writes, so you don't really see anything. Try running CrystalDiskMark on a standard 1.8" HDD and on your SSD, and you'll see the difference.

 

It may be much better than 1.8" HDD, but not when compared to 2.5" HDD.

I found specification for this SSD, and it says

Formatted Int Transfer Rate (read) 90 MBytes/sec
Formatted Int Transfer Rate (write) 70 MBytes/sec
​

HDTune benchmark I did is far slower than this. Is this normal?

* EDIT *
I tested with CrystalDiskMark as you suggested, it seems to be showing correct speed now. getting about 90MB/s read and 65MB/s write.

Do you know if this drive supports trim ?

 

It is also much better than 2.5" HDDs. It is also much better than 3.5" HDDs. Hell, I'm using these drives in my desktops. Nowadays, you've got desktop drives doing 100MB/s sequential, but sequential throughput is rarely a bottleneck. If you ran CrystalDiskMark, you should have seen that the random read/write speeds are significantly faster than those of conventional hard drives. If I'm not convincing enough... well, to each his own

HDTune is giving slower speeds, but HDTune just doesn't like a lot of SSDs. Sometimes it reads lower speeds and sometimes it reads higher speeds. HDTune is meant to depict the sequential read/write curves of conventional hard drives; it is NOT a good SSD benchmark.

The drive does not support TRIM, but the degradation over time isn't that bad.

 

Well I guess random access speed is what really matters under normal use.

I was thinking of installing Windows 7 for trim, but if this SSD doesn't support trim, guess there really is no reason for me to move on to Windows 7 yet.

I installed Windows 7 on my desktop, but had some compatibility issues. Gonna wait about half a year before trying again.

 

That 0.4ms access time makes a big difference compared with a HDD. People reckon that they can tell the difference between 7200rpm and 5400rpm HDDs due to the former's quicker access time (~12ms campared with ~17ms), but the SSD is in a different league.

John

 

Hello someone can tell me if there is any update to add trim function to the old samsung ssd ?

i mean this one :

Thin 128GB uSATA MLC

MMCQE28GTMUP-MVAD1 RBX MLC

Thx in advance!!