Home  |  News  |  Reviews  | About Search :  HardWare.fr 



MiscellaneousStorageGraphics CardsMotherboardsProcessors
Advertise on BeHardware.com
Review index:
Crucial M4 vs Crucial C300 at 64 GB, 128 GB and 256 GB
by Marc Prieur
Published on June 24, 2011

Test protocol
For this test we used the protocol set up for our latest SSD 2011 report that compared the Crucial M4s, OCZ Vertex 3s and Intel SSD Series 510 and 320 models. For more on the protocol we refer you to this page of the report.
Sequential speeds
We started the tests with sequential writes, measured using IOMeter. We tested accesses by 2 MB blocks, in reads and writes. As we have in the other pages of the report, we’ve chosen to display several performance graphs that can be consulted by moving the mouse over the links situated beneath the graph. Here you can view performances on an SATA 6 Gbps port and on an SATA 3 Gbps port.


[ SATA 6G ]  [ SATA 3G ]

As with the C300 range, read performance is fairly similar across the range of M4s whatever their capacity, with the gain on the previous generation varying between 19 and 24%. Write speeds on the other hand vary greatly according to capacity. The gains from the C300 and the M4 are significant, particularly for the low capacity models:

- 64 GB: +44%
- 128 GB: +33%
- 256 GB: +22%

While sequential writes are not the most important area for a 64 GB storage device, improvement of what was the only weak point on the C300 is definitely a positive. Using an SATA 3G interface strongly limits read performance, which drops to around 263-272 MB/s. In writes the impact is notable even on the C300 256, M4 128 and 256 MB models although these SSDs are far from saturating the theoretical bandwidth of the 300 MB/s interface.

<< Previous page
The Crucial M4 range

Page index
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
Next page >>
Random accesses  




Copyright © 1997- Hardware.fr SARL. All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines.