Sign in to follow this  
Sunfox

Intel 510 SSD on X58 - ICH10R & Marvell Quick Test

Recommended Posts

I received the remainder of my system components tonight, including an Intel 510 250GB SSD which I debated long and hard before purchasing.

Before re-installing the operating system (I have been stress testing while I waited for the SSD), I just wanted to make a quick comparison between running the drive as SATA 3.0Gb/s on the ICH10R, and 6.0Gb/s on the Marvell 88SE9128 controller. The motherboard is an Intel DX58SO2 with the latest BIOS and available drivers.

I know that due to the single lane PCIe interface the Marvell controller is performance limited to below full SATA3 speeds, but it can still offer higher maximum transfer rates than SATA2. Note that on the Marvell the drive is by itself, while on ICH10R there are 5 other SATA devices - 4 HDDs and a BD drive.

510-intel.jpgIntel ICH10R

510-marvell1.jpgMarvell 9128 with Marvell Driver

510-marvell2.jpgMarvell 9128 with Microsoft Driver

In the end, these are exactly the results I expected. The Marvell is only 3.3% slower than the ICH10R, but that's after it's obvious sequential read performance advantage of 35.6%. I think which controller to use will depend on what you'll be using the drive for. If video editing or reading a lot of large files, probably the Marvell would be a better bet. For general system/program performance, probably the Intel.

Myself, I do video editing, but I also have a short-stroked RAID0 of four Seagate Barracuda XT drives on the ICH10R that can deliver up to 520MB/s for data files... so the extra read performance of the Marvell isn't likely to be that important to me. So I'll be putting the SSD on the ICH10R as well. I know with the SSD and RAID0 both on the same controller I won't be able to use both to full potential at the same time, but I just don't see any scenarios in my usage where that would be happening.

Anyways, I hope this is of some use, even if only for confirming what we already knew...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not bad. Is your 510 in a pretty clean state still? On our 510s we have noticed a small dip in write speeds. Hope to have some quick screenshots of the drives in action on our new test rigs in the next week or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, make sure you install the Intel SSD Toolbox, great little set of tools to help manage your new drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, it's pretty much new (nothing on it for those tests, and I did wipe it between tests - using the SSD toolbox).

Some interesting things I noted:

* The 510 seems to work very well on SATA2, something that I don't think can be said for all SATA3 native drives (compared to SATA2 native drives). Very balanced read/write throughput, seemingly up to the absolute maximum interface limit.

* The Marvell controller really doesn't seem to use SATA3 speeds at all for writes - even with interface limitations I would expect it to be higher than SATA2 based on what the drive itself is capable of.

* The interesting difference in read speed ramping in the 0.5 to 16kb section of the ATTO chart for Marvell versus Microsoft drivers.

* Even if SATA2 users can't make use of SATA3 drive speed, the improvement in even SATA2 write performance (versus say the X-25m or C300) could make the latest SSD generation worthwhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WoW the SATA 3 numbers are not that impressive compared to same priced vertex 3 SSD :(

Now I must reconsider what to get ;)

----

Vh/Regards

Claus - TapaTalk on my Ip4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WoW the SATA 3 numbers are not that impressive compared to same priced vertex 3 SSD :(

Now I must reconsider what to get ;)

That's not the drive's fault. That's the crappy Marvell controller's fault, and any SATA3 drive will end up with roughly the same performance.

That said my 510 failed tonight rather spectacularly (attempts to fix it only made it worse). If I have to wait 1-3 weeks for an RMA replacement from Intel (I'm at nearly 60 days, which is outside the retailer's 30 day replacement window) I will have to buy a new drive as I can't go that long without my system... so I'm kinda deciding whether to get another 510 or go for something else.

Edited by Sunfox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's not the drive's fault. That's the crappy Marvell controller's fault, and any SATA3 drive will end up with roughly the same performance.

That said my 510 failed tonight rather spectacularly (attempts to fix it only made it worse). If I have to wait 1-3 weeks for an RMA replacement from Intel (I'm at nearly 60 days, which is outside the retailer's 30 day replacement window) I will have to buy a new drive as I can't go that long without my system... so I'm kinda deciding whether to get another 510 or go for something else.

Could you describe the failure you had? We had something happen to one of our 510's and I am wondering if the symptoms were in any way similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you describe the failure you had? We had something happen to one of our 510's and I am wondering if the symptoms were in any way similar.

I started another thread on the matter. But basically on Friday it started to feel "slow", like I was on a notebook hard drive. Later my automated WHS backup failed, which usually indicates a file system error, and when I went to use it again it was slow and I had a mail program complain about a corrupt file. Checked SMART statistics, everything was fine, so I scheduled a chkdsk.

Chkdsk ran - detected 8 "unreadable file record segments". It finished stage 1 of 3, then rebooted, and did it all again. This time there were 32 bad segments, and a ton of other errors. This time Windows didn't start. Rebooted into Startup Repair, wouldn't get out of it even if I tried to force Normal or Safe mode. So I let that run for 4 hours (it says it may take an hour), gave up, tried a bunch of other things to get into Windows - nothing.

So I put it into another system - it wanted to run chkdsk on the drive but I skipped it - however the system then saw the drive as "RAW" file format and corrupt. Did a bunch of tests, SSD Toolbox read/data verification tests failed, so I tried another chkdsk and this time there were 40 bad segments and pretty much every single file on the drive reported an error of some sort (I'm talking an hour of quickly scrolling text of errors). So I wiped the partitions - worked - used SSD Toolbox to secure erase - worked - and tried to recreate a partition - failed. Right now all I can do is see the drive and access SMART/info properties. Any attempt to create a partition just hangs with the HDD LED on (rest of the system works, but the SSD hangs - if I try to read SMART it takes over 60 seconds to get a response).

Only interesting SMART statistic was 74 reallocated sectors, but that never grew during this (although I will say I could have sworn it said 73 before my first chkdsk, but I could have been wrong).

Edited by Sunfox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this