Fastest Client SSD: Micron RealSSD C300 vs. Leading Competitor

Watch as Microns® RealSSD C300 posts better performance numbers than any client SSD currently available on the market.
In this performance test, Microns Justin Sykes runs standard benchmarking tools (PCMark Vantages disk suite and the classic disk benchmark ATTO) on identical systems. The only difference: a 256GB Micron RealSSD C300 in one system and the leading competitors 160GB SSD in the other.

System Details
MoBo: Intel® X48 chipset based
Processor: Intel Core2Duo E8500
Memory: Micron® 2GB DDR3 1066 (PC3-8500)

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• SSD
• Solid State Drive
• Micron
• Micron Technology
• C300
• Justin Sykes
• RealSSD

[uktech]

I noticed you did not mention the brand you are comparing this drive against. What's the point of even showing the comparison? For all we know you could be putting that drive up against some cheap Kingmax SSD. Do a comparison against a OCZ Vertex Turbo 120GB or an ExtremeFFS Sandisk SSD. If your drive is quicker than both those two, you have a valid arguement. Until then this is not a very professional marketing video.

[MrBigglessworth]

LOL,"competitor" drive. Drop some names, lets see what you stacked it up against.

Pepsi isnt afraid to mention Coke in its ads.

[ajstone918]

@ferasu at the time of this video, the c300 was the only Sata 6Gb/s drive on the market...and the competitor is obvious to anyone who has been following SSDs for more than just a few months...

[clubuptime]

I've got these cards in our corporate web servers now -- absolutely friggin amazing cards. We're seeing pretty much identical results to what they're showing in the video for the 3gbps interface. Our servers use Adaptec 5405Z Cards, so no 6gbps :(

[26psyside]

hahah judging by the write speed, the competitor SSD is Intel for sure. Now toss an Vertex2 in the test and then chek the results.

Or even better try to install some heavy programs like Autocad, Arhicad, PS or anything big and lets see who will end it faster!

[ManuPowers]

To everyone complaining about the unfairness of the comparison, yes it unfair, but although it legal in the US to mention the competitors product provided that the product is depicted accurately, the advertisement unfortunately would not be allowed to mention the name of the competitor without some risk being involved due to trade libel consideration.

At the time this was only 6Gb/s ssd on the market so the purpose was to emphiseze its full potential against the competitors full potential.

[ManuPowers]

To everyone complaining about the unfairness of the comparison, yes it unfair, but although it legal in the US to mention the competitors product provided that the product is depicted accurately, the advertisement unfortunately would not be allowed to mention the name of the competitor without some risk being involved due to trade libel consideration.

[ferasu]

two things need to be mentioned:

1- You do need to mention what brand/model you are comparing with.

2- If you want to compare two things regardless you always need to run both at fullest potential meaning SATA III, unless you can't find a mobo that supports it?

[Schlong112]

Ahh I see what he did. I don't think he's including SSDs which aren't "client targeted". That really doesn't mean anything though, as the majority of them don't fit into this imaginary categorization.

[Schlong112]

umm, there are SSDs out there with over 7 times the sustained write speed as this. What competitors are they talking about exactly? 155 MBs sustained is not even close to the fastest SSD on the market. Please tell us who is the "competitor". I think this man is a liar, hehe.

[mobbindag]

@mobbindag *model