This one's going to be easy because the results really do speak for themselves. Simply put, the RealSSD C300 turned in one of the finest all-around performances we've witnessed from a solid-state drive. We're used to seeing SSDs post impressive scores in some tests but deliver sub-par or even horrendous results in others. After going over page after page of benchmark data, though, I'm hard pressed to find a definitive weakness in the C300. The drive's random-write performance with smaller transfer sizes isn't particularly inspiring, and the RealSSD falls victim to a couple of the same FC-Test file sets that create problems for other SSDs, but that's really it. Otherwise, the C300 is a monster, often leading its rivals and rarely far behind them when it's not.
I would, however, avoid using Marvell's 6Gbps 9128 controller. The C300 is plenty fast on the 3Gbps SATA controller in Intel's P55 chipset, so you don't really need the next-gen interface. Plus, the Marvell controller gives up a lot of write performance. I have doubts about whether it's treating the TRIM command properly. The RealSSD may fare better when connected to the 6Gbps SATA controller built into AMD's SB850 south bridge.
All the fuss over faster interfaces takes away from what might be the most important ingredient to the RealSSD's success: support for second-gen ONFI flash. I expect we'll see similar flash technology in drives based on the next generation of controllers from the likes of Indilinx, Intel, SandForce, and others. For now, Crucial appears to be the only game in town, and the RealSSD is making the most of that advantage.
Now I will concede that the 256GB model's $610 street price is a rather onerous pill to swallow, even if the associated cost per gigabyte compares quite favorably to other SSDs. Budget-minded folks will probably want to consider the 128GB variant, which sells for a less imposing $374, albeit with a slightly higher cost per gigabyte. That 128GB drive will be slower with writes and random reads, but I'd expect it to remain competitive overall. It should be just as fast as the 256GB model with sequential reads.
I could try to extrapolate the 128GB model's performance based on Crucial's lower performance ratings for the drive, but I'd be hesitant to make a recommendation without seeing how it fares in the real world. The 256GB model has certainly done enough to earn itself our Editor's Choice award, though. The C300 offers the best all-around performance we've seen from any consumer-grade SSD, and it does so at a competitive cost per gigabyte. If that's not Editor's Choice material, I don't know what is.
56 comments — Last by Dashak at 1:28 PM on 11/21/10
|Intel Optane SSD 900P drives deliver a big chunk of next-gen storage to desktops3D Xpoint SSDs descend from the data center||76|
|Toshiba's TR200 480GB SSD reviewedBiCS on a budget||26|
|Adata's SE730H 512GB portable SSD reviewedDurability meets next-gen speeds||6|
|The Tech Report System Guide: September 2017 editionHog heaven at the high end||100|
|Adata's SD700 portable SSD reviewed3D TLC in a rugged shell||7|
|Samsung's Portable SSD T5 reviewed64 layers on the run||12|
|Toshiba's XG5 1TB NVMe SSD reviewedA new type of 3D NAND takes the stage||12|
|Adata's Ultimate SU900 256GB SSD reviewedTwo bits per cell in three dimensions||11|
|G.Skill's DDR4-4400 kit seizes the four-module memory speed crown||19|
|Rumor: December Radeon drivers will bring a performance OSD||23|
|Intel spins up new assembly-and-test site for Coffee Lake CPUs||9|
|Deal of the day: A laptop with an i5-8250U and Pascal graphics for $680||26|
|EVGA DG-7 cases cover every base||19|
|Radeon 17.11.2 drivers take the fight to the Galactic Empire||41|
|Intel readies a family of 5G modems and talks up a storm on 28 GHz||25|
|National Fast Food Day Shortbread||19|
|OnePlus 5T stretches its screen without straining wallets||40|
|The amount of flak EA are catching for the microtransaction BS is just glorious. I doubt it'll amount to anything but EA are being investigated by the...||+24|