Western Digital SiliconEdge Blue Review: WD Enters the Consumer SSD Market
by Anand Lal Shimpi on March 3, 2010 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Storage
The Test
| CPU | Intel Core i7 965 running at 3.2GHz (Turbo & EIST Disabled) |
| Motherboard: | Intel DX58SO (Intel X58) |
| Chipset: | Intel X58 + Marvell SATA 6Gbps PCIe |
| Chipset Drivers: | Intel 9.1.1.1015 + Intel IMSM 8.9 |
| Memory: | Qimonda DDR3-1333 4 x 1GB (7-7-7-20) |
| Video Card: | eVGA GeForce GTX 285 |
| Video Drivers: | NVIDIA ForceWare 190.38 64-bit |
| Desktop Resolution: | 1920 x 1200 |
| OS: | Windows 7 x64 |
Sequential Read/Write Speed
Using the latest build of Iometer I ran a 3 minute long 2MB sequential test over the entire span of the drive. The results reported are in average MB/s over the entire test length:
Read speed is a bit lower than we're used to seeing, but at 235.7MB/s this is almost twice as fast as a VelociRaptor. In the SSD space, the SiliconEdge Blue performs like the lower end of the Indilinx drives.
Sequential write speed is again much faster than any hard drive (2.5" or 3.5"), and compared to SSDs the SiliconEdge Blue is similar to an Indilinx based drive.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
64 Comments
View All Comments
ClownBaby - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
ughh... It nice to see new entries into the market, and continually improving performance, but prices are still outrageous! When will we get some relief with truly affordable SSDs? In my mind, I'd like to see 60gb drives in the >$100 rangs.chrnochime - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
I thought the mainstream OCZ 60GB is already going for ~130 after rebate?Regardless, I have more faith in WD with its entry into SSD than any other manufacturer, except perhaps Intel. They are one of the most reliable HDD manu, and I don't see this changing with their SSD.
hybrid2d4x4 - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
Looks like yet another player in the SSD game, and despite the often cited `yay, more competition = lower prices` rhetoric, SSD`s are just not decreasing in price. Even at half the prices mentioned in the article, it wouldn`t be an improvement in value over what`s currently available... guess I`ll be sitting on the sidelines yet another year...The0ne - Monday, March 8, 2010 - link
Umm, you want competition so the MARKET could drive the prices down. Right now we have competition but the market isn't really there. As more and more consumers readily shell out hundreds of hard earn dollars for 60GB drives, the market will respond :)wwwcd - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
many money for slow devicesiFX - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
Not likeing Intel's business practices I tend to avoid their products which left OCZ which I haven't been impressed with ever. Now WD is here, an established and respected storage company. Might be time to switch to an SSD. =)TemjinGold - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
Hmm... "it just works," seems insanely overpriced, and the body is silver in color. Now what does that remind you of? :Dmedi01 - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
2$ per GB, vs 0,08$ per GB, that makes, what, one to 30?HobHayward - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
If storage size is all you care about then, yes, SSD's make no sense.However looking at performance, if speed is what counts, under certain circumstances these drives can perform 2 orders of magnitude or more faster than a traditional hdd. That's worth many times the cost difference to some people.
zhopa1 - Wednesday, March 3, 2010 - link
>>However looking at performance, if speed is what counts, under certain circumstances these drives can perform 2 orders of magnitude or more faster than a traditional hdd. That's worth many times the cost difference to some people.So basically, some people value that sometimes, in some circumstances, some SSD drives are faster... there is no useful information in your post...