Intel 320 G3 slower than X25-M G2?

[Reckie]

Anyone else noticed that the G3 seems to get lower test values in AS SSD than the G2?

The G3 is much faster in Sequential write but thats about it, infact the total score seems to be less than the G2, how come?

I havent been able to compare tests done on the same rig but seen several screenshots and it all points in one direction.

So, whats best for a normal user?
The G3's Sequential performance the G2's 4K?

 

[Zap]

What would be faster?

50MB/s sequential with 100,000 IOPS

500MB/s sequential with 1,000 IOPS

Obviously the answer for those who want balanced performance is somewhere in the middle. Looks as if Intel has been tweaking the numbers striving to find the perfect balance.

AnandTech's Intel 320 SSD review

Not using AS SSD, but IOMeter, the 320 beats the G2 in everything, read and write, sequential and random.

In Storage Bench Heavy Workload, the G2 beats the 320 in two out of six benchmarks. However, when the G2 "wins" it is by a tiny bit. Some of the 320 wins are by huge margins. The Light Workload is an exact repeat, with two G2 wins by tiny margins and 320 wins by larger margins.

AnandTech does use AS SSD for sequential incompressible data reads/writes, and the 320 beats the G2 all around. Indeed the G2 was infamous for low sequential write speeds and the 320 beats it by double the score.

In PCMark Vantage, the 320 beats the G2 in everything. EVERYTHING! (with apologies to The Professional)

Same in SYSMark 2007, 320 beats G2 in everything.

Same in the older AT Storage Bench, 320 beats G2 in everything.

Note that all the benchmarks except for AS SSD and IOMeter are trying to re-create what a user can expect from real-world usage of the drives. AS SSD and IOMeter are just synthetic benchmarks that gives a nice clean number.

This isn't surprising as the 320 is just an updated G2, so it is basically the same or better.

I, for one, would take a 320 over a G2 any day of the week, and twice on Sundays.

 

[Reckie]

Thanks for the explanation regardig the AS SSD being synthetic and not a indicator of real usage.

Did Anantech get more versions to test other than the fastest 300Gb model? If not its not strange at all if it beats the 160 G2 with a figure of twice the Sequential Write speed.

Comparing the G2 and G3 in the same size is the way to go and the G3 would then get a Seq.Write of around 165Mb/s instead of the 205Mb/s of the 300Gb version. Its still much faster than the 105Mb/s of the 160Gb G2 but not twice the speed.

If anyone is still curious this is a result from a G2 160Gb running the latest firmware and the total score of 469 seems to be much higher than what the G3 160Gb currently scores? Havent seen a G3 160Gb get past 390 yet which is a bit odd, aint it?