xentr_theme_editor

  • Please do not post any links until you have 3 posts as they will automatically be rejected to prevent SPAM. Many words are also blocked due to being used in SPAM Messages. Thanks!

Corsair MP500 Force 240GB & 480GB M.2 SSD Review

AkG

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
5,270
Reaction score
0
xentr_thread_starter
2016 was certainly an interesting year for anyone who was looking for a new SSD. Through their partnership called IM Flash Technologies, Intel and Micron finally followed in Samsung's footsteps and released their amazingly dense '3D' TLC NAND. Toshiba reaffirmed their commitment to creating exciting solid state drives within the OCZ brand. On the other hand, the enthusiast marketplace was virtually snubbed by most companies since everyone seemed to flesh out their mid range and entry level offerings.

In other words, it was a good time to be a mainstream consumer but not so much if you were an enthusiast looking to scratch that upgrade itch and move on to a <i>second generation</i> NVMe drive. Now granted there were some glimpses of greatness with Intel’s U.2-based SSDs, Kingston's HyperX Predator and a few other high level NVMe offerings but past those, the storage market didn’t move forward all that much from a performance standpoint.

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/intro.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

Thankfully 2017 does not appear to be following in Auld Lang Syne's footsteps and in late 2016 Corsair dropped a bombshell on the marketplace – the MP500 Force series. This new series shows that Corsair's storage division is returning to their enthusiast roots. This new powerhouse has its sights firmly set on the people looking to upgrade their existing Intel 750 (or Samsung equivalent) drive but are not entirely sold on Toshiba's RD400 series. Nor are they idea of stacking NAND 48 cells deep per layer like Samsung's latest and greatest. Let's face it; when dealing with the larger versions of the 860 Pro thermal limitation is a real possibility.

The Force series MP500 is being offered in capacities from 120GB to 480GB and boasts speeds that either meet or exceed the expectations set by the likes of OCZ’s RD400 and many other alternatives in its price bracket. The one difference is that unlike many first generation M.2 drives, this one won’t be offered with a PCIe add-in bracket option. Simply put, this is due to the fact that every current generation motherboard has an M.2 slot built in. If you need an add-in card, there are plenty available from third-party sellers.

<div align="center">
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/box_sm.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>


Arguably going for the high performance market is a great move by Corsair but the Intel 750 has proven to have stamina and staying power that few could envision when it was first released. Plus 'upstarts' like Toshiba's OCZ division and their RD400 have set the bar awfully damn high – even if the RD series is not a true successor to the workstation-orientated RevoDrive series. Mix in the fact that the MP500 does not rely upon any flavor of 3D NAND and it is pretty obvious why this new Force series flew under the radar when it was announced.

So how did Corsair go about taking on the titans of industry and do so without any flashy stunts? By going back to creating models that combine the best, highest performance NAND the industry offers with a new controller that is set to make waves – but hasn't yet. The last time Corsair tried this, the resulting Link A Media -based Neutron series was… good but never lived up to its performance <i>potential</i> and promises. This time however appears to be different as they have opted for the new PHISON PS5007.

<div align="center">
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/top_sm.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>


This is not the first time we have seen the NVMe PS5007 controller in action, and if the PNY CS2030 240GB is any indication Corsair could not have made a better choice. This controller eats high I/O demands for breakfast and then spits out low queue depth high performance for an encore.

As I mentioned a little while ago, even though the MP500 series is meant to take on the Intel 750 and other first generation NVMe drives it does not use a PCIe Add In Card (AIC) or 2.5-inch 12.5mm U.2 form-factor. Instead makes use of the much smaller M.2 2280 interface. Obviously to use the MP500 a motherboard will need a four lane PCIe enabled M.2 port but this does make things a lot easier as most modern motherboards come with an M.2 port but not necessarily have a free PCIe x4 slot let alone the rare U.2 port.

As this is a M.2 based design it should come as no surprise to see that the entire MP500 – including the 240GB and 480GB reviewed today – make use of four NAND ICs, a single DDR3L RAM cache IC (though the upcoming 960GB has two), and the PHISON controller. The only differences between the various capacity versions will be the size of the RAM cache (the 240GB makes use of 256MB, the 480GB has 512MB) and number of NAND layers that the controller has access to. All capacities will use 15nm Toshiba MLC Toggle Mode NAND 'chips'.

Before we being a deep dive into this series there are two potential issues we do need to point out. Firstly, it’s obvious the 480GB model is going to be the faster of the two capacities being tested as each of the 8 channels will have <i>four</i> layers of NAND on it, whereas the 240GB will only have two. More NAND interleaving means more performance so the smaller capacities may also suffer on the performance per dollar front.

On the positive side this amount of NAND interleaving is not possible with any 3D NAND model. Those newer 3D NAND ICs are much denser and require fewer layers to reach a given capacity point. Thus, Corsair has made a perceived handicap into a real-world benefit.

<div align="center">
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/bot_sm.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>


Oddly, within the MP500 there isn’t a heatsink for the controller or NAND which means adequate airflow is going to be critical to ensure optimum real world performance. To help – somewhat- alleviate this Corsair does use a thin metal strip 'heatsink' sandwiched between the label and heatpad. This will help equalize temperatures but as it lacks both mass and surface area it is going to be of limited value. This is a common issue with all M.2 NVMe drives but by using older NAND instead of hotter running '3D' NAND this is not an overly worrisome issue.

From a first opinion standpoint, the MP500 appears to get more right than wrong. When you combine the newer controller with higher grade NAND and in mix in a few firmware tweaks, the end result should be fantastic. Today we will see if the 240GB and 480GB MP500 Force M.2 NVMe drives can indeed live up to their asking price of $180 and $320 respectively.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xentr_thread_starter
Test System & Testing Methodology

Testing Methodology


Testing a drive is not as simple as putting together a bunch of files, dragging them onto folder on the drive in Windows and using a stopwatch to time how long the transfer takes. Rather, there are factors such as read / write speed and data burst speed to take into account. There is also the SATA controller on your motherboard and how well it works with SSDs & HDDs to think about as well. For best results you really need a dedicated hardware RAID controller w/ dedicated RAM for drives to shine. Unfortunately, most people do not have the time, inclination or monetary funds to do this. For this reason, our testbed will be a more standard motherboard with no mods or high-end gear added to it. This is to help replicate what the end-user’s experience will be like.

Even when the hardware issues are taken care of, the software itself will have a negative or positive impact on the results. As with the hardware end of things, to obtain the absolute best results you do need to tweak your OS setup. However, just like with the hardware aspect, most people are not going to do this. For this reason, a standard OS setup is used. The exception to this is for the Windows 7 load test times, where we have done our best to eliminate this issue by having the drive tested as a secondary drive, with the main drive being an Intel DC S3700 800GB Solid State Drive.

For synthetic tests, we used a combination of the ATTO Disk Benchmark, HDTach, HD Tune, Crystal Disk Benchmark, IOMeter, AS-SSD, Anvil Storage Utilities and PCMark 7.

For real world benchmarks, we timed how long a single 10GB rar file took to copy to and then from the devices. We also used 10gb of small files (from 100kb to 200MB) with a total 12,000 files in 400 subfolders.

For all testing a Asus Sabretooth TUF X99 LGA 2011-v3 motherboard was used, running Windows 7 64bit Ultimate edition. All drives were tested using either AHCI mode using Intel RST 10 drivers, or NVMHCI using Intel NVMe drivers.

All tests were run 4 times and average results are represented.

In between each test suite runs (with the exception being IOMeter which was done after every run) the drives are cleaned with either HDDerase, SaniErase or a manufacturers 'Toolbox', and then quick formatted to make sure that they were in optimum condition for the next test suite.

Processor: Core i7 5930K
Motherboard: Asus Sabretooth TUF X99
Memory: 32GB Crucial Ballistix Elite DDR4-2666
Graphics card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780
Hard Drive: Intel DC S3700 800GB, Intel P3700 800GB
Power Supply: XFX 850

SSD FIRMWARE (unless otherwise noted):

OCZ Vertex 2 100GB: 1.33
Vertex 460 240GB: 1.0
Intel 7230 240GB: L2010400
AMD R7 240GB: 1.0
Crucial MX200: MU01
Intel 750: 8EV10135
Kingston HyperX Predator 480GB: 0C34L5TA
OCZ Trion 480GB & 960GB: SAFM11.1
AData XPG SX930 240GB : 5.9E
AData SP550 240GB: O0730A
PNY CS2211: CS221016
PNY CS1311: CS131122
ZOTAC Premium Edition: SAFM01.6
Apacer AS720: PLD1130
Apacer AS330: AP121PD0
Crucial MX300 series: M0CR011
AData SU800: P0801A
PNY CS2030: CS203020
Corsair MP500 Force : E7FM202.1

Phison PS5007:
PNY CS2030 - 15nm MLC Planar NAND
Corsair MP500 Force - 15nm MLC Planar NAND

Samsung MDX controller:
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB- Custom firmware w/ 21nm Toggle Mode NAND

SandForce SF1200 controller:
OCZ Vertex 2 - ONFi 2 NAND

Marvell 9183 controller:
Plextor M6e 256GB- Custom firmware w/ 21nm Toggle Mode NAND

Marvell 1074 controller:
Crucial MX300 - Custom firmware w/ IMFT 384Gbit TLC 3D NAND

Marvell 9293 controller:
Kingston HyperX Predator - Custom firmware w/ 19nm Toggle Mode NAND

Intel X25 G3 controller:
Intel 730 - Custom firmware w/ ONFi 2 NAND

Intel NVMe G1 Controller:
Intel 750 - Customer firmware w/ MLC 20nm NAND

Phison PS3110 Controller:
Kingston HyperX Savage 240GB - 19nm Toggle Mode NAND
PNY CS2211: 15nm Toggle Mode NAND
PNY CS1311: 19nm TLC NAND
ZOTAC Premium Edition: 19nm MLC
Apacer AS330 - TLC NAND

JMicron JMF670H Controller:
AData XPG SX930 240GB - 128Gbit MLC NAND
Apacer AS720 - 128Gbit MLC NAND

SMI SM2256 Controller:
AData SP550 240GB - TLC NAND

SMI SM2258 Controller:
AData SU800 240GB - 3D TLC NAND

Special Thanks to Crucial for providing the memory for this testbed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xentr_thread_starter
Read Bandwidth / Write Performance

Read Bandwidth


<i>For this benchmark, HDTach was used. It shows the potential read speed which you are likely to experience with these hard drives. The long test was run to give a slightly more accurate picture. We don’t put much stock in Burst speed readings and thus we no longer included it. The most important number is the Average Speed number. This number will tell you what to expect from a given drive in normal, day to day operations. The higher the average the faster your entire system will seem.</i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/read.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>


Write Performance


<i>For this benchmark HD Tune Pro was used. To run the write benchmark on a drive, you must first remove all partitions from that drive and then and only then will it allow you to run this test. Unlike some other benchmarking utilities the HD Tune Pro writes across the full area of the drive, thus it easily shows any weakness a drive may have.</i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/write.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

While we do not put too much stock in sequential file performance this is nevertheless a great first impression for both the 240GB and 480GB MP500 Force series.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xentr_thread_starter
ATTO Disk Benchmark

ATTO Disk Benchmark


<i>The ATTO disk benchmark tests the drives read and write speeds using gradually larger size files. For these tests, the ATTO program was set to run from its smallest to largest value (.5KB to 8192KB) and the total length was set to 256MB. The test program then spits out an extrapolated performance figure in megabytes per second. </i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/atto_w.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/atto_r.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

As you can see both the 240GB and 480GB models post extremely good performance numbers. Thanks to the extra on-board RAM cache and better NAND interleaving the larger 480GB MP500 is able to keep up with Intel and Toshiba's top of the line, but the 240GB is no slouch. In other words, the MP500 Force may not exactly knock it out of the park but this in our books is still a home run for Corsair. Corsair really needed a great enthusiast grade drive and the MP500 Force really does live up to expectations.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xentr_thread_starter
Crystal DiskMark / PCMark 7

Crystal DiskMark


<i>Crystal DiskMark is designed to quickly test the performance of your drives. Currently, the program allows to measure sequential and random read/write speeds; and allows you to set the number of tests iterations to run. We left the number of tests at 5 and size at 100MB. </i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/cdm_w.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/cdm_r.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>


PCMark 7


<i>While there are numerous suites of tests that make up PCMark 7, only one is pertinent: the HDD Suite. The HDD Suite consists of numerous tests that try and replicate real world drive usage. Everything from how long a simulated virus scan takes to complete, to MS Vista start up time to game load time is tested in these core tests; however, we do not consider this anything other than just another suite of synthetic tests. For this reason, while each test is scored individually we have opted to include only the overall score.</i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/pcm.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

This type of performance really underscores how far the industry has come in a rather short period of time. While neither the 240GB nor the 480GB MP500 Force are chart toppers they are damn close. Considering Intel and Toshiba would never even think about sampling smaller capacity versions for review like Corsair has that does say a lot about the MP500 series performance potential.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xentr_thread_starter
AS-SSD / Anvil Storage Utilities Pro

AS-SSD


<i>AS-SSD is designed to quickly test the performance of your drives. Currently, the program allows to measure sequential and small 4K read/write speeds as well as 4K file speed at a queue depth of 6. While its primary goal is to accurately test Solid State Drives, it does equally well on all storage mediums it just takes longer to run each test as each test reads or writes 1GB of data</i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/asd_w.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/asd_r.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>


Anvil Storage Utilities Pro


<i>Much like AS-SSD, Anvil Pro was created to quickly and easily – yet accurately – test your drives. While it is still in the Beta stages it is a versatile and powerful little program. Currently it can test numerous read / write scenarios but two in particular stand out for us: 4K queue depth of 4 and 4K queue depth of 16. A queue depth of four along with 4K sectors can be equated to what most users will experience in an OS scenario while 16 depth will be encountered only by power users and the like. We have also included the 4k queue depth 1 results to help put these two other numbers in their proper perspective. All settings were left in their default states and the test size was set to 1GB.</i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/a_w.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/a_r.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

Once again, these results prove that '2D' NAND is not dead. The combination of excellent NAND interleaving with an extremely potent controller is a winning one. So much so that to get 'better' enthusiasts will have to step up to the much, much more expensive higher capacity Toshiba or Intel competition. Brilliant stuff!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xentr_thread_starter
IOMeter

IOMETER


<i>IOMeter is heavily weighted towards the server end of things, and since we here at HWC are more End User centric we will be setting and judging the results of IOMeter a little bit differently than most. To test each drive we ran 5 test runs per HDD (1,4,16,64,128 queue depth) each test having 8 parts, each part lasting 10 min w/ an additional 20 second ramp up. The 8 subparts were set to run 100% random, 80% read 20% write; testing 512b, 1k, 2k,4k,8k,16k,32k,64k size chunks of data. When each test is finished IOMeter spits out a report, in that reports each of the 8 subtests are given a score in I/Os per second. We then take these 8 numbers add them together and divide by 8. This gives us an average score for that particular queue depth that is heavily weighted for single user environments. </i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/iom.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

This is one test that really does prove that PHISON, and by extension Corsair, are handicapping the smaller capacity models by not using enough onboard RAM cache. Of course, home users will not care one whit about excellent workstation type performance but enthusiasts will. As such the 480GB model is the wiser choice. In either case both capacity versions can indeed keep up with Intel and Toshiba. Just expect the 480GB to be much better at it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xentr_thread_starter
Windows 8 / Adobe CS5 Load Time

Windows 8.1 Start Up with Boot Time A/V Scan Performance


<i>When it comes to hard drive performance there is one area that even the most oblivious user notices: how long it takes to load the Operating System. We have chosen Windows 8.1 64bit Pro as our Operating System with all 'fast boot' options disabled in the BIOS. In previous load time tests we would use the Anti-Virus splash screen as our finish line; this however is no longer the case. We have not only added in a secondary Anti-Virus to load on startup, but also an anti-malware program. We have set Super Anti-Spyware to initiate a quick scan on Windows start-up and the completion of the quick scan will be our new finish line. </i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/boot.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

Adobe CS5 Load Time


<i>Photoshop is a notoriously slow loading program under the best of circumstances, and while the latest version is actually pretty decent, when you add in a bunch of extra brushes and the such you get a really great torture test which can bring even the best of the best to their knees. Let’s see how our review unit fared in the Adobe crucible! </i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/adobe.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

These test results show the Corsair really has a winner on their hands with the MP500 Force series. Even the smaller 240GB easily plows through common day tasks and can keep up with Intel and Toshiba.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xentr_thread_starter
Firefox Performance / Real World Data Transfers

Firefox Portable Offline Performance


<i>Firefox is notorious for being slow on loading tabs in offline mode once the number of pages to be opened grows larger than a dozen or so. We can think of fewer worse case scenarios than having 100 tabs set to reload in offline mode upon Firefox startup, but this is exactly what we have done here.

By having 100 pages open in Firefox portable, setting Firefox to reload the last session upon next session start and then setting it to offline mode, we are able to easily recreate a worst case scenario. Since we are using Firefox portable all files are easily positioned in one location, making it simple to repeat the test as necessary. In order to ensure repetition, before touching the Firefox portable files, we have backed them up into a .rar file and only extracted a copy of it to the test device.</i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/ff.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>


Real World Data Transfers


<i>No matter how good a synthetic benchmark like IOMeter or PCMark is, it cannot really tell you how your hard drive will perform in “real world” situations. All of us here at Hardware Canucks strive to give you the best, most complete picture of a review item’s true capabilities and to this end we will be running timed data transfers to give you a general idea of how its performance relates to real life use. To help replicate worse case scenarios we will transfer a 10.00GB contiguous file and a folder containing 400 subfolders with a total 12,000 files varying in length from 200mb to 100kb (10.00 GB total).

Testing will include transfer to and transferring from the devices, using MS RichCopy and logging the performance of the drive. Here is what we found. </i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/copy_lg.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/copy_sm.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

Unlike many NVMe controllers on the market PHISON has tuned their controller for lower queue depth scenarios. This makes the MP500 a marvelous next generation drive for home users – even enthusiasts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
xentr_thread_starter
Partial and Full Drive Performance

Partial and Full Drive Performance


<i>While it is important to know how a drive will perform under optimal conditions, more realistic scenarios are just as important. Knowing if a solid state drive will behave differently when partially or even nearly full than when it is empty is very important information to know. To quickly and accurately show this crucial information we have first filled the drive to 50% capacity and re-tested using both synthetic and real world tests. After the completion of this we then re-test at 75% and 90% of full capacity. </i>

Synthetic Test Results

<i>For our synthetic testing we have opted for our standard PCMark 7 test.</i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/data_p.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>


Real World Results
<i>For a real world application we have opted for a modified version of our standard Windows 7 Start Up test. Unlike our standard Windows 7 image this image is based on a working system that has been upgraded numerous times of the past few years and represents an even more realistic real world test.</i>

<div align="center"><img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/MP500/data_b.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

As expected the PHISON PS5007 really starts to shine when actually used as intended – full. This series may not start out as fast as the biggest and best but its shear reliability and lack of performance drop off is fantastic.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Back
Top