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 Neutron XTi 480GB SSD Review

SKYMTL

HardwareCanuck Review Editor
Staff member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
12,840
Reaction score
3
Location
Montreal
xentr_thread_starter
For the past little while Corsair has been rather quiet on the solid state drive front. Part of this is because the Link-A Media Device (LAMD) controller never caught on with consumers the way they had hoped - despite being highly lauded by reviewers - and part of it is because SandForce is now a division of Seagate, which appears to have very little desire to 'share' controllers. Also, up until fairly recently, there was also some difficulty in obtaining cutting-edge NAND at a profitable price point. Thankfully, Toshiba has stepped up in this regard.

This is not to say that Corsair has given up or left the SSD marketplace, instead they have simply focused on providing the most competitive SSD that they could and that was worth having a Corsair name on it. The result of this inward focus is the all-new Neutron XTi series. The Neutron series may no longer be powered by a LAMD controller, but that is not to say that this is a model intended for the budget or entry-level crowd. Rather, the opposite is true as the Neutron XTi is meant to compete against the Crucial MX300, Toshiba OCZ VX500, and other top-notch mainstream/enthusiast grade drives.

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

That certainly is a tall order as Corsair does not 'own' a controller design company, nor are they backstopped by a NAND manufacturer. Make no mistake though, this new model is a serious competitor at a serious price point. The 480GB model that we will be looking at has an online asking price of $180 (or 38 cents per GB) and comes with Corsair's legendary 5-year warranty. On the performance front, with an IOPS rating of 100K/90K, this is new series promises to be as potent as its new – and bold – red color scheme suggests!

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


So how have Corsair done this? They have done it by rethinking every part of the design process, and learning from other companies. Since Corsair were in no rush to enter the fray, they have sat back and learned from other 'early adopter' manufacturers and then put this priceless knowledge to good use. For example, they have not jumped on the 3D NAND bandwagon, and have instead opted for tried-and-true 128Gbit Toshiba 15nm Toggle Mode NAND, just like the Toshiba OCZ VX500. This planar '2D' NAND is arguably the best NAND available right now in mass quantities. and has powered <i>many</i> excellent mainstream options since it became widely available.

Perhaps the best example of thinking outside the box is the controller/RAM combination that powers this fiery SSD. To be specific Corsair have opted for the quad-core eight-channel PHISON S10 controller. This controller is well-known, and has garnered one hell of a reputation for both its short-term and long-term performance abilities. However, unlike other manufacturers that rely on this stellar controller, Corsair made an interesting observation: the amount of RAM that PHISON says should be paired with the S10 controller can actually bottleneck its performance! That is why Corsair has <i>doubled</i> the amount of onboard RAM. This combination of excellent NAND and a proven controller tweaked to perfection is precisely how Corsair intended to make up for lost time and lost to the Crucial MX and OCZ VX juggernauts.

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


Further helping differentiate the Neutron XTi as a unique model is the chassis that Corsair has opted for, which is not nude silver, nor basic black, and harkens back to the old days when manufactures actually cared about how the case of the SSD looked. Specifically, this 7mm 2.5" form-factor drive is drop dead gorgeous and even comes with a <i>red</i> adapter bracket. To be honest, this drive looks fast even when sitting on a desk next to a system. The only minor nitpick is that Corsair did not included a 3.5" adapter (preferably in red), but they do include a free copy of Acronis True Image HD so that does help make up for this minor misstep.

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


Internally, Corsair have gone with a clean dual-sided layout on a half-length PCB. While we would have preferred to have seen a full-length PCB with 16 lower density NAND ICs for reduced NAND operating temperatures, the NAND interleaving in this higher density eight IC design is the same and is pretty decent for an eight lane controller. The only nitpick is neither the NAND ICs, nor the controller (or even the RAM) are covered in heat pads. This is a touch disappointing and a missed opportunity, we will see whether it affects performance.

<div align="center">
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/Neutron_XTi/open2_sm.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
</div>


As mentioned above, Corsair have doubled the RAM capacity to a whopping <i>one gigabyte</i> via two 512MB Nanya-branded ICs. This RAM is not only cavernous in its capacity, but also fast clocking in at DDR3-1600 speeds.

The one main area we would have liked to have seen improved was in the data loss protection side of the equation. Instead of improving upon the stock PHISON models, and using as many onboard capacitors as Crucial does, Corsair have decided to simply rely on the PHISON S10's built-in data loss abilities. Basically, this level of protection is similar to how Toshiba and their OCZ VX500 does things and is mainly firmware based. As such, it is a good backup, but does not reach the Crucial MX and Intel 5 or 7 series way of doing things. Hopefully, Corsair listens to criticism and future designs will improve upon the 'good enough' stock way of implementing data loss protection. In the meantime, it is better than nothing, and it will protect precious data in most common scenarios. However, if physical data loss protection is important to you, we still prefer Intel and Crucial's overkill method to PHISON's merely adequate method.
 
Last edited:
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
Corisair XTi: SAFC02.3

Toshiba TC58 controller:
OCZ Trion 480GB & 960GB - Custom firmware w/ 19nm Toggle Mode TLC 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

Special Thanks to Crucial for providing the memory for this testbed.
 
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 feel.</i>

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

While the difference may not be massive, the Neutron XTi is the fastest PHISON S10-based solid state drive tested to date. Hopefully, this is the beginning of a very nice trend for this model.
 
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/Neutron_XTi/atto_r.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

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

For a drive that rests on the more budget-oriented end of the spectrum, these performance results are damn impressive. Clearly, the combination of excellent NAND with a massive amount of onboard RAM does make a noticeable performance impact. Of course, ATTO is a synthetic benchmark that we consider to be a softball test suite, so while this is nice to see it still is not telling us all that much. All these results are doing is backing up Corsair's claims that the RAM does make a difference. Let's see if this tweak really does make the PHISON S10 controller shine in harder synthetic tests.
 
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 us to measure sequential and random read/write speeds, and also allows us to set the number of tests iterations to run. We left the number of tests at 5 and the size at 100MB. </i>

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

Once again, the Corsair Neutron XTi is posting results which are not in line with what we have come to expect from the PHISON S10 controller. Looking closer, both the single and deep queue depths results are bloody impressive, and this model gives enthusiast-grade drives a real run for their money… as it should for $180!
 
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/Neutron_XTi/asd_r.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
</div>
<div align="center">
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/Neutron_XTi/asd_w.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/Neutron_XTi/anvil_r.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
</div>
<div align="center">
<img src="http://images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/akg/Storage/Neutron_XTi/anvil_w.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
</div>


These results just underscore the fact that Corsair were indeed correct. PHISON's recommendation regarding the onboard RAM amount was clearly not enough. Considering how cheap RAM is this is rather puzzling, but kudos to Corsair for finding this issue and correcting it - as these results are much better than what we have come to expect from the PHISON S10 controller.
 
xentr_thread_starter
IOMeter

IOMETER


<i>IOMeter is heavily weighted towards the server side 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/SSD (1, 4, 16, 64, 128 queue depth) each test having 8 parts, each part lasting 10 min with 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 report 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 them 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/Neutron_XTi/iom.jpg" border="0" alt="" />
</div>


If nothing else, these results exemplify the excellent R&D that Corsair put into this new Neutron model. Simply put, this drive does not bog down nearly half as much as other PHISON-based models, even those using excellent Toggle Mode NAND. Brilliant stuff.
 
xentr_thread_starter
Windows 8.1 / 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/Neutron_XTi/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/Neutron_XTi/adobe.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

Now that we turn our attention to more real-world oriented testing, the Neutron XTi proves that it is more than just a synthetic benchmark drive. This drive is rather peppy and does squeeze noticeably better performance results from an already good controller.

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

As these results highlight, this model definitely performs more closely to what we have come to expect from higher-end solid state drives. Clearly, it is a rather potent drive that can – somewhat – justify its rather high per-gigabyte asking price.
 
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/Neutron_XTi/data_pcm.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/Neutron_XTi/data_pcm.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></div>

As you can see, this drive not only starts out fast, but it stays fast too. This once again is all thanks to that extra RAM buffer, which allows the dedicated core to more efficiently keep the NAND ready for I/O requests.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top