HDD/SSD Comparison and Features

Hard Drive Specifications
Western Digital Raptor 150GB
Manufacturer's Stated Capacity 32 GB 150 GB
Operating System Stated Capacity 30.9 GB 139.73 GB
Interface SATA 1.5Gb/s SATA 1.5Gb/s
Rotational Speed n/a 10,000 RPM
Cache Size n/a 16 MB
Average Latency n/a 2.99 ms (nominal)
Read Seek Time .1 ms 4.6 ms
Number of Heads n/a 4
Number of Platters n/a 2
Power Draw Idle / Load .55W / 3.1W 9.19W / 10.02W
Acoustics Idle / Load 0 dB(A) / 0 dB(A) 35 dB(A) / 48 dB(A)
Thermals Idle / Load 25C / 26C 47C / 58C
Write/Erase Endurance >140 years at 50GB Write/Erase Cycles per Day -
Data Retention 10 years
Command Queuing n/a Native Command Queuing
Warranty 5 Years 5 Years - Retail or OEM

The MTRON MSD-SATA6025-032 features a capacity of 32GB; other sizes ranging from 4GB to 32GB are available in the 2.5" form factor and up to 128GB is available in the 3.5" form factor. The drive is marketed into the commercial, server, and industrial sectors with an emphasis placed on performance storage needs with a high degree of tolerance to environmental conditions.

The MSD-SATA6025-032 features a read seek time of less than .1ms, a maximum read speed of up to 100MB/sec, a maximum write speed of 80MB/sec, and sustained transfer rates of around 95MB/sec. The drive features a write/erase endurance of approximately 140 years at 50GB of write/erase cycles per day thanks to an exclusive controller chip design that features proprietary wear leveling and bad block management algorithms.

The MTRON drive is truly silent as indicated by the acoustics test, features a very low power envelope with load requirements being over three times less than the Western Digital Raptor drive, and excellent thermals considering our room temperature base was 25C.

Index Hardware Setup
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • mostlyprudent - Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - link

    I hope Gary's 3 year prediction is as wrong as AT's (and just about everyone else's) prediction about DDR3 speeds and latencies! I am quite impressed by what has happened in SSD technology over the last year or so.
  • AnnihilatorX - Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - link

    Well I do rip loseless audio from CDs. On some types of music I can hear differences betwween mp3 and ape

    32GB is just enough for a Windows installation plus few applications

    It's best to store multimedia files to a HDD
  • yyrkoon - Thursday, August 16, 2007 - link

    80MB/s sustained is more than enough for video editing, and I am not sure you guys understand this or not, but until now, this is the first test I have personally seen that the SSD comes this close to overall standard HDD in performance. The Raptor may peak higher, but if I am reading these benchmarks correctly, this drive is FAST. Take the sub milisecond access times, and you have something worth talking about.

    As for Windows boot times, I think if you compared this even to a Raptor, you would notice a diference in bootup times. Windows may not need much more than ~12MB/s transfers, but the very low access times will show a noticable difference. Maybe only a second or two, but in Windows boot times, this is outstanding given the current performance of all current HDDs.


    32GB is just enough for a Windows installation plus few applications

    Uh, WinXP only needs ~1.5GB-4GB for a base install, this gives plenty of room for other applications. I do not know how other people install their OSes, but this is perfect for me, since I keep all my data(important or not) on a different drive from the OS anyhow. This SSD would probably serve great as a Photoshop scratch disk as well . . .
  • GlassHouse69 - Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - link

    Windows itself doesnt need a fast drive. I load up windows 1x every 2-3 weeks. It is on 24/7. The swap file is affected, but with 2 gb of ram, dual core, xp pro, O&O defrag and no random crap programs loaded into memory unnecessarily, I never see my hd tic when I am using windows.

    Now, network transfers it can show, but that is for 1 hour here and there, maybe 3-4x a month. Really, what the fast hd is used for is encoding or decoding, compressing and uncompressing, and, most importantly, games. There you would never dream of using anything less than 100 gigs of space. So, this thing is completely useless. yay! I mean, unless you make a partition for your favorite games and another for some ripping usage, 32 gb is next to useless.

    it is a great write up though. nicely done
  • AnnihilatorX - Friday, August 17, 2007 - link

    Not entirely true

    Although Windows at run-time does not need a fast drive,
    Windows at boot-time and applications at load-time do improve a lot

    Windows startup is 2x faster on SSD
    That alone is the biggest selling point of SSD
  • Calin - Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - link

    You might want to try a quick and dirty benchmark in Linux, maybe the situation is simply related to drivers. And maybe some quick and dirty benchmarks in XP versus Vista, just to see if the Intel chipset is slower in all configurations
  • Epyon - Wednesday, August 15, 2007 - link

    Thanks for the review. Its great to have some concrete numbers to base opinions on SSDs.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now