Manufacturer: Crucial Price: $ 570 US Author: Steve Date: 10/04/2010

[ Introduction ]

Today we are finally getting to check out the Crucial RealSSD C300 based on a new Marvell controller which brings SATA 6Gb/s support and some seriously impressive performance. For this review we are checking out the biggest most expensive model with the 256GB drive, and we plan to find out how it compares to leading SandForce based SSDs... Early this year memory maker Crucial announced the RealSSD C300 series, which they claimed was the world’s fastest consumer Solid-State Drive. Another bold claim made by Crucial was that this new SSD series supported the high-speed SATA 6Gb/s interface, which would enable read speeds of up to 355MB/s. At the time capacities of 128GB and 256GB in a 2.5-inch form factor were announced. Other than the impressive claimed read speeds and support for the new SATA 6Gb/s interface, little was known about the upcoming RealSSD C300 series. However it was another two months before Crucial announced shipping their new RealSSD C300 series to distributors. For the last 6 months we have been trying to get our hands on one of these new Crucial SSDs and finally we have one to show you. For the last few weeks we have had the 256GB model on hand for a battery of tests, and as we had hoped the results do not disappoint. At around $570 US the 256GB model is quite pricey, though it does work out to be just $2.22 per gigabyte which is good value by SSD standards. However for our more budget conscious readers Crucial did announce a much more affordable 64GB version on June 23rd, 2010. This smaller drive features the same incredible read throughput, though the write performance has been downgraded quite considerably. Still, at just $155 US for 64GB, this RealSSD C300 sets a high benchmark for all affordable SSD products. That said, at $2.42 per gigabyte it does cost slightly more per gigabyte when compared to the much bigger 256GB model. To date we have tested just about every kind of 2.5” desktop SSD there is, covering models featuring controllers from JMicron, Intel, Toshiba, SandForce, Samsung and Indilinx. However the Crucial RealSSD C300 features a controller that is not manufactured by any of these companies, rather this is the first time we get a glimpse at the Marvell 88SS9174-BJP2 controller. Being a new SSD series featuring a new controller, the RealSSD C300 series did have a few early bugs that needed ironing out. Initially there were a few issues with the drives TRIM support, while Crucial also had a few hiccups with their update tool. However all of this appears to be under control now, and with the latest firmware the RealSSD C300 series is a force to be reckoned with. With that being said, let’s take a closer look at the RealSSD C300 256GB model...

Table of Contents >>> Introduction <<< Crucial C300 in Detail How We Test, System Specs Benchmarks: File Copy Test Benchmarks: Real-World Applications Benchmarks: CrystalDiskMark 3.0 Benchmarks: AS SSD Benchmark Benchmarks: Atto Disk Benchmark Benchmarks: HD Tune Pro Conclusion Next Page ->

Dave P

Posted on: 10/06/2010 11:42 AM Damn I was about to buy the Intel X25-V 40GB but this changes everything. The C300 64GB is 30% more expensive but has 60% more storage and its wayyyyyyy faster! Thanks heaps for the review this was amazing timing for me.

roxstar

Posted on: 10/10/2010 09:58 AM Yeah there is no point to these SATAIII drives till the chipsets start to support them. Still the SATAII performance was amazing anyway.

Bossco

Posted on: 10/06/2010 08:39 PM These are nice drives and they are slowly becoming more affordable but even at $2ish per gig they have a long way to go.

Makaveli

Posted on: 10/06/2010 10:44 PM YOu are going to have to wait until intel releases an updated chipset with SATA 6 to test this again. Right now those marvel SATA 6 controllers are junk.

archange Posts: 9 Joined: 2010-07-22

Posted on: 10/07/2010 10:16 AM Indeed, I was really looking forward to SATA III results.

djocin

Posted on: 10/07/2010 08:34 PM I for one am glad you tested using SATA II since this is all that is relevant to me right now. Results looks great!

Euro	Posted on: 10/08/2010 06:04 AM These things look good. But how does the 64gb version perform? Anyway thanks for the review.

archange Posts: 9 Joined: 2010-07-22

Posted on: 10/08/2010 09:25 AM SandForce Announces Next-Gen SSDs, SF-2000 Capable of 500MB/s and 60K IOPS Somehow I am skeptic that they will have an incentive to max out the new SATA 6 Gbit interface in the first attempt. However, I cannot help grinning and keeping my fingers crossed. If this really happens, I would say the future is bright.