Quote:
Originally Posted by error-id10t 
My 4k read comment applies to ALL SSDs, they've increased speeds everywhere except there. True, some are slightly faster but they ALL still suck at 4k reads. One of the review sites mentioned they saw improvements in speeds after using it after awhile so keep an eye on that and of course Crucial may be bring a firmware out that speeds it up (most usually do).
My 4k read comment applies to ALL SSDs, they've increased speeds everywhere except there. True, some are slightly faster but they ALL still suck at 4k reads. One of the review sites mentioned they saw improvements in speeds after using it after awhile so keep an eye on that and of course Crucial may be bring a firmware out that speeds it up (most usually do).
I basically agree about the 4K read speeds not increasing much, but there are exceptions. AS SSD is not the only benchmark that matters, it you check SSD reviews at Anandtech, that use IOmeter among others, 4K reads have improved. It's curious that the best AS SSD 4K read score, until recently, was given by the Crucial C300 SSD, in the low +30MB/s range. That was not surpassed until the Samsung 840 Pro hit 37-38MB/s in AS SSD 4K read speed.
The C300 could reach over 30MB/s 4K read speeds in AS SSD, with ONFI 1.0 NAND (100-133MB/s NAND speed), with one of the first SATA III SSD controllers. If newer SSDs with faster NAND and better controllers cannot surpass or even equal it, that implies the firmware was coded to trade 4K read speed for something else, IMO. Is SSD firmware biased for high sequential (marketing) speeds?
