SSDBoss Review Our evaluation of 600 SSD vs 840

read performance

How quickly data is read from the drive

4K Random Read, 4K Random Read Access Time and 512K Sequential Read

write performance

How quickly data is written to the drive

4K Random Write, 4K Random Write Access Time and 512K Sequential Write

real world benchmarks

How well the drive performs common tasks

Windows 7 Boot-up Time, Photoshop Lens Filter and AS SSD ISO Copy

Benchmarks

How well the drive performs on common benchmarks

PCMark Vantage and AS SSD Score

No winner declared

Too close to call

Differences What are the advantages of each

Default view of Seagate 600 SSD

Reasons to consider the
Seagate 600 SSD

Report a correction
Much faster 512K sequential write 450.09 MB/s vs 248.62 MB/s More than 80% faster 512K sequential write
Faster windows 7 boot-up time 8.1 s vs 9.3 s Around 15% faster windows 7 boot-up time
Much faster AS SSD ISO copy 422.87 MB/s vs 188.99 MB/s Around 2.2x faster AS SSD ISO copy
Front view of Samsung 840

Reasons to consider the
Samsung 840

Report a correction
Faster 4k random read 303.68 MB/s vs 225.06 MB/s Around 35% faster 4k random read
Higher capacity 250 GB vs 120 GB More than 2x higher capacity
Faster 4k random write 76.07 MB/s vs 57.79 MB/s More than 30% faster 4k random write
Lighter 53 g vs 77 g More than 30% lighter
Faster photoshop lens filter 56.1 s vs 57.9 s Around 5% faster photoshop lens filter
Lower 4k random write access time 3.29 ms vs 4.32 ms Around 25% lower 4k random write access time
Lower avg. power consumption 1.69 Watts vs 2 Watts More than 15% lower avg. power consumption

Benchmarks Real world tests of 600 SSD vs Samsung 840

4K Random Read

600 SSD
225.06 MB/s
Samsung 840
303.68 MB/s
600 SSD 840 @ ssdreview.com
Steady state performance is quite good, which means you don't have to worry as much about keeping some free space on the drive to maximize performance.
600 SSD | by techPowerUp!

4K Random Write

600 SSD
57.79 MB/s
Samsung 840
76.07 MB/s
600 SSD 840 @ ssdreview.com
Performance of the 600 Series SSD is good and roughly matches that of the (aging).
600 SSD | by techPowerUp!

Windows 7 Boot-up Time

600 SSD
8.1 s
Samsung 840
9.3 s
600 SSD 840 @ ssdreview.com
It promises to deliver good performance at reasonable cost, which is exactly what end-users need.
600 SSD | by techPowerUp!

Avg. Power Consumption

600 SSD
2 Watts
Samsung 840
1.69 Watts
600 SSD 840 @ ssdreview.com
We weren't given the same detail of specification on the non-Pro version but suffice it to say that power usage is higher than that of the Pro model.
Samsung 840 | by Legit Reviews (Nov, 2012)

4K Random Read Access Time

600 SSD
4.32 ms
Samsung 840
3.29 ms
600 SSD 840 @ ssdreview.com
Seagate has customized the firmware of the 600 SSD to better fit their requirements, so some performance differences to the Corsair Neutron are to be expected.
600 SSD | by techPowerUp!

4K Random Write Access Time

600 SSD
1.11 ms
Samsung 840
0.82 ms
600 SSD 840 @ ssdreview.com
Drives using the latest technology, like the Corsair Neutron and OCZ Vector, do much better here, but steady state performance is really a borderline test-case with more scientifical than real-life value for typical consumer workloads.
Samsung 840 | by techPowerUp!

Reviews Word on the street

600 SSD  vs Samsung 840 

9.3
9.0
While the 600 SSD is targeted at consumers, the 600 Pro is for workstation- and datacenter applications.
600 SSD

Comments

comments powered by Disqus