The Intel SSD 540s (480GB) Review

Random Read Performance

The random read test requests 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test spans the entire drive, which is filled before the test starts. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.

The random read speed of the Intel 540s is a significant improvement over both SM2256 drives and Phison S10 TLC drives, but isn't quite as fast as the MLC drives or SanDisk and Samsung TLC.

Power usage of the Intel 540s was slightly higher than the SP550, but given the performance increase their efficiency is similar and good overall.

Intel 540s 480GBADATA Premier SP550 480GBADATA XPG SX930 480GBCorsair Neutron XT 480GBCrucial BX100 500GBCrucial BX200 480GBCrucial MX100 512GBCrucial MX200 500GBCrucial MX300 750GBOCZ Trion 100 480GBOCZ Trion 150 480GBOCZ Vector 180 480GBPNY CS1311 480GBPNY CS2211 480GBSamsung 850 EVO 500GBSamsung 850 Pro 512GBSanDisk Extreme Pro 480GBSanDisk Ultra II 240GBSanDisk X400 1TBToshiba Q300 480GB

The Intel 540s drew more power and delivered more performance than the SP550 at every queue depth until QD32, where the SP550 performed slightly better.

Random Write Performance

The random write test writes 4kB blocks and tests queue depths ranging from 1 to 32. The queue depth is doubled every three minutes, for a total test duration of 18 minutes. The test is limited to a 16GB portion of the drive, and the drive is empty save for the 16GB test file. The primary score we report is an average of performances at queue depths 1, 2 and 4, as client usage typically consists mostly of low queue depth operations.

The Intel 540s shows almost double the performance on the random write test that the SM2256 drives did. This puts it well ahead of the Phison-based TLC drives and close to SanDisk's TLC drives.

The Intel 540s had relatively high power draw during the random test, but it certainly wasn't the least efficient drive.

Intel 540s 480GBADATA Premier SP550 480GBADATA XPG SX930 480GBCorsair Neutron XT 480GBCrucial BX100 500GBCrucial BX200 480GBCrucial MX100 512GBCrucial MX200 500GBCrucial MX300 750GBOCZ Trion 100 480GBOCZ Trion 150 480GBOCZ Vector 180 480GBPNY CS1311 480GBPNY CS2211 480GBSamsung 850 EVO 500GBSamsung 850 Pro 512GBSanDisk Extreme Pro 480GBSanDisk Ultra II 240GBSanDisk X400 1TBToshiba Q300 480GB

The random write performance of the Intel 540s increases moderately from QD1 to QD2 and only very slightly after that. The SM2256 drives started out slower and stayed there,  though the BX200 drew more power with higher queue depths. Most budget TLC drives show relatively little scaling with queue depth here, with a few exceptions like the OCZ Trion 150 jumping up from QD4 and QD8.