if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Centon C-380 480GB SSD Review
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

By David Ramsey

Manufacturer: Centon Electronics
Product Name: C-380 Series 480GB SSD
Part Number: 480GB25S3VVS1
UPC: 731969521724
Price As Tested: $399.99 (Amazon)

Full Disclosure: Centon Electronics provided the product sample used in this article.

Centon isn’t a name many enthusiasts will know. I’d never heard of the company myself until this review sample; apparently, they’ve been in business for over 35 years manufacturing DRAM and flash memory products, and have only recently entered the consumer marketplace. The Centon C-380 480GB SSD SATA-III Solid State Drive, part of the “Enthusiast Solutions” series, is the focus of what Benchmark Reviews will be putting through our test suite.

Solid State vs Hard Disk

No matter how fast your processor, memory, or video card is, your computer will still be limited by its slowest component: the hard disk. While hard disk speed has improved tremendously since the “early days”, with large caches and 10,000RPM spindle speeds, even the fastest hard disk’s performance is glacial compared to the rest of the computer. The situation only gets worse with modern pre-emptive multitasking operating systems, where dozens of threads are running simultaneously and competing for your disk’s limited response time and bandwith.

Consider: the average time to move a high-performance hard disk’s read/write head to a new track will be less than 10ms, which seems pretty fast. But your CPU is galloping along at billions of cycles per second, and will spend a significant amount of its time just waiting for the hard disk to fulfill its last request. Hard disk performance has plateued in the last few years, running up against the physical limitations of spindle speeds, magnetic media density, and head servomotor performance. At the end of the day, disks are limited by the fact that they’re comprised of physical, moving parts.

With no moving parts, Solid State Drive technology removes this bottleneck. The difference an SSD makes to operational response times and program speeds is dramatic: while a faster video card makes your games faster, and a faster processor makes compute-bound tasks faster, Solid State Drive technology makes your entire system faster, improving initial response times by more than 450x (45,000%) for applications and Operating System software, when compared to their mechanical HDD counterparts. The biggest mistake PC hardware enthusiasts make with regard to SSD technology is grading them based on bandwidth speed alone. File transfer speeds are important, but only so long as the operational I/O performance can sustain that bandwidth under load.

Bandwidth Speed vs Operational Performance

As we’ve explained in our SSD Benchmark Tests: SATA IDE vs AHCI Mode guide, Solid State Drive performance revolves around two dynamics: bandwidth speed (MB/s) and operational performance I/O per second (IOPS). These two metrics work together, but one may bemore important than the other. Consider this analogy: bandwidth determines how much cargo a ship can transport in one voyage, and operational IOPS performance is how fast that ship moves. By understanding this and applying it to SSD storage, there is a clear importance set on each variable depending on the task at hand.

For casual users, especially those with laptop or desktop computers that have been upgraded to use an SSD, the naturally quick response time is enough to automatically improve the user experience. Bandwidth speed is important, but only to the extent that operational performance meets the minimum needs of the system. If an SSD has a very high bandwidth speed but a low operational performance, it will take longer to load applications and boot the computer into Windows than if the SSD offered a higher IOPS performance.

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Closer Look: C-380 480GB SSD
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

Centon apparently has both “Consumer Solutions” and “Enthusiast Solutions”, although what the difference is is not something you can really discern from their web site. In fact, the only information Centon’s web site has about the exact model we’re reviewing, the 480GB25S3VVS1, is generic information like the capacity (480GB), form factor (SATA 2.5), and pin count on the connectors (7+15 pin). There’s no data on performance, operational lifetime, or warranty. Centon does spec the sequential read speed at 520MB/s and the sequential write speed at 500MB/s, using the ATTO disk benchmark, and about 90K iOPS (I/O operations per second) using IOMeter.

The SSD comes in generic packaging labelled simply “Centon”. On the back of the package is a sticker with the part number. The SSD itself has a sticker denoting its series, capacity, and part number. No accessories or documentation of any kind are included.

The back of the SSD is even plainer than the front.

From the side, we can see the metal casing has standard mounting holes for 2.5″ devices. What it might take you a second to notice is that there are no screws holding the case together. Yep, it’s a snap-together case. A little prying with a small flat bladed driver is all you need to pop it open, though.

We’ve seen the Phison PS3110-S10 quad-core controller before; here’s it’s supporting 16 32GB NAND memory chips, backed up by 4Gb of DDR3-1600 Nanya cache RAM.

The reverse side of the board contains the other 8 NAND chips.

With no hardware accessories, no included software, and indeed no advertising claims, we’re left to discern the good and bad points of the Centon C-380 480GB SSD entirely on our own. And that’s what we’re going to do.

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
SSD Testing Methodology
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

Solid State Drives have traveled a long winding course to finally get where they are today. Up to this point in technology, there have been several key differences separating Solid State Drives from magnetic rotational Hard Disk Drives. While the DRAM-based buffer size on desktop HDDs has recently reached 64 MB and is ever-increasing, there is still a hefty delay in the initial response time. This is one key area in which flash-based Solid State Drives continually dominates because they lack moving parts to “get up to speed”.

When we test storage devices, the two main metrics to consider are access time and transfer rate. Simply put, access time is the time is takes the storage device to start delivering data once the request has been received, while transfer rate is how fast (megabytes per second) the data comes once the transfer operation begins. With a hard disk, data transfer cannot begin until the disk’s head servo physically moves the read/write head to the correct track. Although modern servos are very fast, in the best case you’re still looking at several milliseconds to do this, while an SSD’s access time is always under a millisecond. The disadvantage is even worse if the data isn’t all in a contiguous space on the disk, since the head will have to be repositioned on the fly, leading to more delays.

Early consumer SSDs actually had slower transfer rates than the best hard disks, although their instantaneous access times more than made up for it. The zenith of consumer hard disk performance was probably reached in 2012 with the release of the Western Digital Velociraptor 1 terabyte disk. Spinning at 10,000RPM, this disk could under ideal circumstances (i.e. a synthetic bandwidth test) reach a sequential transfer rate of over 230MB/s. Keep this figure in mind as you read this review.

SSD Testing Disclaimer

Early on in our SSD coverage, Benchmark Reviews published an article which detailed Solid State Drive Benchmark Performance Testing. The research and discussion that went into producing that article changed the way we now test SSD products. Our previous perceptions of this technology were lost on one particular difference: the wear leveling algorithm that makes data a moving target. Without conclusive linear bandwidth testing or some other method of total-capacity testing, our previous performance results were rough estimates at best.

Our test results were obtained after each SSD had been prepared using DISKPART or Sanitary Erase tools. As a word of caution, applications such as these offer immediate but temporary restoration of original ‘pristine’ performance levels. In our tests, we discovered that the maximum performance results (charted) would decay as subsequent tests were performed. SSDs attached to TRIM enabled Operating Systems will benefit from continuously refreshed performance, whereas older O/S’s will require a garbage collection (GC) tool to avoid ‘dirty NAND’ performance degradation.

It’s critically important to understand that no software for the Microsoft Windows platform can accurately measure SSD performance in a comparable fashion. Synthetic benchmark tools such as ATTO Disk Benchmark and Iometer are helpful indicators, but should not be considered the ultimate determining factor. That factor should be measured in actual user experience of real-world applications. Benchmark Reviews includes both bandwidth benchmarks and application speed tests to present a conclusive measurement of product performance.

Test System

Motherboard: ASUS P8P67 EVO (Intel P67 Sandy Bridge Platform, B3 Stepping)
Processor: Intel Core i7-2600K 3.4 GHz Quad-Core CPU
System Memory: 4GB Dual-Channel DDR3 1600MHz CL6-6-6-18
SATA 6Gb/s Storage HBA: Integrated Intel P67 Controller
- AHCI mode – Intel Rapid Storage Technology Driver 11.7.0.1013
SATA 3Gb/s Storage HBA: Integrated Intel P67 Controller
- AHCI mode – Intel Rapid Storage Technology Driver 11.7.0.1013
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Edition 64-Bit with Service Pack 1

Storage Hardware Tested

The following storage hardware has been used in our benchmark performance testing, and may be included in portions of this article:

Test Tools

AS SSD Benchmark 1.6.4067.34354: Multi-purpose speed and operational performance test
ATTO Disk Benchmark 2.46: Spot-tests static file size chunks for basic I/O bandwidth
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1a by Crystal Dew World: Sequential speed benchmark spot-tests various file size chunks
Iometer 1.1.0 (built 08-Nov-2010) by Intel Corporation: Tests IOPS performance and I/O response time
Finalwire AIDA64: Disk Benchmark component tests linear read and write bandwidth speeds
Futuremark PCMark Vantage: HDD Benchmark Suite tests real-world drive performance

Test Results Disclaimer

This article utilizes benchmark software tools to produce operational IOPS performance and bandwidth speed results. Each test was conducted in a specific fashion, and repeated for all products. These test results are not comparable to any other benchmark application, neither on this website or another, regardless of similar IOPS or MB/s terminology in the scores. The test results in this project are only intended to be compared to the other test results conducted in identical fashion for this article.

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
AS-SSD Benchmark
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

Alex Schepeljanski of Alex Intelligent Software develops the free AS SSD Benchmark utility for testing storage devices. The AS SSD Benchmark tests sequential read and write speeds, input/output operational performance, and response times.

AS-SSD Benchmark uses compressed data, so sequential file transfer speeds may be reported lower than with other tools using uncompressed data. For this reason, we will concentrate on the operational IOPS performance in this section.

Beginning with sequential transfer performance, the Centon 480GB solid state drive produced speeds up to 516.89MB/s for reads and 464.16 for writes. Both of these sequential speeds are among the fastest we’ve seen recently. But a better “load test” for the drive is AS-SSD’s 64-thread section.

480GB Centon C-380 SSD AS-SSD Results

The chart below summarizes AS-SSD 64-thread 4KB IOPS performance results among a variety of enthusiast-level SSDs. The Centon SSD comes up a little short in the write category, which is something we’ve seen with the Phison controller on this test in the past. Read performance on the other hand is very good, if not quite up to the very best drives we’ve tested.

In the next section, Benchmark Reviews tests transfer rates using ATTO Disk Benchmark.

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
ATTO Disk Benchmark
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

The ATTO Disk Benchmark program is free, and offers a comprehensive set of test variables to work with. In terms of disk performance, it measures interface transfer rates at various intervals for a user-specified length and then reports read and write speeds for these spot-tests. There are some minor improvements made to the 2.46 version of the program that allow for test lengths up to 2GB, but all of our benchmarks are conducted with 256MB total length. ATTO Disk Benchmark requires that an active partition be set on the drive being tested. Please consider the results displayed by this benchmark to be basic bandwidth speed performance indicators.

480GB C-380 SSD ATTO Benchmark Results

The 480GB model provided to Benchmark Reviews for testing produced 566 MBps maximum read speeds that plateau when the file size reaches about 64KB, and an exceptional write speed of 537 MBps peak write bandwidth that plateaus starting at about 128KB. Both of these figures handily exceed Centon’s promise of 520MB/s reads and 500MB/s writes on this benchmark; indeed, these are the highest scores Benchmark Reviews has ever recorded.

These results catapult the Centon 480GB SSD to the very top of our ATTO disk benchmark score chart, narrowly edging out the previous champion, the Samsung 850 EVO.

In the next section, Benchmark Reviews tests sequential performance using the CrystalDiskMark 3.0 software tool…

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
CrystalDiskMark 3.0 Tests
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

CrystalDiskMark 3.0 is a file transfer and operational bandwidth benchmark tool from Crystal Dew World that offers performance transfer speed results using sequential, 512KB random, and 4KB random samples. For our test results chart below, the 4KB 32-Queue Depth read and write performance was measured using a 1000MB space. CrystalDiskMark requires that an active partition be set on the drive being tested, and all drives are formatted with NTFS on the Intel P67 chipset configured to use AHCI-mode. Benchmark Reviews uses CrystalDiskMark to illustrate operational IOPS performance with multiple threads. In addition to our other tests, this benchmark allows us to determine operational bandwidth under heavy load.

CrystalDiskMark uses compressed data, so sequential file transfer speeds are reported lower than with other tools using uncompressed data. For this reason, we will concentrate on the operational IOPS performance in this section.

CrystalDiskMark 3.0 reports sequential speeds reaching 528.9 MB/s reads and 498.9 MB/s writes. 512K test results reached 382.8MB/s read and 289.6 MB/s write performance. 4K tests produced 29.75MB/s read and 90.82MB/s write performance. Overall the results on this test were quite good.

Centon C-380 SSD CrystalDiskMark Results

The chart below summarizes 4K random transfer speeds with a command queue depth of 32. The Centon 480GB drive does well, but not exceptionally, in this test, coming in above mid-pack, hampered by a relatively low write result of only 198MB/s.

In the next section, we continue our testing using Iometer to measure input/output performance…

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Iometer IOPS Performance
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

Iometer is an I/O subsystem measurement and characterization tool for single and clustered systems. Iometer does for a computer’s I/O subsystem what a dynamometer does for an engine: it measures performance under a controlled load. Iometer was originally developed by the Intel Corporation and formerly known as “Galileo”. Intel has discontinued work on Iometer, and has gifted it to the Open Source Development Lab (OSDL). There is currently a new version of Iometer in beta form, which adds several new test dimensions for SSDs.

Iometer is both a workload generator (that is, it performs I/O operations in order to stress the system) and a measurement tool (that is, it examines and records the performance of its I/O operations and their impact on the system). It can be configured to emulate the disk or network I/O load of any program or benchmark, or can be used to generate entirely synthetic I/O loads. It can generate and measure loads on single or multiple (networked) systems.

To measure random I/O response time as well as total I/O’s per second, Iometer is set to use 4KB file size chunks over a 100% random sequential distribution at a queue depth of 32 outstanding I/O’s per target. The tests are given a 50% read and 50% write distribution. While this pattern may not match traditional ‘server’ or ‘workstation’ profiles, it illustrates a single point of reference relative to our product field.

All of our SSD tests used Iometer 1.1.0 (build 08-Nov-2010) by Intel Corporation to measure IOPS performance. Iometer isconfigured to use 32 outstanding I/O’s per target and random 50/50 read/write distribution. The chart below illustrates combined random read and write IOPS over a 120-second Iometer test phase, where highest I/O total is preferred:

Centon specs this drive at 90,840 read iOPS, although our testing with that configuration produced only 54,918 iOPS. However, our standard test is based on 50% read and 50% writes, resulting in the 31,971 iOPS we recorded.

In our next section, we test linear read and write bandwidth performance and compare the speed of the ADATA SSD against several other top storage products using the AIDA64 Disk Benchmark.

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
AIDA64 Disk Benchmark
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

Many enthusiasts are familiar with the Finalwire AIDA64 benchmark suite, but very few are aware of the Disk Benchmark tool available inside the program. The AIDA64 Disk Benchmark performs linear read and write bandwidth tests on each drive, and can be configured to use file chunk sizes up to 1MB (which speeds up testing and minimizes jitter in the waveform). Because of the full sector-by-sector nature of linear testing, Benchmark Reviews endorses this method for testing SSD products, as detailed in our Solid State Drive Benchmark Performance Testing article. One of the advantages SSDs have over traditional spinning-platter hard disks is much more consistent bandwidth: hard disk bandwidth drops off as the capacity draws linear read/write speed down into the inner-portion of the disk platter. AIDA64 Disk Benchmark does not require a partition to be present for testing, so all of our benchmarks are completed prior to drive formatting.

Linear disk benchmarks are superior bandwidth speed tools in my opinion, because they scan from the first physical sector to the last. A side affect of many linear write-performance test tools is that the data is erased as it writes to every sector on the drive. Normally this isn’t an issue, but it has been shown that partition table alignment will occasionally play a role in overall SSD performance (HDDs don’t suffer this problem).

480GB Centon C-380 SSD Read Results

We run the AIDA64 linear read and write tests with a 1M block size. Charted above, read performance on the 480GB Centon C-380 SSD returned average speeds of 507.3 MB/s. Read performance was very consistent.

AIDA64 linear write-to tests were next…

480GB Centon C-380 SSD Write Results

After an initial spurt of performance as high as 487 MB/s, probably the result of caching, performance drops to a startlingly low 130.7 MB/s average. And by “startlingly low”, I mean “there are some hard disks out there that can beat this figure.”

While the linear read speeds are right at the very top of what we’ve seen before– the difference between the Centon drive and the top-performing Samsung 850 Evo is about 1%– the write speeds are much less impressive.

Linear tests are an important tool for comparing bandwidth speed between storage products, serve to highlight the consistent-bandwidth advantages of SSDs, which don’t suffer the performance drop-off that HDDs do as the test proceeds away from the fast outer edge of the disk.

In the next section we use PCMark Vantage to test real-world performance…

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
PCMark Vantage HDD Tests
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

PCMark Vantage is an objective hardware performance benchmark tool for PCs running 32- and 64-bit versions of Microsoft Windows 7. PCMark Vantage is well suited for benchmarking any type of Microsoft Windows 7 PC: from multimedia home entertainment systems and laptops, to dedicated workstations and high-end gaming rigs. Benchmark Reviews has decided to use the HDD Test Suite to demonstrate simulated real-world storage drive performance in this article.

PCMark Vantage runs eight different storage benchmarks, each with a specific purpose. Once testing is complete, results are given a PCMark score while and detailed results indicate actual transaction speeds.

Centon 480GB PCMark Vantage Individual Scores (HDD Suite)

The 4800GB C-380 SSD produced a total PCMark Vantage (secondary) HDD Test Suite score of 81216, the second highest score we’ve ever recorded.

In the next section, I share my review conclusion and final product rating.

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Centon 480GB SSD Conclusion
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

IMPORTANT: Although the rating and final score mentioned in this conclusion are made to be as objective as possible, please be advised that every author perceives these factors differently at various points in time. While we each do our best to ensure that all aspects of the product are considered, there are often times unforeseen market conditions and manufacturer changes which occur after publication that could render our rating obsolete. Please do not base any purchase solely on our conclusion, as it represents our product rating specifically for the product tested which may differ from future versions.

The Centon drive is a cipher: normally, vendors provide much more information on review items, telling us about the technology behind the product, its competitive advantages, and the kind of performance we can expect on various benchmarks and tests. The Centon drive is the closest thing we’ve seen to a black-box device: I had to ask the company for additional information such as warranty (1 year) and places where the drive can actually be purchased. That last one’s a weird one, too: Centon provided three links to online vendors carrying this drive: Newegg, Mac Mall, and CompSource. Here are the links and prices as of the time of this review:

Amazon: $399.99
Mac Mall: $279.99
CompSource: $220.00

The drive is tagged as “Enthusiast Solutions”, which implies that it’s a high performance item, and for the most part, our tests bear this implication out. It’s only on iOPS and linear writes across the entire device that the expected performance doesn’t materialize.

In fact, the AIDA64 linear write results were so striking that I re-tested another SSD to make sure I had everything set up correctly; it returned the same results I had recorded months earlier. Then I re-tested the Centon drive, and it returned the same poor write results I’d seen earlier in the day. So, I’m pretty sure the test results are valid and that I didn’t screw anything up, but this is the second SSD I’ve tested recently that fell flat on the AIDA64 Linear Write and IOMeter tests, and they’re from different vendors, use different controllers, different NAND, and different cache RAM. So: mystery.

Appearance doesn’t count for much in storage products: even if you have a windowed case, your drives probably are not visible. Centon uses a very plain black snap-together enclosure decorated only by a sticker on the front.

By their nature– no moving parts– SSDs are all but immune to physical shock. While early SSDs had relatively high failure rates, modern SSDs are proving to be very reliable, often far surpassing their specified write lifetimes. With robotically-assembled circuit boards, there’s a very high level of overall physical quality in most SSDs these days, which makes Centon’s 1-year warranty seem stingy.

It’s hard for me to rate the Centon: its overall performance is very good, and it would make an excellent upgrade from a hard disk or smaller SSD. However, even its lowest online price of $220 is much higher than the competition: major players like Intel, Mushkin, and SanDisk all offer sub-$200 480GB drives, and they also offer at least 3 year warranties and most come with utility software and accessories such as spacers or 3.5″ mounting brackets. While the Centon’s performance is competitive, its high price, short warranty, and lack of any accessories put it at a significant disadvantage in the consumer SSD market.

Pros:

+ Very good overall performance
+ Lightweight compact storage solution
+ Resistant to extreme shock impact

Cons:

– Poor AIDA64 sequential write performance
– High price, short warranty, and lack of accessories

Ratings:

Performance: 9.25
Appearance: 8.50
Construction: 8.00
Functionality: 8.00
Value: 7.00

if ($script:h1count -eq $null) { $script:h1count = 0 }
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Final Score: 8.15 out of 10.
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }

COMMENT QUESTION: Which brand of SSD do you trust most?

” } else { return $args[0].Value } Centon C-380 480GB SSD Review $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

By David Ramsey

Solid State vs Hard Disk

Bandwidth Speed vs Operational Performance

” } else { return $args[0].Value } Closer Look: C-380 480GB SSD $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” } else { return $args[0].Value } SSD Testing Methodology $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

SSD Testing Disclaimer

Test System

Storage Hardware Tested

Test Tools

Test Results Disclaimer

” } else { return $args[0].Value } AS-SSD Benchmark $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

480GB Centon C-380 SSD AS-SSD Results

” } else { return $args[0].Value } ATTO Disk Benchmark $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

480GB C-380 SSD ATTO Benchmark Results

” } else { return $args[0].Value } CrystalDiskMark 3.0 Tests $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

Centon C-380 SSD CrystalDiskMark Results

” } else { return $args[0].Value } Iometer IOPS Performance $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” } else { return $args[0].Value } AIDA64 Disk Benchmark $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

480GB Centon C-380 SSD Read Results

480GB Centon C-380 SSD Write Results

” } else { return $args[0].Value } PCMark Vantage HDD Tests $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

Centon 480GB PCMark Vantage Individual Scores (HDD Suite)

” } else { return $args[0].Value } Centon 480GB SSD Conclusion $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

Pros:

Cons:

Ratings:

” } else { return $args[0].Value } Final Score: 8.15 out of 10. $script:h1count++ if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

Related articles:

Kingston HyperX Fury RGB SSD Review

Samsung SSD 970 PRO Solid State Drive Review

Samsung SSD 970 EVO Review

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Centon C-380 480GB SSD Review
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Closer Look: C-380 480GB SSD
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
SSD Testing Methodology
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
AS-SSD Benchmark
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
ATTO Disk Benchmark
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
CrystalDiskMark 3.0 Tests
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Iometer IOPS Performance
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
AIDA64 Disk Benchmark
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
PCMark Vantage HDD Tests
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Centon 480GB SSD Conclusion
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “

” }
else { return $args[0].Value }
Final Score: 8.15 out of 10.
$script:h1count++
if ($script:h1count -eq 2) { return “