Ummmmm... Well the 120GB max iops AS-SSD (incompressible) sequentials are 516 reads & 250 writes... ...vs (again) 510/180 for the 128GB M4. Then the M4 is 50MB/s faster for QD64 4K reads & 50MB/s slower for writes (if you actually use that high a QD for anything - OS & general app QD tend to be 3-7 or so it's not a useful figure). & the the M4 is 3MB/s quicker for QD1 4K reads & 23MB/s slower for writes (which again isn't a useful figure). Now, what you then have to remember is that this is the *worst case scenario* for this SF drive &, unless you're going to be using 99.9% incompressible files on your SSD, they're completely unrealistic - even though you're completely incorrect & the drives trade places 'if' we pretended that these numbers meant something for an OS/apps/games drive. [NB similarly, 100% compressible r/w scores from atto are unrealistic.] if, instead, we look at some 'slightly' more meaningful data from Anandtech (which i've linked to at least once or twice before) then it's clear that on either a heavy or light workload, the M4 is significantly weaker as a drive... Of course noting that both the 128GB M4 & the 120GB 510 lose much of their write speed vs the 256/250GB drives tested, whereas there's minimal difference between the 240GB & 120GB max iops (as shown here & here - obviously looking at the 6Gb/s figures & ignoring the M4 ones as it's the pre 0009 f/w) - which increases the difference in both tests. Otherwise, just to be clear, the Octane uses an indilinx controller.