Details on Intel's Third-Gen SSD 25nm Refresh

Status
Not open for further replies.

gmarsack

Distinguished
Jul 25, 2009
320
0
18,780
0
I like seeing the 300/600GB capacities up there... wonder how much something like that would cost - the gross national product of a small country perhaps? Cool to see this tech advance though. :)
 

KingArcher

Distinguished
May 19, 2010
238
0
18,710
16
[citation][nom]gmarsack[/nom]I like seeing the 300/600GB capacities up there... wonder how much something like that would cost - the gross national product of a small country perhaps? Cool to see this tech advance though.[/citation]

A hand and a leg for 160/300 GB. Probably a kidney as well for the 600GB ;)
 

sstym

Distinguished
Feb 16, 2009
118
0
18,680
0
It looks like Intel's next gen controller is barely level with the current SandForce and Marvell offerings.
SandForce advertised for their next gen controller and the specs are way more impressive (I know, wait until actual benchmarking is done).

What it could mean, though, is lower priced SSD's, which is what WE NEED.
Last year, SSD prices hovered around $3 to $4 per GB. Today it's more like $2 per GB (for SandForce and Marvell anyway).

When the prices hit $1 per GB, count me in.
 

invlem

Distinguished
Jan 11, 2008
580
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]KingArcher[/nom]Why does Intel have poor write performance compared to other manufacturers?[/citation]

Very rarely do you write a lot of data sequentially on an OS drive, outside of installing new programs or copying big files. For daily operations random read/write is what you want.

This is why Intel drives, even with their lesser write performance still beat most of the other drives out there. The intel offering is known for its amasing random read/write performance.

Of course SandForce has changed the game with their chip, I suppose only benchmarks will tell which is the better option for this generation of drives.
 

Kahless01

Distinguished
Sep 14, 2009
149
13
18,695
2
would be nice to see the 80 and 160's get pushed down to lower price points and the 300/600 take their places but that will never happen. we can all still hope for 1$/1GB tho. ill keep my 80gb g2 drive for awhile longer.
 

Spanky Deluxe

Distinguished
Mar 24, 2009
515
7
18,985
0
From the Anandtech article:

"The new drive uses 25nm IMFT Flash, which means we should get roughly twice the capacity at the same price."

While that would be quite good, Intel's drives seem to be quite overpriced as it is - a 160GB drive costs £320 here, whereas you can get a 256GB for the same money. If they release a 300GB drive for the same price then it would only just be cheaper than most of the competition.

I may consider getting a 300GB drive if it comes in at under £300 to replace my 256GB Crucial drive. If they come in at under £250 then I'll snap one up right away.
 

serendipiti

Distinguished
Aug 9, 2010
152
0
18,680
0
Seems that improvements on the controller are minimum (perhaps write performance). But what performance comes from improvements on the controller and which one comes from the fact of 25nm flash. What will happen when other manufacturers (Sandforce) start using 25nm flash ?
 

scook9

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2008
826
0
18,980
0
One reason I REALLY like my Intel drives....I regularly get performance BEYOND what is advertised. As supposed to the sandforce and indilinx drives I have had where the advertised performance is only a dream

That and the size of Intel are what will keep me with them. They make very solid products. The Corsair x128 I had was extremely flaky where the intel drives are tanks
 

AMD_pitbull

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2010
132
0
18,680
0
Can't wait ti'll these drives start hitting the SSD PCI-E performance level. 540/490 Read/write? I'm game. And that's the slowest speeds on the one's for sale at Newegg. Anyone think they have any idea when these SSD's will start catching up?
 

HavoCnMe

Distinguished
Jun 3, 2009
603
0
18,990
1
Too bad the majority of folks can't afford to drop $250+ on a storage device only capable of >100GB of storage. But on a brighter note, it will bring down the cost of Intel G2 devices. JMO
 

xero9200

Distinguished
Dec 12, 2009
13
0
18,510
0
Anyone notice the increased power consumption? When active, this thing will suck twice as much power as the last generation. Sure that's still less than a hard drive, but it's not the direction we should be moving.
 
[citation][nom]komag[/nom]still no SATA 3 speed?[/citation]
It's difficult to really max out SATA 2 so, SATA 3 is not really needed yet... And some of you just HAD to have it.. lol Anyways Sandforce has announce a new SSD controller chip the will allow up to 500MB/s transfers!
It's the Sandforce 2000 series (yet to be released) Those will max out SATA 2 and make use of the extra speed SATA 3 offers.
 

theoutbound

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2010
141
0
18,680
0
A refresh of the G2 drives is certainly needed, but Intel seems to be playing catchup right now. Sandforce's 2nd gen seems to be on paper a more impressive controller. Unless Intel plans some price cuts, I think they will still be a middle of the pack SSD vendor.
 

hannibal

Distinguished
"The new drive uses 25nm IMFT Flash, which means we should get roughly twice the capacity at the same price."

Well this only means that the production cost comes down, not the actual prize / GB... These will be very expensive at first like all previous upgrades, but as HavoCnMe said above, it will pring G2 devices down for a while.
The real prize drop can be expected, when there are enough competition in 25nm SSD devices...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS