• Our team is working to address issues posting quotes or media to the forums. Please bear with us as we get this sorted out.

Intel 34-nm SSDs Officially Launched, Cheaper

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ramar

Distinguished
Apr 17, 2009
249
0
18,680
0
I'm tempted now, as 80GB for the root drive is nothing to laugh at. However, in a year I may be rethinking that purchase. =P With GTA4 at 16GB, it's a much more sound decision to wait til the 160GB is 300 dollars or lower. Maybe next year this same time or right before Christmas?
 

doomsdaydave11

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2007
935
0
18,980
0
I'm actually quite happy with my 500GB WD Caviar Black. Fast drive... sometimes even 100Mbps read speeds and 90Mbps write speeds. SSD's are clearly better in every way when compared to HDD's, but they're just astronomically expensive. If speed is what you want, money is better spent on 2 VelociRaptors in a RAID array... as long as you back up your data.
 

fulle

Distinguished
May 31, 2008
968
0
19,010
14
You know, even if price wasn't an issue (which is always is), I'd still have a hard time deciding whether I want to run my system with 2 10000RPM VelociRaptors in RAID, or to use a setup with a SSD+HDD for storage, or 2 SSD, and so on. Honestly, I'd STILL run the VelociRaptors instead, priced the same, due to the fact that the SSD's performance in my Photo Editing software would be completely unacceptable. Loading a Crysis map in 2 minutes compared to 3 isn't really compelling enough when the write speeds suck this bad. The tradeoff isn't even close to being worth it... and capacity is too low to have these drives boot programs (not to mention how annoying it would be to try to stuff 2 Raptors and a SSD into my system).

SSDs still have a ways to go before I'd consider them useful. As is, they'd have to be LESS money than some of the higher end HDDs for me to consider... and given those are around $1.3 for Gigabyte... I agree with The_Blood_Raven. These drives would need to be priced at roughly $1 per gigabyte for me to be interested. As ridiculous as that might sound to some...
 

doomtomb

Distinguished
May 12, 2009
810
0
18,980
0
I might be willing to drop the bank for SSDs soon as they are $2 to 1GB but the golden day will be $1 to 1GB. Still too expensive these days for my OS + programs in a RAID-0 configuration :/
 

hillarymakesmecry

Distinguished
Feb 24, 2009
448
0
18,780
0
So as consumers we won't really have any idea if we're buying an x25 50nm or 34 nm? I hope they spell it out on the box. Otherwise you might be getting one that's slower and uses more power.

Cheers for the price drop! I only pay $100 for my HD's though and my old 74gb raptor is still running strong. Keep bringing those prices down!
 

Hanin33

Distinguished
Feb 13, 2009
388
0
18,780
0
when comparing speed and performance... why compare these hy priced and 'advanced' SSDs to sata drives? why not to SAS drives of the 15k rpm variety? the pricing would tend to come out the same for SAS drives and the controller price is a 1-time hit that can carry over to future systems... so how do these SSDs compare to something meant to perform, SAS 15k rpm drives?
 

rcpratt

Distinguished
Jun 30, 2009
71
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]hillarymakesmecry[/nom]So as consumers we won't really have any idea if we're buying an x25 50nm or 34 nm? I hope they spell it out on the box. Otherwise you might be getting one that's slower and uses more power.Cheers for the price drop! I only pay $100 for my HD's though and my old 74gb raptor is still running strong. Keep bringing those prices down![/citation]
The new drives have a different part number. At newegg, both Intel X25-M models are listed as either unavailable or sold out. I expect they have been draining their stock for the past few weeks and will explicitly list the new drives soon.
 

anamaniac

Distinguished
Jan 7, 2009
2,447
0
19,790
1
I still use a 80 gig HDD (with a second 250 gig), so using a 80 gig such as that wouldn't be bad.

Sexy, actually a decent price, and great performance. Who doesn't want one? SSD's should hit the consumer market heavily soon if this rate keeps up.
 

rockyjohn

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2006
2,813
0
20,960
74
These are getting pretty to close to the price I will buy at. The prices for some of the other maufacturers are there now - they just need to clean up some of the performance issues.

I am just wondering why Seagate and WD have not come forward with their entries yet - I hope it means they will have something big price/performance wise when they do announce.
 

jwl3

Distinguished
Mar 15, 2008
341
0
18,780
0
Considering that 4 years ago, I bought a 74GB Raptor for the same price premium over an equivalent cheaper slower HD, I will definitely be buying an X25M, which would give me so much more of a performance step up than my Raptor did back then.

The Raptor was maybe 20% faster than a regular hd whereas this thing should be at least 200% faster.
 

Area51

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2008
95
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]Hanin33[/nom]when comparing speed and performance... why compare these hy priced and 'advanced' SSDs to sata drives? why not to SAS drives of the 15k rpm variety? the pricing would tend to come out the same for SAS drives and the controller price is a 1-time hit that can carry over to future systems... so how do these SSDs compare to something meant to perform, SAS 15k rpm drives?[/citation]

Well the best a SAS drive can do is about 150 IOPS while the Intel SSD's can get up to 36000 read and about 6000 Writes. Also the latency is almost none existence and they do draw significantly less power. Also you can use the ICH that is almost in every device to achieve a great RAID config without paying for an expansive controller.
 

Hanin33

Distinguished
Feb 13, 2009
388
0
18,780
0
[citation][nom]Area51[/nom]Well the best a SAS drive can do is about 150 IOPS while the Intel SSD's can get up to 36000 read and about 6000 Writes. Also the latency is almost none existence and they do draw significantly less power. Also you can use the ICH that is almost in every device to achieve a great RAID config without paying for an expansive controller.[/citation]

your numbers are highly exaggerated... there's a reason why commercial and industrial workstation installations still use SCSI and SAS over SATA and SSDs...
 

cdillon

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2009
55
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]Hanin33[/nom]your numbers are highly exaggerated... there's a reason why commercial and industrial workstation installations still use SCSI and SAS over SATA and SSDs...[/citation]

Wrong. The reason that mid to high-end servers and workstations still use SCSI (including SAS and FC) has nothing to do with performance figures, exaggerated or not. You can get fast or slow drives using any interface. The SCSI protocol has RAS (Reliability, Availability, Serviceability) features that the SATA protocol lacks. That is the only reason that SATA drives of any kind, SSD or otherwise, aren't used in mid to high-end servers and workstations. And yes, SAS SSDs do exist, check out the STEC ZeusIOPS line of SAS and FibreChannel(!) SSD drives. If you think these Intel SSDs are expensive, though, check those STEC drives out. Make sure you're sitting down, first, don't want you to hit your head when you faint after you see the price.
 

Shnur

Distinguished
Mar 9, 2009
169
0
18,680
0
I was exactly shopping for an SSD, I'll still have a 500GB and 1TB drive to back me up with the data storage.
For the first time their "Extreme" label doesn't mean 5x price premium
 
G

Guest

Guest
Battery life will surely be affected by the smaller die too!
How's the price difference to the older 50nm models?
 

radguy

Distinguished
Jan 25, 2008
223
0
18,680
0
I think this is really good news. This will probably the spur the next big drop in ssd prices. Lets face it since the vertex hit the market prices have been pretty stable in the ssd world. With this release the indilinx controller drives are all overpriced.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS