Intel Releases SSD Toolbox 3.0 Software

[tecmo34]

Intel has released an updated version to the Intel SSD Toolbox (Version 3.0) for use by Intel SSD users.

Intel Releases SSD Toolbox 3.0 Software : Read more

 

[joe nate]

Very nice. After updating my firmware I installed Intel SSD Toolbox 3.0. Still says my drive is at 100% estimated life remaining. I rarely ever think to check for updates, so thanks to tom's hardware, I did!

 

[alyoshka]

Yeah, I updated mine 2 days ago...... works like a wonder and looks better, even feels better. The Firmware Update tabs cool.Nice...
Overall a very nice updated tool.

 

[Lutfij]

hmmm - after reading this i'm definitely going to wait out for lower priced SSD's that have a good life expectancy.

 

[jimmysmitty]

Nice. Glad to see this.

 

[mrkdilkington]

This is why I only buy Intel SSD's. Secure Erase is so easy with the toolbox; on other brands it's a lengthier process involving Linux distributions or HDDErase that never seems to work with your chipset.

 

[joe nate]

[citation][nom]Lutfij[/nom]hmmm - after reading this i'm definitely going to wait out for lower priced SSD's that have a good life expectancy.[/citation]

I have had my Intel SSDs for 2 years now. I do everything you're supposed to (disable superfetch, don't defrag, etc) and the tool reports still 100% Estimated life remaining (and 100% drive health). I turn on and use my computer for 3-5 hours and turn off my computer daily.

Just fyi. Just because the tool has the ability to measure it, doesn't mean the expected life is low. In fact Intel was the first brand to make an SSD that did everything right when it comes to SSDs. From power consumption, to read/write speeds, to life expectancy to supporting TRIM. They did it right from the start. Other brands had to deal with the faulty/buggy jmicron controller that ruined products that could have otherwise succeeded.

 

[nikorr]

Intel does a good job for their SSD's.

 

[spazoid]

[citation][nom]Lutfij[/nom]hmmm - after reading this i'm definitely going to wait out for lower priced SSD's that have a good life expectancy.[/citation]

What? You make no sense whatsoever. After reading about an updated piece of software for monitoring and performing maintenance on an SSD, you're going to wait for cheaper SSD's? How are those two related?

 

[Guest]

mrkdilkington: If the others are a lengthier process, that would tend to indicate that Intel isn't really erasing anything, at least not securely. There are 1,000,000+ tools out there that do a truly hardcore erasing, and most of them take time.

nikorr: Yeah, they do a fine job when they're not bricking their expensive SSDs, or showing 8MB of capacity on a reboot.

 

[drwho1]

I just wait until the SSD manufactures "release" Lower Prices.

 

[proxy711]

[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]I just wait until the SSD manufactures "release" Lower Prices.[/citation]
While they aren't as cheap as HDDs. You can quite commonly fine close to $1 to 1GB ratios on 64GB and 120GB SSDs, which is plenty for an OS and the ladder a gaming drive.

With an added TB+ HDD or two storage isn't a problem. I think the added price, but greater performance is worth the extra cost.

However I do agree the price needs to continue to drop for 250+GB SSDs to become "affordable".

 

[mrkdilkington]

[citation][nom]solid_shat_dude[/nom]mrkdilkington: If the others are a lengthier process, that would tend to indicate that Intel isn't really erasing anything, at least not securely. There are 1,000,000+ tools out there that do a truly hardcore erasing, and most of them take time.[/citation]What I mean is the amount of time to set up the Secure Erase. The Secure Erase function itself on a SSD should go very quickly, only a few seconds, or you're doing it wrong. A longer, different erase method on a SSD will waste write cycles.

 

[drwho1]

[citation][nom]Proxy711[/nom]While they aren't as cheap as HDDs. You can quite commonly fine close to $1 to 1GB ratios on 64GB and 120GB SSDs, which is plenty for an OS and the ladder a gaming drive.With an added TB+ HDD or two storage isn't a problem. I think the added price, but greater performance is worth the extra cost. However I do agree the price needs to continue to drop for 250+GB SSDs to become "affordable".[/citation]

Agreed.

SSD's need to get to the .70 to .90 per Gigabyte price range before they start "flying off the shelves". This were SSD's will start truly becoming mainstream.

A 250GB - 320GB SSD would be a perfect size for most users for a boot drive that can hold most "needed" software and even a few games.

I'm using my notebook's 320GB hard drive as a guideline....
My tower uses a 500GB boot hard drive (with far more games and programs than my notebook) But even a $1 per GB that would still be way too expensive for a 500GB SSD.

A simple math: at .80 cents per GB for a 500GB SSD would still be $400 dollars, but although to me (and many) would still be too high, that IMO would be a great start for SSD's to start "flying off the shelves".

 

[prakalejas]

Useless, does not work on HP server RAID controller, even with simple raid-0 (not really raided). Once again - drawing nice GUI is useless without actual functionality upgrade.