Newegg has been having the odd sale on the M4 64GB, which for being a 64GB SSD is pretty awesome. Last week it was selling for $90 and sold out, then went on shell shocker for a hundred and sold out. I should point out that it probably SHOULD be $100 with it's cheap IMFT 25nm nand, but none the less looks like a good deal. I picked one up. When the time came two weeks ago to invest in a new 6gps drive, I went with the intel 510, despite it's lacking encryption like the 300 series and with its high price. If I were to do it over again, I'd get the Corsair P3 probably and save $50.
[citation][nom]chovav[/nom]nice work guys I do have a question though: for my own use, I need to encrypt the system drive using TrueCrypt (128bit AES). When I did that on a Vertex 2 60GB, the performance went down a hundred-fold! This apparently had to do with the fact that the data was in-compressible (bad for SandForce controllers) and the drive was completely "filled" by TrueCrypt's encryption (so you won't be able to see how much data is on it).This meant that the performance was actually LOWER than an encrypted mechanical hard drive, and actually almost unusable. Is there any way for you to devise a test that looks at this effect on SSD performance? This situation is not very rare, a lot of business users must encrypt their drives in order to comply with Company Policy.. I've used AS-SSD for testing, with read/write results at around 3.5MB/s :SThank you,Chovav[/citation]
I would recommend the Intel 320 series. They have built in encryption, AES 128 I believe. If you MUST use TrueCrypt (or some other encryption), I second Andrew's M4 recommendation, but if you just need the drive to be encrypted with AES 128, you don't even need to use true crypt with the 320 series -- not the more expensive 510.
[citation][nom]chovav[/nom]nice work guys I do have a question though: for my own use, I need to encrypt the system drive using TrueCrypt (128bit AES). When I did that on a Vertex 2 60GB, the performance went down a hundred-fold! This apparently had to do with the fact that the data was in-compressible (bad for SandForce controllers) and the drive was completely "filled" by TrueCrypt's encryption (so you won't be able to see how much data is on it).This meant that the performance was actually LOWER than an encrypted mechanical hard drive, and actually almost unusable. Is there any way for you to devise a test that looks at this effect on SSD performance? This situation is not very rare, a lot of business users must encrypt their drives in order to comply with Company Policy.. I've used AS-SSD for testing, with read/write results at around 3.5MB/s :SThank you,Chovav[/citation]
I would recommend the Intel 320 series. They have built in encryption, AES 128 I believe. If you MUST use TrueCrypt (or some other encryption), I second Andrew's M4 recommendation, but if you just need the drive to be encrypted with AES 128, you don't even need to use true crypt with the 320 series -- not the more expensive 510.