Now's your chance win big! Join our community and get entered to win a RTX 2060 GPU, plus more! Join here.
Pi Cast Episode 3 streams live on Tuesday, August 4th at 2:30 pm ET (7:30 PM BST). Watch live right here!
Catch Scharon on the Tom's Hardware Show live on Thursday, August 6th at 2:00 pm ET (7:00 PM BST). Click here!
It's nice to see all these new ssd's etc being reviewed and flaunted,but all still very expensive and theres no way i would even consider paying the amount asked.But people must be buying them or im sure they would already be dropping the prices.
These drives are cheaper by 10-20% than the OCZ drives while seemingly providing better performance. The 60 GB (64GB equiv) is $225-$250 for OCZ while the Supertalent drive is $173. $50-$75 difference, but also the ST drive has 128MB cache compared to the 32MB for the 60GB Vertex. This seems like another stride in the right direction for SSD's.
The new Super Talent 64 GB MasterDrive SX - SATA-II states that its read speed is 200 MB/sec. The 30 GB & 60 GB Vertex Series SATA II 2.5" SSD's quotes a read speed "up to" 230 MB/s. The smaller Vertex have a 64 MB cache. The Super Talent has 128 MB cache.
Is Super Talent being modest while OCZ is being expensive? Or is OCZ just faster? Benchmark anybody?
[citation][nom]Shadow703793[/nom]What controller? I do hope it's not the JMicron one.[/citation]
By all accounts the latest JMicron controller fixes all of the problems associated with earlier models. However Intel still has the best controller (they uses their own proprietary controller) hence why their SDD's are the most expensive but it's good to see Intel will get some competition from Super Talnet, OCZ and Samsung which will hopefully lower prices.
Additionally, all three models--the 64 GB, 128 GB, and 256 GB versions--are capable of reaching sequential read speeds up to 220 MB/sec and sequential write speeds up to 200 MB/sec, depending on the model.
I've had a Supertalent SSD in the past, and it was soooooo slow, that it couldn't even run Vista.
I hope their random read/write ops will be adequately fast enough to run an OS like Vista comfortably; at least faster than a 5200rpm notebook HD!
I'd love to see some tests on this!
If the drive will be faster in random ops than a notebook HD, I might consider buying the 64GB version (which is the only drive that fits my budget, and able to extend my notebook/netbook's battery life.