[Ben]

The Intel SSD 320 is the much anticipated follow-up to the Intel X25-M, easily the most popular consumer SSD to date. The SSD 320 (commonly referred to as the X25-M 3rd Generation) is a mainstream SSD, letting the big brother SSD 510 go after the enthusiast space. Mainstream doesn't mean boring though, the SSD 320 posts quoted sequential read speeds of 270MB/s and writes of 220MB/s, which is still quite respectable. And while the SSD 320 is more of an evolution of the X25-M, there's still a lot that's new, like Intel 25nm NAND and capacities up to 600GB, a first for consumer SSDs.

Read full story

[[ETA]MrSpadge]

I hope people don't get mad at Intel because the drive may not fit their expectations. Take it for what it is and either buy it or not - your choice.

However, I've also got a question: is the DRAM really 666 MHz SDR? Seems a bit strange, given that it's 2011

MrS

[Jackyshadow]

Ahhh...I just bought a Vertex 2 100GB a few days ago. It'd be great to see how 320 competes against Vertex 2 - it is a last gen SSD, after all.

Also, would performance drop on smaller capacity models? I notice all major reviews are using 300GB model (assuming this is the model Intel sent out to the press).

[TSullivan]

Its listed as 166MHz, which I am guessing has a multiplier of 4, although could be wrong. Not sure how speeds compare on the mobile-grade memory.

[Brian]

Jackyshadow, on 28 March 2011 - 05:22 PM, said:

Ahhh...I just bought a Vertex 2 100GB a few days ago. It'd be great to see how 320 competes against Vertex 2 - it is a last gen SSD, after all.

Also, would performance drop on smaller capacity models? I notice all major reviews are using 300GB model (assuming this is the model Intel sent out to the press).

You could compare to the Vertex 2 charts, I'd link you but it depends on which V3 you have

And yes, the performance drops as you get smaller. The 40GB for instance has puny writes, but the read speeds stay respectable.

[Brian]

And here's the chart from Intel showing performance by capacity. This should help clear up some of the confusion.

 Screen shot 2011-03-28 at 7.59.49 PM.png (26.86K)
Number of downloads: 48

[TSullivan]

Brian, on 28 March 2011 - 06:59 PM, said:

And here's the chart from Intel showing performance by capacity. This should help clear up some of the confusion.

Screen shot 2011-03-28 at 7.59.49 PM.png

No word on what the internal configurations are. If Intel were to build the smaller drives on 4GB or 8GB chips, keeping the same number as the 300GB model, you wouldnt see a huge hit on write speeds. I want to say we have a 160GB G3 inbound, so we will know for sure then.

[Jackyshadow]

Thanks for the quick answer! You guys rock.

[udaman]

TSullivan, on 28 March 2011 - 07:02 PM, said:

No word on what the internal configurations are. If Intel were to build the smaller drives on 4GB or 8GB chips, keeping the same number as the 300GB model, you wouldnt see a huge hit on write speeds. I want to say we have a 160GB G3 inbound, so we will know for sure then.

Performance spec's on write, 4k random is sucky for anything <160GB; I wouldn't touch anything <160GB.

There is currently *no* price break between the older X25 series & new 320, newegg lists the 320 series 120GB currently @$229---still too expensive . so much for 25nm bringing costs down, and we waited how long for this? Wasn't there an announcement about the 300 & 600GB being ready to rock at the end of *last* year, lol. Disappointing so far, other than additional reliability being built into this current gen.

This post has been edited by udaman: 29 March 2011 - 07:59 PM

[Djembe]

I'm not seeing the new drives on Newegg. Do you have a link?

This post has been edited by Djembe: 29 March 2011 - 08:08 PM