Jump to content


Photo

Intel SSD 320 Review Discussion


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Ben

Ben

    Member

  • Admin
  • 27 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 09:59 AM

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

#2 [ETA]MrSpadge

[ETA]MrSpadge

    Member

  • Member
  • 755 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 04:31 PM

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

#3 Jackyshadow

Jackyshadow

    Member

  • Member
  • 2 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 05:22 PM

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).

#4 TSullivan

TSullivan

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 688 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 05:23 PM

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.

#5 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,384 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 06:56 PM

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

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#6 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,384 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 06:59 PM

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

Attached File  Screen shot 2011-03-28 at 7.59.49 PM.png   26.86KB   48 downloads

Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#7 TSullivan

TSullivan

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 688 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 07:02 PM

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

Attached File  Screen shot 2011-03-28 at 7.59.49 PM.png   26.86KB   48 downloads


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.

#8 Jackyshadow

Jackyshadow

    Member

  • Member
  • 2 posts

Posted 28 March 2011 - 08:32 PM

Thanks for the quick answer! You guys rock.

#9 udaman

udaman

    Member

  • Member
  • 642 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 07:58 PM

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 :angry: :angry: :angry: . 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.

Edited by udaman, 29 March 2011 - 07:59 PM.

#10 Djembe

Djembe

    Member

  • Member
  • 63 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:03 PM

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

Edited by Djembe, 29 March 2011 - 08:08 PM.

#11 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,384 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 09:23 PM

Ahhh, it *just* popped up -

http://www.newegg.co...k=intel ssd 320

$229 for the 120GB is equal pricing to the X25-M. That's also day one on one retailer. Hopefully with promos we quickly get to $200. As to timing, Intel never said anything that I'm aware of about capacities or performance prior to the announcement. I was briefed on these at Storage Visions - but nothing official from Intel.

Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#12 Brian

Brian

    SR Admin

  • Admin
  • 5,384 posts

Posted 30 March 2011 - 02:44 PM

Someone must agree with me - NE is out of stock already on the 120GB, which is still the only one they're showing.

Brian

Publisher- StorageReview.com
Twitter - @StorageReview

 

#13 SSDaddict

SSDaddict

    Member

  • Member
  • 29 posts

Posted 30 March 2011 - 04:49 PM

Why shouldn't it become a huge hit?

Stability, capacity and eventually prices will normalize.

Perfect for all users with a 3Gb/s SATA MB.
GB X58A-UD7 | i7 980X | 12GB Mushkin Redline| X25-E 32GB | Vertex LE 100GB | C300 256GB | 9211-8i + 9260-8i | Asus 5870 | Areca 1880-4GB

#14 vpsdeploy

vpsdeploy

    Member

  • Member
  • 1 posts

Posted 15 July 2011 - 10:04 PM

We have 2x intel SSD 320 300GB in RAID-0 running in our VPS servers,
having 260-300MB/s writting speeds (with 10-15 vm's running at same time).

100GB vzdump ~ 15 minutes to done
and during the backup process the system performance is very well, with only 1-3% of IO load.

We are very pleased with this disks...

Regards!

Edited by vpsdeploy, 15 July 2011 - 10:07 PM.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users