backtop

Print 25 comment(s) - last by tjr508.. on May 7 at 5:49 PM
Corsair Nova Series expands

In late February, Corsair launched two new SSD product lines aimed at the mainstream market. The Reactor Series features a "reboot" of JMicron's SSD controller while the Nova Series features the much-lauded Indilinx Barefoot controller.

When it launched, the Nova Series SSD were available in capacities of 64GB and 128GB with read/write speeds of 270MB/sec, 130MB/sec and 270MB/sec and 190MB/sec respectively.

Today, Corsair has announced two new additions to the family which slot in at both the low-end and high-end. A new 32GB Nova SSD delvers relatively meager read/write speeds of 195MB/sec, 75MB/sec. A range topping 256GB Nova SSD, on the other hand, brings read/write speeds of 250MB/sec, 195MB/sec.

As with the two previously announced Nova SSDs, these two new addition support TRIM in Windows 7 and come with a two-year warranty.

Pricing is not yet available for the new 32GB and 256GB Nova SSDs, but we'll update the article when we get word from Corsair.

Updated 5/5/2010 @ 7:13 am

We said we'd get back to you on pricing details, and we're true to our word. Corsair just informed us that the 32GB Nova will have an MSRP of $99 (shipping now) and the 256GB Nova will have an MSRP of a whopping $675 (shipping between May 12 and May 16).

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Corsair Adds 32GB, 256MB Nova SSDs
By ElementZero on 5/4/2010 9:08:54 AM , Rating: 2
Sweet! I gotta get me a 256MB hard drive!




By solarrocker on 5/4/2010 9:17:21 AM , Rating: 2
lol, you beat me to it!


RE: Corsair Adds 32GB, 256MB Nova SSDs
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 5/4/2010 9:19:48 AM , Rating: 5
It'll cost ya tree-fitty ;)


RE: Corsair Adds 32GB, 256MB Nova SSDs
By solarrocker on 5/4/2010 9:23:55 AM , Rating: 4
Hold on naw, I'll see if I got three-fitty


By ElementZero on 5/4/2010 9:28:30 AM , Rating: 2
bah - had to go and fix the title didn't ya :P

haha


By Kurz on 5/6/2010 12:46:29 AM , Rating: 4
Don't do it Woman!!!
Hes just goin to keep comin back here.


By spread on 5/4/2010 11:11:43 AM , Rating: 2
I hear the pricing is not year available.


32GB = FAIL
By Silver2k7 on 5/5/10, Rating: -1
RE: 32GB = FAIL
By amanojaku on 5/5/2010 10:00:15 PM , Rating: 2
The OS and games? Who gives a sh1t about those? It's my massive porn collection that I'm worried about!!!


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By Silver2k7 on 5/6/2010 4:00:37 AM , Rating: 1
lol getting downrated just for speaking my mind?

its a shame that SSD makers are not pushing towards larger drives with say 128GB as minimum.. instead of making tiny drives such as a 32GB one.


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By someguy123 on 5/6/2010 5:19:24 AM , Rating: 2
The button is "not worth reading".


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By Aloonatic on 5/6/2010 9:14:31 AM , Rating: 2
Come now, you know as well as I do that to many "worth reading" = agree and "not worth reading" = disagree. Let's not delude ourselves.

Besides, what's not worthy of comment about what the OP said? Sure, it's a question that's often raised on the SSD stories, but comments get repeated all the time on when similar articles are posted.

Someone's opinion on the issue of whether a 32GB drive is too small is, IMHO, not something that is not worth reading, when clearly it's an issue for many.

As it happens, that'd be more enough for me. OS + office, browsers and basic photo program + a game or 2 should be ok with 32GB as that's all I use a PC for these dats, and I don't really want to have to pay more for faster SSD drive space that I wont utilise.

All depends on what you want I suppose. If you do a lot of gaming and a lot of work, clearly it's not going to be big enough, but then you can justify spending more on a bigger drive too of course.


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By Taft12 on 5/6/2010 12:00:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Come now, you know as well as I do that to many "worth reading" = agree and "not worth reading" = disagree. Let's not delude ourselves.


Not all of us take moderation duties so lightly. The original post was an opinion arrogantly stated and added nothing to the discussion - very much worthy of "not worth reading"


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By bplewis24 on 5/6/2010 12:06:55 PM , Rating: 2
If that's the case, then 90% of posts should be down-rated since they are almost all opinions that don't add much to the "discussion" (what is a discussion anyway).

Or is it the "arrogant" part you care about? I sure hope people don't down-rate due to their delicate sensibilities...but then again now I'm just deluding myself.

Brandon


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By bplewis24 on 5/6/2010 12:10:17 PM , Rating: 2
I think the best illustration of how you're deluding yourself and how disingenuous it is to suggest that only non-arrogant non-opinions that "add to the discussion" are worthy of reading is the only post on the board that has a rating of 5 so far.

Brandon


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By FaceMaster on 5/6/10, Rating: 0
RE: 32GB = FAIL
By AnnihilatorX on 5/6/2010 10:55:53 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
its a shame that SSD makers are not pushing towards larger drives with say 128GB as minimum.. instead of making tiny drives such as a 32GB one.


Nova came with 64GB and 128GB when it launched, now 32GB and 256GB variants are out, both big and small. I'd call that fair and something for everyone, how's that a 'shame'?

Not everyone can afford SSDs over 128GB, and not everyone have that much data to store, or want to store data apart from OS or apps on SSDs.


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By AnnihilatorX on 5/6/2010 10:36:39 AM , Rating: 2
Sir, I'd call you shortsighted. Two 32GB SSD in a RAID 0 setup would offer higher performance than a single SSD at few bucks higher cost. provides adequate 64GB of storage for the OS and many applications.

I've been using 2x 16GB SSDs as my Windows 7 system drive and install small applications on it. I have no problem with space.

In case you have doubts on RAID0 reliability, there isn't much data to lose for the OS drive, as I always back up my user profile folder, and kept my documents on another drive.


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By AnnihilatorX on 5/6/2010 10:38:38 AM , Rating: 2
wow interesting, I've been downrated within 30 seconds after I post that. Someone is surely a quick reader ;)


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By geddarkstorm on 5/6/2010 1:30:39 PM , Rating: 2
It's because he was a -1 post. Replying to one of those is an automatic downrate by the site itself, heh. But, good points by you!


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By stromgald30 on 5/6/2010 2:07:41 PM , Rating: 2
No . . . you get downrated automatically for responding to a -1 rated post.


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By Modeverything on 5/6/2010 12:30:13 PM , Rating: 2
I think I remember reading that there are no current RAID controllers that allow TRIM to work. Without TRIM, I personally wouldn't buy an SSD.


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By geddarkstorm on 5/6/2010 1:31:38 PM , Rating: 2
Intel's tools now allow trimming through RAID. So... if you want TRIM and RAID on SSDs gotta go Intel for now.


RE: 32GB = FAIL
By tjr508 on 5/7/2010 5:49:05 PM , Rating: 1
That's odd. I've been using mine for almost two years without a cleanup.


"Game reviewers fought each other to write the most glowing coverage possible for the powerhouse Sony, MS systems. Reviewers flipped coins to see who would review the Nintendo Wii. The losers got stuck with the job." -- Andy Marken











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki