Print 37 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Mar 11 at 2:48 AM

Intel says that its upcoming SSDs will better Samsung's offerings in performance.  (Source: Samsung)
Intel to boost performance of its next generation SSDs

In late December, Intel launched its Z-P140 PATA solid-state disks (SSDs). The tiny drives measure just 12x18x1.8mm and power consumption is equally miniscule with readings of 1.1mW while idle and 300mW during read/write operations.

When it comes to performance and storage capacity, however, the Intel SSDs are a little behind the times. The Z-P140 can only be had in storage capacities of up to 16GB while read/write speeds come in at just 40MB/sec and 30MB/sec respectively.

Intel looks to leapfrog its current offering later this year with new multi-level cell (MLC) chips which will be used in 1.8" and 2.5" SSDs. According to Intel's NAND Products Group guru Troy Winslow, the drives will be available in capacities ranging from 80GB to 160GB.

Intel also plans to take on the best from Samsung and BiTMICRO in terms of performance. Samsung's current MLC-based 128GB SATA-II SSD achieves read speeds of 100MB/sec and write speeds of 70MB/sec. "What I can tell you is ours is much better than that," said Winslow in an interview with CNET.

"When Intel launches its...products, you'll see that not all SSDs are created equal," Winslow added. "The way the SSDs are architected, the way the controller and firmware operates makes a huge difference."

Intel's SSD, like the offerings from Samsung, will use the SATA-II interface.

As more manufacturers step up to produce NAND flash memory for SSDs, one of the few remaining drawbacks for the storage solution will being to subside: the high price of entry. Opting for a 64GB SSD on a MacBook Air will set you back a whopping $999. Adding a 64GB SSD to Dell's XPS M1330 will cost you $650.

Intel feels that pricing will continue to trend downward in the coming months. "Price declines are historically 40 percent per year," Winslow continued. "And in 2009, a 50 percent reduction, then again in 2010." Samsung flash marketing manager Michael Yang recently stated that SSD prices will fall 35 to 45 percent year-to-year.

Hopefully, the estimates on price reductions for SSDs will hold up as production ramps up. Most major manufacturers (Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc.) offer SSD options on their notebooks. ASUS has shown that it move a large quantity of SSD-equipped notebooks -- when the price is right -- and it looks to go for a knockout punch with its second generation Eee PC 900.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: All I want...
By ninjit on 3/10/2008 2:23:27 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think it's all that practical to have the hard-drive decide what data should be on the SSD portion, and what should be on the HDD.

Vista's Readyboost is supposed to do what your asking for in theory, but in practice it's severely limited by the speed of current flash drives.

Before HDDs go the way of the dodo, and we start seeing everything in solid-state, the first step is to have the OS and swap file on an SSD, and everything else on regular storage.
Even before that, if you really must have an SSD somewhere in your system, I personally think a good mix would be to have a separate smallish SSD as the target for just virtual memory - and maybe ReadyBoost too: basically we should be able to tell Vista to use this drive for any file caching it wants to do, in addition to the memory page-files.

One of the biggest problems with having a single system disk for all your needs, is that a fairly large application will end up competing with itself for disk access - think of a game that's trying to load a big model or texture map into memory, only to run out of available RAM at which point the OS starts dumping idle memory to page-files - the single hard-drive goes nuts.

Linux tries to alleviate this by having a dedicated swap partition, but if it's still located on the same single drive, it doesn't help all that much.

Memory-paging (just like regular memory access) is inherently random (hence the name), so placing swap files on an SSD would have big tangible benefits.

RE: All I want...
By taropie on 3/10/2008 3:06:06 PM , Rating: 5
But wouldn't u have bigger tangible benefits by slapping in more ram? Why need a swap file if it could be eliminated...

RE: All I want...
By ninjit on 3/10/2008 9:35:23 PM , Rating: 2
yes, of course more actual RAM is always better...

But in general usage these days, memory requirements always outstrip available RAM (hence the move to virtual memory).

And if you think of cost, with people whining about the current price point for SSDs, DDR2 RAM is ~$25/GB almost twice the per GB cost of an SSDs

Besides which, the amount of physical RAM you can install on a system is always limited.

"My sex life is pretty good" -- Steve Jobs' random musings during the 2010 D8 conference

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki