backtop


Print 44 comment(s) - last by Jansen.. on Feb 12 at 9:18 PM

OCZ Vertex Still Delayed

Intel has announced a series of price cuts on its lineup of SLC (Single Level Cell) and MLC (Multi Level Cell) Solid State Drives. Their NAND flash is produced by IM Flash Technologies, an Intel joint venture with Micron Technologies.

Lower sales due to the global economic slump are a key reason for the price cuts. However, declining NAND flash prices are lowering production costs for Intel's competitors, many of which are entering the market with a new generation of products. Intel launched their 160GB X-25M for $945 just under two months ago.

OCZ's Apex series of SSDs use an integrated RAID 0 controller to boost performance for a modest price premium over regular MLC SSDs. G.Skill's Titan series uses a similar design, as both use JMicron RAID and SSD controllers. However, OCZ has heavily optimized their firmware to provide extra performance. They are both available at retail.

The Vertex series, also from OCZ, has up to 64MB of DRAM cache to boost performance. This is especially critical for random write performance, an issue that has plagued previous generations of SSDs due to the use of a first generation JMicron SSD controller.
 
OCZ is still tweaking the firmware of their Vertex line in order to maximize reliability and performance. While many customers are anxious to purchase these SSD, it is commendable that OCZ is trying to avoid Seagate's firmware mistakes.

Intel's mainstream M series uses MLC NAND, while the E series uses the faster SLC NAND. Pricing is for OEMs in lots of 1,000 and above.

Model

 Old Price

 New Price

 X-25M 80GB

 $595

 $390

 X-25M 160GB

 $945

 $765 

 X-25E 32GB

 $575

 $415

 X-25E 64GB

 NA

 $795 

Intel has plans for a 128GB SLC drive and a 320GB SSD using 34nm MLC NAND chips. They are expected to be released later in 2009.

 



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Keep sliding . . .
By Bateluer on 2/6/2009 2:09:10 PM , Rating: 2
Nope, I can't afford one so I just look at the benchmarks and numbers. And those don't appear to justify the price.

I can live with the microseconds of delay and paying 1/45th per gigabyte. Even at 1$ per GB, its still too much money. I can get a very fast Caviar Black 1TB drive for 130, and its not even the fastest TB drive available. That's roughly 13 cents per gigabyte.


RE: Keep sliding . . .
By icanhascpu on 2/6/2009 2:19:06 PM , Rating: 2
Benchmarks and numbers don't tell you how it is. You would need to use one to see the difference. 120write 190read and crap like that is not the same as the drives you're used to.

If you can't afford it, thats fine, but until you use y=one, your opinion about them is uneducated.

People can also "live" without computers.


RE: Keep sliding . . .
By mindless1 on 2/7/2009 11:53:05 AM , Rating: 1
Actually, with the price of today's memory anyone with a properly set up system won't benefit nearly as much as you imply. 120-190MB/s IO pales in comparison to the performance of a filecache, or even a ramdrive considering gigs of memory can now be had for $5/per after a rebate.

It'll improve boot and hibernation times, I'll grant that. Otherwise the user is the typical bottleneck, not a properly set up system.


RE: Keep sliding . . .
By homebredcorgi on 2/6/2009 3:17:49 PM , Rating: 2
Take it from someone who regularly uses one of these (X-25M) in a laptop. They are fast. Worth the price? That would depend on your concept of expensive.

Previous laptop had ~20MB/s read and a 19ms lag (!). That is now 180MB/s read and 0.1ms lag.
You notice it at startup: the time to start a program after logging in is ~3 seconds (I have a bunch of crap that loads at startup). The 16 core desktop with 32GB of RAM (loading the same crap) takes ~25 seconds from startup before you can get a program to launch. Things like this do help productivity and usability in the long run. Not to mention it is completely silent - which takes a little getting used to.

Loading several GB of data takes several seconds instead of minutes. Resume from sleep takes a few seconds instead of 20. Things like this don't sound like much, but they do make a difference in the long run.

Will it save the world? No. Is it a cost effective desktop replacement? Probably not. But if you do a lot of reading/writing of data on a laptop and can live with a small amount of storage, there's no other option. give this another few years and you WILL be using them.


RE: Keep sliding . . .
By Hare on 2/6/2009 4:10:40 PM , Rating: 2
Random seek/write is nice in SSD drives but the actual throughoutput is not out of this world. RAM is dirt cheap so 32GB (for app caching) and a fast drive with dense platters is also a pretty good choice (for considerably less $). Of course that doesn't help with OS boot times but that's a minor issue.


RE: Keep sliding . . .
By icanhascpu on 2/6/2009 7:59:41 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That would depend on your concept of expensive.


That was the obvious logic from what was being discussed. The point you seemed to have ignored is that perception of worth cannot be measured unless one properly evaluate the product, and looking at numbers on a webpage doesn't cut it.

The difference between experience and knowledge is sometimes vast.


"We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Related Articles
OCZ Apex SSDs Officially Announced
January 14, 2009, 4:29 PM
OCZ Vertex SSDs Delayed
January 13, 2009, 9:43 AM
Intel Ships Pricey 160GB SSD
December 23, 2008, 11:14 AM













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki