Print 38 comment(s) - last by mckirkus.. on May 12 at 3:15 PM

Pricing cuts will spur greater SSD adoption

Intel is lowering prices on several of its SSDs in a response to increased competition in the burgeoning SSD market. The world's largest semiconductor company makes SSDs using NAND flash produced by IM Flash Technologies, an Intel joint venture with Micron Technologies.

The X25-M series of mainstream 2.5-inch SSDs, which use Multi-Level Cell flash, is the target of the price cuts. The 160GB model will receive a $100 price cut off the MSRP, while the 80GB model will drop $50 in price. However, the street prices are much lower, as retailers react to demand for the popular Vertex series of SSDs produced by OCZ Technology.

Increased production and competition has forced a dramatic drop in prices. Intel launched its 160GB X25-M drive for $945 just four short months ago. Today, it is available for two-thirds of its original price, a savings of over $300. The price for the 80GB model has been cut almost in half since its launch.

Intel will also be making available more 80GB and 160GB SSDs in the 1.8-inch form factor. The retail supply of the X18-M series has been limited since its launch. These drives are used mostly in netbooks and smaller laptops which are space constrained.

Meanwhile, the X25-E series targeted at the enterprise server market will also soon face pricing and capacity pressure from OCZ and Super Talent.

Super Talent will soon be shipping SLC-based SSDs with up to 256GB of storage, which OCZ will counter with their Vertex EX series targeting the enterprise server and tiered storage markets.

Intel will fight back in this lucrative market, with designs for a 128GB SLC drive and a 320GB SSD using 34nm MLC NAND chips. They are expected to be released later in 2009.



December 2008

February 2009

April 2009

 X25-M 80GB




 X25-M 160GB




X18-M 80GB




 X25-E 32GB




 X25-E 64GB




Comments     Threshold

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

By Spuke on 4/28/2009 12:16:24 PM , Rating: 5
Almost there. Need to slash that $320 in half and I'm in.

RE: X25M
By dubldwn on 4/28/2009 12:44:35 PM , Rating: 2
I'm gonna do the slc thing, but I don't understand why the 64gb is over double the price of the 32gb.

RE: X25M
By PrezWeezy on 4/28/2009 1:19:39 PM , Rating: 1
Because it's not actually 2x32 gb drives. The 32 GB drive actually has a capacity which is closer to maybe 36 for wear leveling. So the 64 has to have closer to maybe 72-75 GB. It's a percentage which does not increase linearly. Plus they fit more into the same size box so it takes more engineering. They are still overpriced a bit, but you get what you pay for.

RE: X25M
By gfxBill on 4/28/2009 4:52:46 PM , Rating: 1
Umm, last I checked 2x36=72. What's not linear about it? Agree somewhat about the extra engineering though I suspect it would be trivial.

RE: X25M
By icanhascpu on 4/29/2009 1:43:57 AM , Rating: 2
Because it's not actually 2x32 gb drives.


RE: X25M
By PrezWeezy on 4/30/2009 8:59:41 PM , Rating: 2
72 was a bad number to use. I don't know the exact numbers, but from what I understand you have quite a bit more headroom in a 64GB drive than a 32. And if the engineering was trivial you would think they wouldn't have such small drives to begin with wouldn't you?

RE: X25M
By lennylim on 4/28/2009 2:50:54 PM , Rating: 4
Because they think that is what people are willing to pay. May not necessarily be due to material cost (impossible to tell without examining the components).

"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki