Author Topic: Intel's new 'value-oriented' SSD reviewed... (Read 8259 times)

Arcmanov · « **on:** May 12, 2010, 02:55:35 PM »

Behold the new Intel X25-V 40GB SSD

Nicely reviewed (against other SSDs and the top-of-the-line HDDs) by Techreport.

Already available on Amazon too.

Question is...would you buy one of these at that price point right now?

I think 800+ TT dollars (plus shipping) for 40GB is preposterous, regardless of the speed.

Discuss...

Carigamers · « **on:** May 12, 2010, 02:55:35 PM »

Preston786 · « **Reply #1 on:** May 12, 2010, 03:01:51 PM »

sweet but..... not for that price

Crixx_Creww · « **Reply #2 on:** May 12, 2010, 04:03:53 PM »

look
i not even buying 40 gig scsi drives for servers no more

why de ass would i do so for my own machines.
It coulda be 40 gigs at 400 dollars
still would be retarded.

60 -80 to start with and we could play with price

UltimateGamer · « **Reply #3 on:** May 12, 2010, 04:06:43 PM »

Rediculous! Why would anyone put that and value in the same sentence, i would never know.

TriniXaeno · « **Reply #4 on:** May 12, 2010, 05:00:01 PM »

could have sworn we had a discussion about this already? getting a sense of deja vu

Carigamers · « **Reply #4 on:** May 12, 2010, 05:00:01 PM »

Crixx_Creww · « **Reply #5 on:** May 12, 2010, 05:03:29 PM »

the discussion was about the 4000 dollar 1tb ssd

Arcmanov · « **Reply #6 on:** May 12, 2010, 06:18:27 PM »

^^^ what he said

This discussion is about the 40GB drive you alway harping about.

123 US for that is madness.

TriniXaeno · « **Reply #7 on:** May 12, 2010, 08:12:21 PM »

ah yes, that's where it came up.

these things would pwn in data centers with their much lower power consumption. The energy savings across a farm could pay for themselves in a year.

Kraeoss · « **Reply #8 on:** May 13, 2010, 05:29:20 PM »

well if ur insanely rich and just gots moneys to blowz thenz uz canz getz itz !! andz bez thez bestestz !!

phoenix31tt · « **Reply #9 on:** May 13, 2010, 07:13:40 PM »

Quote from: TriniWyatt on May 12, 2010, 08:12:21 PM

ah yes, that's where it came up.

these things would pwn in data centers with their much lower power consumption. The energy savings across a farm could pay for themselves in a year.

havent read up the power savings.. but from your research...

if u add up the number of drives needed to equal current data center drives at the same price.. would it really pwn?

i.e. you can probrably get a 150gb or more drive for the price of this 40... which means you need for of these to replace 1 drive..

so.. does 4xSSD still beat 1xSAS drive in terms of power?

TriniXaeno · « **Reply #10 on:** May 14, 2010, 08:55:18 AM »

We have a ton of servers with 72gb drives. Many in raid.

1 80gb drive will surely safe $$ in power. 1 to 1 replacement.

I'm sure research will concur.

MessiaaH · « **Reply #11 on:** May 14, 2010, 10:52:27 AM »

wyatt i think u miss phoenix point. re-evaluate his statements, and apply costing to everything. 1-1 replacement = significant money spent behind dem ssd.

And crixx post d best point, 40gb juss not cuttin it dese days, hell, my OS drive on win 7 now is 65 gb, it used to be 40 way back one, but application sizes juss increases, and d size men C: have to be dese days juss going up and up and up. 40gb is out of d question.

need to start at least ah lil 80 before even considering a drive fuh meh OS.

Kraeoss · « **Reply #12 on:** May 14, 2010, 10:55:46 AM »

lol... ent...

phoenix31tt · « **Reply #13 on:** May 14, 2010, 11:08:35 AM »

yea my comment was just to say... for instance... if i were to replace the 300GB sas drives with 7W power consumption form my data center...
what i would watch is

the power consumption of a drive (say 40 = 2W or w/e)
then i will need 7 of those to replace one 300GB so thats 7*2 = 14W

Then goes the cost of the 7 vs. 1 300GB etc etc.

i'm getting mixed results of power consumption on those drives doh... some as high as 2.5W Load.. some as low as 150mW Load... dont know which is tru... if is 150mW then hands down datacenters would gain significantly by option for them... however with 2.5W.. nah

W1nTry · « **Reply #14 on:** May 14, 2010, 12:50:57 PM »

Also keep in mind (and I don't know if they've found the fix to this yet) that SSD suffer from block write problems after prolonged usage:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16979
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/print/9132668/Analysis_SSD_performance_is_a_slowdown_inevitable_

So what good (particularly in the server environment) would more energy efficient but slower with time drive really do?

I think SSD are still in their infancy and as with most leading edge tech we need time before we see proper mass market price reductions.

Netizen1 · « **Reply #15 on:** May 14, 2010, 01:19:41 PM »

Quote from: W1nTry on May 14, 2010, 12:50:57 PM

Also keep in mind (and I don't know if they've found the fix to this yet) that SSD suffer from block write problems after prolonged usage:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/16979
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/print/9132668/Analysis_SSD_performance_is_a_slowdown_inevitable_

So what good (particularly in the server environment) would more energy efficient but slower with time drive really do?

I think SSD are still in their infancy and as with most leading edge tech we need time before we see proper mass market price reductions.

Intel's drives fixed this issue. The problem is, Intel isn't being very helpful with the model numbers/names... so it's tough to decipher whether a drive is using the better tech or not...

TriniXaeno · « **Reply #16 on:** May 14, 2010, 01:37:59 PM »

the TRIM support greatly reduces that effect w1ntry and even when performance has reduced...it is still superior to traditional HDs.

Phoenix, here are the power figures:

Raptor 74gb
Read/Write 8.40 Watts
Idle 7.90 Watts
Standby 1.76 Watts
Sleep 1.11 Watts

Intel X25M SSD

Active 2.50 W
Idle 0.060 W

So it is 336% more efficient when active

and

are you ready for this.........

wait for it......wait for it.........

13,166% more efficient when idle.

hence the power savings bonanza for data centers.

Did we mention it's much faster too??? and has insane random access times? (won't even bother to quote the %)

stop hating and congratulate.

The future is here. costs a little bit but that's the norm. Prices will fall and traditional HDs will start going the way of the three and a half inch floppy drive.

MessiaaH · « **Reply #17 on:** May 14, 2010, 02:27:50 PM »

wyatt, when u propose to a company in trinidad, to replace all their sas drives with ssd, and dey agree, tell me.

lol. dies all i have to say on the future being here and now for ssd

Kraeoss · « **Reply #18 on:** May 14, 2010, 02:34:20 PM »

lol... in like ah real long time though... i'm with w1n on this one... cause i mean there are advances and then there are Advances lol... ssd tech is gonna get better over time but it's not gonna be anytime soon and the prices are what will make or break them... all the money you may save in power technically u can count that against the cost of the drives lol... and besides... 40 GB when they hit 80 then that's an upgrade...

ps. not picking a fight just my .02c

MessiaaH · « **Reply #19 on:** May 14, 2010, 02:56:05 PM »

you have to watch at feasibility too, d price of d drives, vs d speed, juss make no sense in d server space. dey too expensive.

Justifying ah single drive fuh yuh OS easier than justifying tons of SSD in a data center. and when building data center, one crucial component is storage capacity. 4.5 Teras and up. SSD equivilent is break neck.

And if u watching ssd for OS capabilites, u only need few, and d power saving would not matter with jus 2-3 drives. for d cost dem thing going for.

SSD biggest problem is cost. and as long as dey stay high so, they will be ah luxary only certain ppl can afford. And based on how d market looks today, dem prices not going to change anytime soon.

Carigamers · « **Reply #19 on:** May 14, 2010, 02:56:05 PM »

Author Topic: Intel's new 'value-oriented' SSD reviewed... (Read 8259 times)

Carigamers

Carigamers

Carigamers

ShoutBox