Read more.Quote:
Available in M.2, mSATA and 2.5-inch form factors with very low idle power requirements.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Available in M.2, mSATA and 2.5-inch form factors with very low idle power requirements.
they should stop bumping SSDs as gaming technology.
The Intel 520 was bugged from launch with it's 256bit AES hardware encryption. They offered a refund to anyone that wanted one because it couldn't be fixed.Quote:
The SSD 530 series drives use the latest 20nm NAND technology backed by Intel's reputation for quality and reliability
And that's the less serious issue. The drives still have serious BSOD issues that Intel can't fix. Just Google "Intel 520 BSOD" and read their own forums.
Intel have had numerous driver issues, chipset recalls, SSD refund programs, and have been caught fiddling recent benchmarks.
Can we please stop this "quality and reliability" line that people harp when Intel is mentioned. That company died years ago.
edit - and let's not forget Sandy Bridge-E shipping with VT-d simply *broken* in the C1 stepping. Chips that are purely aimed at the high end market.
See also: shoddy Linux wireless drivers, even though the meme that Intel knows best continues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent
There's a couple of folks on Hexus who also trot out that "Intel is best" line, although I was under the distinct impression that their "professional" (i.e. business/enterprise) SSD's were pretty solid performers - is this wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent
That said, I'd assumed (wrongly?) that most folks seem to stick with other brands of SSD was purely down to price sensitivity. Maybe I need to review that assumption.
Why? The assumption is that - like Apple fans - hardcore PC gamers have deep pockets when it comes to hardware and only want "the best". In which case it's surely natural to position a comparatively expensive (on £/MB terms) SSD as a performance item which will let you load those CoD/MoH/C&C levels just that bit faster. Heck, I've seen comments from folks on here that spending £800+ on the graphics subsystem (be that Crossfire, SLi, or some humongous single beast like a GTX Titan) is "reasonable".Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardware_Elite
I'm sure there's one or two that I remember using striped RAID arrays of SSD's because a single SSD wasn't fast enough. :o
But if you look at the article you'll see that Intel seem to be positioning this piece of kit at the portable market first and foremost - so that's ultrabooks and laptops - with desktops bringing up the rear. That makes a good deal of sense to me, given the SSD's increased physical resilience and also much reduced power drain. On a purely personal level, the place where replacing HDD's with SSD's has seen the biggest gains has been in the house laptops, the desktops it's merely a nice to have. Although a Samsung 840EVO for the gaming PC's app's partition looks like a nice present to myself. ;)
Dont know how reliable Intel are, but I know their 320 series SSD did look better than most, though Ive found the Crucial drives excellent in my experience with 5 of them.
One question:
How come the power usage of the drive changes with size? Surely that doesnt make sense...!!!
Did that company ever exist?Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent
Creators of the i432, generally recognised as the worst processor ever designed in the history of computing.
ISTR early 386 parts were discovered to have a 32x32 multiply instruction that didn't work at some temperatures. I think their justification for not doing a recall was that it was a new instruction, so no-one was using it yet.
For years Intel shipped processors with fundamental coherency problems in multi socket configurations, which I think they only fixed in the P4?
ouch bias against intel here! cmon say Samsung are the best !
they are very good drives. and they did push for the gaming with the 520 series.
I have been fighting poorly thought out Intel silicon for decades, from back in the 8 bit days until present. I guess seeing unearned praise for them rubs me up the wrong way.Quote:
Originally Posted by saunders
The phrase "The SSD 530 series drives use the latest 20nm NAND technology backed by Intel's reputation for quality and reliability." did rub me up the wrong way. I guess Hexus are just pasting parts of the press release here, there really isn't any technical info just marketing bumpf. Their drives have a reputation for suddenly deciding they can only store 8 megabytes, so if that is the reputation backing these drives count me out.
You are spot on that my recent SSD purchase was Samsung though. They control their entire ecosystem: controller, flash chips and assembly. That helps a lot for quality control.
Intel should be able to do the same, yet last time they used Sandforce controllers with custom firmware. What controllers do these use? How many bits per cell exactly is the multibit flash? What is the endurance? What sort of data redundancy do they employ?
Intel did a good job with PCI though, and USB. Just a shame their processors went downhill after the 8085.
I'm not going to say "Samsung is best" because that's just fanboydom. Yes, Samsung have some pretty good looking SSD's available at the moment, but then again so do Crucial, Sandisk, OCZ et al. Speaking of OCZ, I've not been bitten (yet?) by the poor reliability that reputedly stalks the OCZ Vertex 2E's like the Grim Reaper on rollerskates. Mine's been my boot drive for nearly two years without a single problem. (Just hope I've not just jinxed it by saying that)Quote:
Originally Posted by saunders
I'll argue that OCZ did more to push the cause of SSDs for gaming that Intel have. Intel gear seems to have been (to me at least) on the "premium" end of the market so it's needed pile-em-high-and-sell-em-cheap merchants like OCZ to push for widespread adoption.
According to Hexus' recent review of the Samsung 840 EVO, they (Samsung) use 19nm NAND, so surely that 1nm smaller will make a massive difference?! :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix
I'm with you on that - to a point. 100% in-house is ideal, but I'd prefer a rock-stable 3rd party part to one that of unproven reliability, but in-house. What I particularly like about Samsung is that they're not making the assumption that the data is compressible (like the SF controllers do), so while their headline figures might not be in the top 5, at least you can be sure that performance will be relatively constant. At the time I bought the 830's for the laptops here, I remember reading something that made that MCX controller they use sound quite good too - but for the life of me I can't remember what it was now.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix
According to the bumf I've seen on the net, the 530's are merely the 520's with the NAND replaced with 20nm. So controller is Sandforce 2281. As to the rest, is there anything on Intel's own site? Just had a quick look and endurance is quoted as 1.2Mhours MTBF.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix
Sand4orce. Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough.
Intel - No
OCZ - No
Corsair - No
Sandisk - No
Kingston - No
Adata - No
Error Error... Irresistible
Error Error... Irresistible
What it is don't come in a bottle
The drug the software and disease