There is a large uproar surrounding reduced performance of drives that have switched from 34nm flash to 25nm flash without changing the product name, model number, performance claims, etcetera. Be sure to google the drive name plus the term 25nm to see if that problem occurs with the drive you are considering.

March 2011 SSD pricing update:

The list sorted by Gross Price is:

The value drives right now are


None of those 3 will break records for fastest SSD but they are the cheapest in their capacity bracket. Of course all of this is likely to change next month when Intel releases their newest drives and we are still waiting on the C400 as well. I don't know how the EOL status will affect C300 pricing or availability in the coming months and power users won't likely care as the newer drives out perform it. Might be worth watching for closeout specials if you don't need the fastest drive and are looking for a bargain.

Edit: added C400 prices from Superbiiz.

As to the tiers and the Sandforce / Intel 510 situation (faster drives that may be rated lower than some expect in this price list). I'm looking for reliable consistent performance and if the 510 series doesn't get a firmware update to even out the performance it'll likely drop down into the tier with the Sandforce 1200 drives.

As it stands both are plenty fast enough to replace a traditional hard drive but there are places where each fall short of the bar of excellence set by the Intel X-25M G2. They both beat it in some aspects and if you want to work with that I won't tell you not to I just won't give them a unconditional recommendation.

As to other drives that are similar I'm waiting for general availability and enough reviews to restructure the Tiers.

I'm not looking forward to the data dive that it'll take to properly update the SSD Reliability thread this year. Too many new drives for that to be anything short of a mammoth project.

Oh, and on another subject the Samsung SSD Magician is out of beta and is version 1.1 as of Feb 7, 2011 (aka 2011-02-07). Still nowhere as polished as the Intel SSD toolbox but better than nothing.

Do you think the price of the Intel X25-M 120GB ~$208 ~$1.73/GB SSDSA2MH120G2K5 is likely to drop significantly?

Seems like for a boot drive where random read times are important, the new drives aren't much better... and this one has a proven history of reliability.

When it end of lifes, do you expect it to just quickly disappear or hang around for a while at a discount? Or even stick around as a third Intel option?

I also like the fact that its utilities read the % of write cycles left in the drive. Are there any other SSDs that have such a feature?

1. ALL modern SSDs have % write cycles in their SMART data. Any program that reads smart data will tell you this for any SSD. Crystal Disk Info, Speedfan, HDtune, and many others. Pick one and you can figure out how that is going.

It's really a non issue. People that have used their drives for years still have 9x% (90 something %) remaining.

2. Future pricing info. Everyone that reads this thread is welcome to make their guess. If more than a couple chime in and guess I'll add mine to the pool just to see if I get lucky but I have no solid idea what prices will do in the future. This thread is me tracking prices and hoping others will contribute their expectations and observations on pricing.

The big unknown is how much cheaper per GB will the Intel 320 be than the X25-M? See http://vr-zone.com/articles/intel-solid ... z1FduMSROI

25nm flash should drop the price vs the 34nm flash in the Intel G2 drives but you'll have to buy a drive at 1.5 to 2x the capacity to get similar write speeds so the comparable drives will be the X25M at 120GB and the Intel SSD 320 at 160GB. 33% more capacity at the same price is 25% less cost per GB (4/3 vs 3/4 this sort of comparison confuses most people). If the price per GB of 25nm flash is more than 75% of the cost per GB of 34nm the new drive will be more expensive for similar performance but increased capacity. If it is less than 75% of the cost per GB it'll be similar performance and increased capacity at a reduced cost. The flexibility in pricing could push that either way. And until wee see performance specs and real life benchmarks for the lower capacity drives it'll be hard to make accurate price/performance and price-capacity comparisons.

There won't be a 120GB version of the 320 series. I'm surprised they are bothering to make the 40GB version of the 25nm product. I don't have performance specs but I'm assuming the suggested replacement table would be something like



It's hard to say how accurate those comparisons are without proper specs and benchmarks and there will be room for biased or incompetent comparisons vs all the X25V and X25M levels. Do you compare primarily on price, capacity, or performance? Whichever you choose will bias the outcome of the other comparisons. A thorough comparison would include the entire product lines or at least the capacity above and below the X25M equivalent (say the 120GB X-25 vs the 80GB and 160GB 320 series, or the 80GB X25 versus the 80 and 160GB 320 series).

And if you try to focus your comparison on performance first instead of capacity or price do you try to match the read, the write, the overall? It gets very messy when you do a detailed comparison. I think a fair review would have to make conclusions based on real world techniques such as:

Which drive do I buy if my price target is x? For example $150-$200

Which drive do I buy if my capacity target is x? For example cheapest 120GB or larger

Both of those should be considered in an overall comparison as the performance is going to be all over the board and hard to compare in a way that doesn't seem confused or biased. I guarantee you there will be arguments and name calling in the tech threads when the rest of the new drives come out this year (just like any other year).

deleted

I'd rather see this request in another thread as it's totally off topic to anyone wanting to read about SSD pricing data.

http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum ... rtex-LE%29 shows that the smart data attribute for drive life remaining on the LE version is 231. You can either use the OCZ tool to look at the smart data or you can use speedfan or HDtune and pay attention to the value for attribute 231 on a new drive compared to yours. If you need help translating the smart values you should post a screenshot in a thread that you start or find a thread that is at least dedicated to such issues.shrunk

Turns out Google hasn't found it yet but the C400 is available at Superbiiz.



so assuming we toss the C400 in the running for value drives we get



Though it's hard to call a >$900 drive a value

Doug,

Firstly, may I take this opportunity to say a very big THANK YOU for sharing your extensive knowledge and experience in this forum, as your SSDs have invariably been insightful and informative.

With respect to what the remainder of 2011 may bring for SSD pricing, I hope that the upcoming Intel 320 conform to your second scenario above, namely offering similar performance and increased capacity at reduced cost. The reason for this wish is that while SSDs have become relatively common among enthusiasts, cost is IMHO still the main barrier to wider SSD adoption, so hopefully the transition to 25nm flash will drop the price/GB significantly (albeit not immediately in all likelihood). From the perspective of an individual who has yet to experience the joys of a SSD, it seems to me that performance has been sufficient for mainstream users since the introduction of the Intel X25-M series in late 2008, which also appear to have been the most reliable SSDs.

In summary, if the Intel 320 series proves to be at least as fast and reliable as the X25-M series but at significantly lower prices, I think Intel will finally achieve mainstream SSD adoption... I'd definitely buy one!

The estimated pricing and a new release date are now posted at VR-Zone.

Thanks for the link Tephras.

If they are at the same price points (note that the vr-zone prices are estimates), my preference would be to opt for an older X25-M model until any bugs have been identified and resolved for the new controller, not to mention allowing time for the initial retail prices to settle.

Interesting how that version contradicts the prior VR-zone piece that didn't list a 120GB version.

I hope the C400 and it's peers are released and get reviewed b4 the C300 goes the way of the dodo. It'd be nice to know what the true performance vs price differences are.

I'm just not getting this. Why on earth would anyone choose these over the last generation of Intel SSDs? What am I not getting??????????????????

They will likely exhibit higher performance than the previous (X25-M) generation of Intel SSDs (although how significant this improvement is for real usage scenarios is another matter entirely) and of course some consumers simply have to have the "latest and greatest"!

However, I agree that they will likely only become compelling when prices fall (which should be possible over time because of the 25nm flash) and a few months elapse to identify and iron out any initial bugs.

If the performance were equal between the X-25M G2 (34nm) and the 320 Series (25nm) and the price were the same the profits would be higher for Intel. At least you'd know there wouldn't be any shortage of supply and Intel wouldn't have to raise prices*.

If the performance is worse on the 25nm SSD and the price is the same it'd be what the Consumerist calls The Grocery Shrink Ray. Higher profits + a drawback for the consumer.

We can hope that performance is greater or that prices will drop significantly but as it stands now it looks like it'll be a mixed bag with slightly faster reads and slightly slower writes which is not a desirable trade off in my book.

We'll have to wait a few weeks for reviews and pricing to be sure how it all pans out but for now the G2 120GB drive looks to be the boot drive I'd most want if I someone offered me a 50% discount on a drive of my choice (say newegg or amazon I'd love some store credit ).

Now about that *. You might ask why would any manufacturer need to raise prices. Well any manufacturer with exposure to Japan would be incuring costs right now with damaged factories.



Of course the more cynical could say that flash memory isn't a processor and not too greatly isn't the same as not at all.



OK, so lets say we believe them 100%. And we need another explanation for * that doesn't involve Japan.

How about that bit of news about WDC buying Hitachi. Why is the hard drive industry consolidating?

I'd say it's because the market for Hard Drives is shrinking and will either become a niche or will disappear eventually. That's a long term thing that no one can prove or disprove. Even if it were true what does it have to do with SSD prices?

I'd answer that SSDs are were the enthusiast and the DIY builders are spending the largest chunk of their storage budget (in $ not GB). So Intel and all the other major SSD players are watching demand for SSDs rise and need to produce more to keep up with demand. Combine the decline of interest in Hard Drives with the increase in interest in SSDs and the manufacturers have reason to keep prices up to maximize profits even as they increase market share.

Maybe there are other reasons. I'd welcome everyone's best guesses of reasons I left out. Whatever the reason it's up to the marketing/finance pencil pushers to decide what price to sell the drives for. Thank goodness we have true competition in the SSD market. Things would be much worse for us consumers wanting cheap SSDs if there was only 1 or 2 big players with comparable drives.

Just built myself a desktop system after not having one for six months.
I wanted an SSD and eventually went for a C300 128GB as I got a good deal direct from Crucial (£145). 60/64GB felt too tight for space as I’m not intending to upgrade to an even faster SSD in the next few years. Didn’t want to pay the price and risk premium on one of the next generation drives and after seeing their current performance and pricing I feel happy.
I also have a 2TB WD Green (3 platters) for multimedia and archive data.

Coming from using a Netbook (Atom single core) with a 5,400 notebook drive the SSD performance is almost surreal; the first few days I laughed a few times at the disk performance.
I’m going to install Cakewalk Sonar Producer (8.5 & X1) to the SSD and it will be interesting to see how the load times are.

I’ve bought my parents a Dell Optiplex 980 MT desktop each and am considering adding a small SSD (<64GB) as a boot drive. Any suggestions?
The Optiplex doesn’t support SATA 6G and I definitely don’t want an OCZ product. I figure a Vertex 2E is the way to go although there are Kingston (confusing model range) and Intel drives in the intended price range.

They may not be thrilling, but my X25-Vs have been reliable and I can recommend them as a budget drive.

If the market for HDDs is shrinking, it may be because the manufacturers shot themselves in the foot by providing capacities that are probably dozens of times greater than what Joe Average requires, thus no incentive to upgrade. This is not the case in the SSD market, where most users a) have just barely enough storage capacity for their needs/wants and b) are enthusiasts with a willingness to upgrade as the latest and greatest is released.

However, until I see SSDs available in the common store-built budget systems offered by PC shops I still wouldn't call them mainstream any time soon. A lot of people are still unaware of the benefits, or continue to dismiss SSDs because they could buy an x TB HDD for the same money. The early netbooks used SSDs (as low as 4 GB if I remember correctly) which I thought was the beginning of the end for platter drives, only to watch them later transition to HDD in the interests of higher capacity.

In the next couple of years I expect that HDDs will truly start to be phased out, and as unexciting as the early specifications may be, by the time the initial pricing has dropped to appropriate levels, the 320 Series may well end up with a place in history as the 'Model T Ford' of SSDs.

Intel's 320 series SSD have already appeared in retail stores here, in Slovakia. Prices are almost the same as for X25/M. Only 160GB model is cheaper in comparsion to the 34nm version.
...well, for me, a bit dissapointment
Although, no performance specs revealed yet...



The number on the right is with VAT in €

pc.sk

If prices for the Intel 320 series are comparable to those for the X25-M/V, wouldn't it be better to buy an X25-M 80GB than a 320 80GB from a performance perspective?

Quite possibly, although the 320 series should drop in price because 25nm flash is cheaper than 34nm flash... which would then make the key issue how quickly prices will drop?

See http://www.silentpcreview.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=61874&p=537356#p537356 for further discussion on this point, including a link to an early review of the 80GB Intel 320 drive.

Yes, I also read the Expreview article using that link. Hopefully, we'll soon get to compare random read/write speeds for the Intel G2 and G3 80GB SSDs.
http://en.expreview.com/2011/03/23/worl ... 569.html/8

Page 5 of the Expreview includes a comparison of the Crystal Disk Test random speed results:
Drive Random (4K) read speed (MB/s) Random (4K) write speed (MB/s)
Intel 320__ 80GB (G3) 22.53 46.83
Intel X25-M 80GB (G2) 24.33 67.48

So based on these (admittely early) results the G3 is 7% slower than the G2 in random reads and a whopping 31% slower in random writes!

This suggests that dhanson865 is likely to be correct in guessing that the comparable model performance wise for the 80GB X25-M will be the 120GB 320 series...

Source: http://en.expreview.com/2011/03/23/world-exclusive-review-intel-g3-ssd-80gb/15569.html/5

Indeed!



It seems that G3 uses the same controller as G2. A real disappointment, not to mention only SATA 3Gbps...

I think the primary barrier to widespread SSD adoption is price so I'd be happy for the 320 (G3 series) to exhibit similar performance to the X25-M (G2) series *if* (and only if!) it has a signficantly cheaper price/GB. Unfortunately the rumors (which of course may not be correct - we'll know very shortly) suggest that the initial price/GB for the 320 (G3) series will be comparable to the X25-M (G2) series, but hopefully it will fall over time.

In the meantime, if the price/GB is comparable, I'd prefer the X25-M drives because of their proven reliability, since while the G3 controller is apparently the same, the flash and firmware will be new so there is the possibility of serious bugs (as occured early in the early days of the X25-M series).

Late March 2011 SSD pricing update:

The list sorted by Capacity then Gross Price is:

It's questionable if the 40GB Intel 320 Series should be on the list. I'll leave it here for now but know that I don't recommend anyone buy it. It's here purely for pricing history at this point.

If you notice price increases on lower capacity drives consider the Earthquake/Tsunami/Fukushima Nuclear situation and know that prices won't drop like we expected this year.

M4/C400 prices are unreliable as anyone that had any stock sold out the day they started selling them (or close to that). I'm just taking the price from Superbiiz at this point.

Interestingly enough the Intel 320 Series is cheaper than the X-25M at 160GB. In fact it actually makes the value choices short list.

The Samsung 470 64Gb being a value choice for XP Users and the C300 64GB being the value choice for Win 7.

The Intel X25-M 120Gb being a value choice for XP Users and the C300 128GB being a value choice for Win 7.

The Intel 320 series only makes it at 160GB because it's cheaper than the 160GB X25-M. If you can get away with 120GB or 128GB you'd be better off buying the lower capacity drive both in cost and random write performance. If you need that extra capacity or the sequential speed improvement the 160GB 320 Series SSD could be a viable choice.

value drives

At $1000+ I didn't expect the 600GB drive to match the 120GB X-25M but it did (close enough for me). Not that I can afford to buy such a monster.

Anand did a piece today about 20nm flash from IMFT (which just recently started selling 25nm flash). His comment is that we should expect 20 to 30% price drops on SSDs from each new process generation going forward (as opposed to the much higher drop we saw when 34nm replaced 50nm).

April 2011 SSD pricing update:

The list sorted by Capacity then Gross Price is:

It's questionable if the 40GB Intel 320 Series should be on the list. The 40GB X25-V is starting to go out of stock as it is an EOL item. I'll be either dropping one or both of the 40GB drives off my list in the near future.

M4/C400 prices are unreliable as the release apparently got shoved back. Looking like Apr 26th or later right now. They also seem to be using part numbers different enough to make my searches for both more work.

The selection at 120/128GB is wide and the X-25M prices have risen noticeably recently so that it is no longer the cheapest drive at that capacity.

At 160GB the X25-M seems to be dropping in price to match the Intel 320 Series price.


value drives short list:


I still have a hard time thinking of drives above $200 as value drives for my personal purchases but for someone looking for best cost per GB and still trying to avoid HDs and not wanting to RAID a stack of 128GB drives together I could see the advantage of 600GB of data in a single small package that is shock resistant.

And Samsung is nearing that ever desired $1.50/GB price point where a 128GB drive could be under $200 shipped to my door. Heck even the C300 seems to be heading that direction.

edit: fixed extra line breaks around C4 part numbers.

Doug,

In line with your posts in the How important are random writes on SSDs thread, I'd suggest contiuning to use the 40GB X25-V random write performance as the cutoff. Since the 40GB Intel 320 Series will undoubtedly exhibit a lower random write speed, this would be grounds for it's exclusion from your price list.

That's kind of what I've been thinking for the last few weeks but I'm waiting for solid reviews to pull the trigger one way or another. I am open to the concept of redefining the low bar slightly once the reviews are in.

FWIW, the first 3 reviews on newegg have 2 of the 3 complaining about lower than expected speeds. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6820167044 yet they all gave it 4 or 5 eggs.

I still haven't seen a thorough review from any source let alone a trusted one.

Hi,

I'm going next week in Singapore, so I tought I'd pick up one of the Intel 320's (80Gb probably). Does anyone know computer stores that sells Intel SSDs in Singapore?
Thx!

Sorry if it's offtopic...