Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel 320 review with benchmarks published

Last response: in Storage
Share
a b å Intel
a c 303 G Storage
March 28, 2011 1:31:49 PM

Intel 320 80Gb ssd review with benchmarks published:

http://en.expreview.com/2011/03/23/world-exclusive-revi...

It's pretty much an updated X25-M. There is no comparison with other solid state drives.

Tom's Hardware has published a review with a comparison of ssd's:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-ssd-320-cruci...

So has AnandTech:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4244/intel-ssd-320-review

PC Perspective:

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=1102&type=expert

Legit Reviews:

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1579/1/

Tech Report:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/20653

SSD Review:

http://thessdreview.com/our-reviews/intel-320-series-30...

Storage Review:

http://www.storagereview.com/intel_ssd_320_review_300gb

PC World Magazine Mainstream Review:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/223477/intel_320_series_...
a b å Intel
a c 143 G Storage
March 28, 2011 4:35:59 PM

Intel has been letting me down as of late. I keep expecting them to produce product like the original X25-M G2, which was top dog and most reliable for the longest time. It seems like they are losing ground to Crucial and OCZ with each new release.

Here is hoping the SATA6 25nm, whenever released, gets Intel back on track :( 
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 303 G Storage
March 28, 2011 4:42:01 PM

At least Intel is advertising the 320 series as a mid-level ssd.

EDIT - Several reviews suggest Intel might not be that far off the mark because there is an extremely large base of users that do not have SATA III (6 Gb/s) capability. Ever since I found out the 320 was a SATA II (3 Gb/s) ssd I'v been wondering about it because of an article right here at Tom's Hardware a while back indicating the vast majority of users were still using Intel dual core based systems. That means they don't have SATA III capabilities. One of the reviews went so far as to say users with SATA III (6 Gb/s) systems are a drop in the bucket compared to users with SATA II (3 Gb/s) systems.

EDIT - Just read the news article on the home page of Tom's Hardware. Intel claims there are over one billion SATA II (3 Gb/s) pc's around the world. Looks like Intel knows what they are doing - going for the bread and butter - lots of it.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b å Intel
a c 143 G Storage
March 28, 2011 5:13:14 PM

Christian,

Your link is broken... :(  (well for me at least).

As a trusted X25-M users for over a year, I can agree with the reliability and performance of those drives.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 303 G Storage
March 28, 2011 5:25:41 PM

Christian - same here - I got a page not found error.

When can gamers and enthusiasts expect an Intel SATA III (6 Gb/s) ssd with a custom Intel controller and 25nm Flash?

Intel has released new ssd's three months in a row. What's next?
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 415 G Storage
March 30, 2011 1:05:14 AM

I'd really like to see a statement of write endurance for these drives (i.e., Intel claims the X25M G2 160GB drive will last "at least" 5 years at a write rate of 20GB/day).

I place a higher premium on reliability than performance, and right now the 320 series is looking like it might have the chops. The ability to retain all data in the event of an unexpected power failure as well as the resilience to withstand multiple NAND chip failures are very attractive qualities from my point of view.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 303 G Storage
March 30, 2011 1:56:59 AM

sminlal - Thanks. Look like an Intel advertising flyer.

In one of the reviews AnandTech did some math based on "current usage models". I don't remember which one. I am positive he thought the ssd's would last well beyond their warranty and people would probably upgrade before the ssd's give out. I know he installed a couple of new ssd's in his servers to see what would happen long term.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 415 G Storage
March 30, 2011 4:13:54 PM

JohnnyLucky said:
In one of the reviews AnandTech did some math based on "current usage models".
I'd have more confidence in a statement made by the manufacturer, as Intel did for it's X25-M G2 drives.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 303 G Storage
March 30, 2011 4:39:27 PM

sminlal - Intel officially says 1.2 million hours Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) for the new 320 ssd's. The information is in the specification on the second page of that Intel advertising flyer.

I do remember endurance for the 320 is a little lower than the X25-M but I can't remember where I saw that.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 415 G Storage
March 30, 2011 4:58:33 PM

JohnnyLucky said:
sminlal - Intel officially says 1.2 million hours Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) for the new 320 ssd's.
Yes, but that doesn't tell you anything about the write endurance of the drive. The other spec I'd love to see, and which I've never seen for any SSD, is data retention time. Bits in flash memory cells are stored as static charges - those charges dissipate over time and so the drive will "loose" data if it's left there long enough. I've never seen a spec on this for an SSD, although at least one spec sheet for the raw flash chips apparently specifies 10 years. But this is another characteristic that degrades with smaller cell sizes...
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 303 G Storage
March 30, 2011 5:55:05 PM

Understood. I do not recall reading anything specific about data retention so I did a little research.

Here is a link to the JEDEC test standard you can download:

http://www.jedec.org/standards-documents/results/JESD22...

Here is a link to an interesting Intel forum thread:

http://communities.intel.com/thread/13783?wapkw=(temperature)

Here is a link to a report about data reliability and lifetime written by a couple of electrical engineers at Imation:

http://www.imation.com/PageFiles/83/SSD-Reliability-Lif...

1. I think there is some interesting information over at JEDEC. Might be worth registering to take a look at what they have since it is a standards organization.

2. Just google for: ssd data retention time and you'll get quite a few results. Would probably have to sort through them to find the good info.

EDIT - Looks like data retention is probably about 10 years. Lots of factors to consider. Being a senior citizen I figure I'll be 6 feet under and pushing up daisies by then.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 415 G Storage
March 30, 2011 6:59:13 PM

JohnnyLucky said:
Here is a link to the JEDEC test standard you can download....

...EDIT - Looks like data retention is probably about 10 years. Lots of factors to consider. Being a senior citizen I figure I'll be 6 feet under and pushing up daisies by then.
Interesting links, thanks for posting them. My thought is that to play it safe I'll wipe my SSD and re-install everything on it after 5 years - that way I won't be depending on any bits that are getting too old.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 303 G Storage
March 30, 2011 7:30:30 PM

I bet you do an upgrade before the 5 year mark. :) 

In the meantime, Intel 320 already sold out at newegg.com.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 415 G Storage
March 30, 2011 7:33:35 PM

JohnnyLucky said:
I bet you do an upgrade before the 5 year mark. :) 
Probably, but an upgrade isn't sufficient - I'll need to rewrite all the bits on the drive. That means rewriting the partition table / MBR, file system metadata, and all of the files and folders as well.
m
0
l
April 27, 2011 5:03:05 PM

tecmo34 said:
Intel has been letting me down as of late. I keep expecting them to produce product like the original X25-M G2, which was top dog and most reliable for the longest time. It seems like they are losing ground to Crucial and OCZ with each new release.

Here is hoping the SATA6 25nm, whenever released, gets Intel back on track :( 


How is OCZ beating Intel? Their drives fail within a few months at most, and their advertised speeds are very misleading. Just google around and look at some reviews to compare for yourself which customers are more satisfied.
m
0
l
a b å Intel
a c 303 G Storage
April 27, 2011 5:42:06 PM

synce - This is an old thread from last month. Should have started a new thread.

Anyway, when it comes to home users, gamers, and enthusiasts Intel no longer has the fastest drives. Intel has been surpassed by ssd's using the brand new SandForce 2XXX controllers.
m
0
l
!