$3:1GB? We're getting there.

When we Hit $1.50-$2.00 per GB i will buy 2 256 to put in a raid 0 in my DELL M6400 Covet!

Chipset? These don't look like standard indilinx or samsung specs!

yep, the 64 and 128GB prices are just about in reach for the not-quiet-early-but-earlyish adopters

Golden number is 1:1

Hmmmmm I like the

if you want speed and performance... why RAID basic SSDs? Just get an SSD-PCIe card and you can reach data speeds of 1500.

You also cant boot off of a PCIe-SSD at this time and the cost is absurd...

Which consumer pci-e ssds are actually on the market already? And you can't boot from the fusion-io drive but the others I have heard about work basically like a raid controller card with on board flash memory, so they are boot-able.

I've read they're working on making them bootable but have not seen anywhere saying they're at this time, and plus I've read prices for these range between $1600-5000 US.

Haven't we learned by now that the sequential read/write speeds mean next to nothing?

After reading this article, I know nothing about these drives other than pricing.

I'm about willing to take bets: when the gallium/arsenide CPUs hit the shelves along with the magnesium hydride nanocrystal SSDs, we'll see the current version of SSD being used for chucking at the neighbor's yowling cat at midnight. Or is it just me?

That's what I'm wondering. They just made their other models obsolete, so Crucial will have to charge a lot less for the older drives if they want to sell them. But why buy those when new models seem to be coming out every month?

I still don't see a compelling reason until they come down to something like the 1GB:$1 that was mentioned. I would buy 64GB for 64 bucks..IF it was significantly faster than my current drive.

Bigger SSDs but also bigger prices!! The real news here is that the high premium is still unreasonable for most folks.

I just hoped they would also create a budget version for the netbook/notebook market!
Being fast is great and all, but I'm still not willing to pay more than $100 for a drive.
And preferably for a drive > 32, or even 64GB
these specs are all very wonderful, but for the average joe that uses his laptop for connecting to the internet, watch some HD video, and play a game or two, power requirement matters more than lightning fast speeds.

If Crucial would create a 64-80GB SSD, with a good controller, and say 120/80MB R/W speeds, in a very energy efficient drive with plenty of IOPS, for the price of $120 I'd be on my toes to buy it immediately!

Asus EeePc does it!

They DO mean something, because most of the time, if you know it has a good controller, a +200MBs R/W MLC SSD can outperform a 60MBs R/W SLC SSD.
IOPS increase also with sequential R/W, and Crucial is known for making reasonably good drives.
The drive's sequencial speed together with the data that it's SATA3 compatible should tell you that it is 90% surely not equipped with a crappy controller neither!

That's about where spinning disks were in ~2002 if my memory serves me well.

The price is almost bearable, can't wait to see one in my next computer.

=D

ditto

100 \$100\

The point is, at this point they are not for most folks but for smart folks!

Very tempting to bite. Building a new PC next year and may just be able to replace my 10k Raptor with one of these!

ssd is not a new technology, its just the hot "shiz" on the market if you will, the reason for the new drives everymonth is, they know that these drives are overpriced..now all they do is sit back and see how many impulse shoppers they can pick up.

i will definately be using SSD in my next build/upgrade. there is really no reason no to, other than the heafty pricetag

what 128gb is only 23 euros more than 64gb ?? that can't be right...

Gimme a 64GB for $100 and I'll buy it and slap it in my laptop to give it a bit longer life cycle.