Intel Unveils 120GB SSD: The X25-M Sweet Spot
120GB of Intel SSD goodness for under $250.
If you wanted to grab an Intel X25-M SSD for your desktop or laptop, you're like faced with the option of going with the 80GB or 160GB model. While the prices on the G2 models do scale well with each other, the 80GB may be too small and the 160GB may be too expensive.
If that was a dilemma that you are faced with, then Intel has a new solution for you – the 120GB model that's less than 50 percent more expensive than the 80GB model.
The new 120GB X25-M has an MSRP of $249, while the 80GB is now at $199 and the 160GB is at $415. If that's still to spendy for you, then there's the $99 entry-level 40GB Intel X25-V "boot drive."
"Every Christmas, consumers are looking for the latest tech gadget; this year, with prices dropping, the solid-state drive is becoming more mainstream and can make the single greatest improvement to PC performance," said Troy Winslow, director of product marketing for the Intel NAND Solutions Group. "With an SSD, tech shoppers can give the gift of a technology makeover that will help speed up, or breathe new life, into a current PC by just swapping out the hard drive for an SSD."
Of course, these are still running the 34nm Postville flash, so those looking for speedier solutions should wait for the 25nm Postville Refresh.

Which is weird, the higher capacity ones seem to be cheaper in performance/price.
I don't mean to bust your balls but check this out.
http://www.frys.com/product/6165889?site=sr:SEARCH:MAIN_RSLT_PG
I know it sucks.
Because that is the capitalist model: The first ever launched SSDs should be dropping to reasonable prices, while the newer technology SSDs take their price points. Similar to the gfx card price wars. Get it? There are newer SSDs coming out all the time and the older models are not dropping to lower price points. If demand is really this high, then supply should be following religiously, because nobody would lose money over any investment into an SSD market. But it is not. I feel that by now you should be able to pick up a budget SSD of 80 GB for 50 bucks. Maybe without TRIM, or a newer tech controller, but an SSD none the less giving the middle ground of performance. The article today about HDD raid 0 vs SSD raid 0 showed the tremendous gap we already know exists. There is a middle ground, which (I think seagate?) tried to cover by combining the technologies with their hybrids. I haven't seen any performance figures for these, but it is a step in the right direction IMO. It is just frustrating as a consumer when there are performance/price gaps that are insurmountable. Imagine no available vehicle in the 10k-30k price range, and your only choices are a neon or a benz? Wtf?
Sadly the nand prices wich are the major cost for the SSD's don't seem to drop at the rate they should considering the improved yeilds and the number of "shrinks" they made to date - Samsung for instance is world famous for its numbers of price cartels in the part and is still world leading the production of the nand if im not mistaken.
Maby something for the EU & US goverment should look into for some easy money!
You'll be sadly disappointed when all this SSD "boot drive" garbage is a thing of the past this time next year. I'm waiting out until I can get a 256GB SSDfor < $200. Although a stretch, I think this time next year it will be near that price.
Then you have too much other crap on your drive....I have Windows 7 Pro 64-bit, office ultimate 2007, a few games like Crysis and GOW (10GB each) and my 160GB Intel SSD still has about 50 GB free.....
move your songs and videos to a mechanical disk....they get no benefit from being on your ssd
I think the solution is to just keep core stuff on the ssd (excluding games which have to go on the hdd just due to their size)
My desktop is an 80GB Intel G2 and a WD6400AAKS and that is working great for me so far. Laptop is a 160GB G2 and WD6400BEVT which is also working well (I have alot more files on the laptop from school and such)