Enthusiasts with SSDs are loathe to swap back to mechanical storage. And for good reason. Wonderful though they might be for cramming lots of information into a compact space, disk drives aren't as responsive, and they're not as fast. Getting the best of each world often involves a desktop machine with both technologies under the hood. Use a decently-sized SSD for loading Windows and performance-sensitive apps, then throw your other programs and user data on the big disk.
Unfortunately, mobility often precludes such a luxury. Compact enclosures mean that storage is usually limited to a single drive. Only the larger notebook chassis give you room for two or more disks, and those are commonly desktop replacements--hardly ideal candidates for getting dragged back and forth from class each day. Looks like it's time to make a choice. SSD or hard drive; which will it be?

It's fair to say that, given the choice, most enthusiasts would opt for solid-state technology over a hard drive any day of the week. The problem, of course, is that an SSD gives you limited capacity. Not only that, but it's comparatively very, very expensive when you look at cost per gigabyte. An SSD in a laptop sounds nice, but getting enough space for your OS, games, apps, and information is only really affordable for a fortunate few. Everyone else gets to drool over the killer data rates and plug along on 2.5" 7200 RPM disks, at best.
If only it were possible to mix and match storage technologies using conventional hard drives and solid-state storage packed into a more space-conserving form factor.
That's exactly what Intel is trying to do with its Solid-State Drive 310-series--small form-factor SSDs aimed at some of the most mobile environments you could imagine. Designed to work in a mSATA interface and available in capacities of 40 or 80 GB, we could be looking at the answer to hybrid storage subsystems in thin-and-light designs. Additionally, Intel is aiming at the netbook, mini/sub-notebook, all-in-one, and embedded markets.
In one fell swoop, the company claims to be addressing size, weight, power, performance, and reliability issues with which 2.5" and 1.8" hard drives cannot compete. Is this the end-all for the folks who sit in front of online configurators trying to figure out if it's worth spending so much extra money on an SSD, when they really need the space afforded by that 320 or 500 GB hard drive?
We set up a handful of different usage scenarios with the goal of digging deeper. Lets dissect the SSD 310-series and what it might do for your next mobile machine.
- Notebooks: One Drive Only?
- Meet Intel's SSD 310: Like X25-V, Only Smaller
- mSATA: Completely New
- Test Setup
- Benchmark Results: I/O Performance
- Benchmark Results: Iometer Streaming
- Benchmark Results: CrystalDiskMark Streaming Performance
- Benchmark Results: 4 KB And 512 KB Random Reads
- Benchmark Results: 4 KB And 512 KB Random Writes
- Benchmark Results: PCMark Vantage Storage Test
- Benchmark Results: Mobile Performance
- Benchmark Results: File Transfer Performance And Power Consumption
- Final Words

Been rocking an SSD for about a year now, and there is no going back to mechanical drives, SSD for the laptop segment makes even more sense. I think most of us however would like to see price drops a bit faster though, my 120GB OCZ Vertex Turbo cost me over 500 dollars.
Been rocking an SSD for about a year now, and there is no going back to mechanical drives, SSD for the laptop segment makes even more sense. I think most of us however would like to see price drops a bit faster though, my 120GB OCZ Vertex Turbo cost me over 500 dollars.
I believe the last report I read mentioned close to 60% of all SSD purchases are mobile related. SSDs can really mark up a notebook's price, so I'm right there with you on prices. We need price drops, more of them, and in quicker succession.
Cheers,
Andrew Ku
TomsHardware.com
We have fast, extremely fast drives but at prices that touch the sky, wouldn't it be better to just have loaded or embedded the OS straight onto the mobo.... cheaper until it's capable of handling the high data flow rates offered by SSD... yet not being able to saturate the SATA flow rates or capacities.....
History has been made. SSD's are finally starting to hit a dollar/GB. Keep those prices dropping!
My Steam folder alone is 437GB. I have another 100GB+ on non steam games also. Then add my OS and etc.
I currently enjoy the faster speeds of 4x500 RAID 0 with the OS on a 1TB. I would actually be running 8x500GB RAID 0 if my case was large enough, and my graphics card weren't so large (blocks 2 slots).
How does Toms feel about doing a showdown between $500 of modern HDD vs $500 of modern SSD? With and without a dedicated controller.
I know for my next build I don't know whether I want 4x 3TB or a 3TB with 2-3x SSD or 3x 3TB with a single small SSD, or is it better to go with, say, 8x 1TB or 4x 3TB in either RAID 0, 10, 5, 6, 50, 60 etc.
So, if I would have to choose between old-school 500GB HDD, overkill 256GB SSD, or just simple 60-128GB SSD + external 2.5" HDD for a laptop, I'd go with the last one.
It is all relative. I have a 256GB SSD on my m15x laptop and I can tell it boots slightly faster then my desktop but loads apps about the same. My desktop has 2 velociraptors stripped 0 raid. I have no complaints with the desktop but would I like to replace the raptors with SSD's? Of course but it makes more sense to start with mobile since it really helps more on that.
Yes but that is AFTER a $75 mail in rebate. Computer companies are not good with rebates, the last time I sent in a batch of them I received half of them back. I wouldn't want to gamble on a rebate that is 60% of the final cost of the product. And that is the old generation of Kingston drive, probably a closeout because they have new versions on the market now.
I think you have to figure almost $2 per Gb to get a quality drive with good performance, and that is after searching for sales.
Reliability is still questionable though. The reliability ratings for good hard drives are still much higher than they are for SSD's.
I have 3 laptops that need upgrades so I really do need to see some big price drops.
History has been made. SSD's are finally starting to hit a dollar/GB. Keep those prices dropping!
That's AFTER rebate. Read the not-so-fine print. It's $180 before rebate. It's not really the same thing as saying prices are almost at 1$/GB. The $/GB is still getting better, but not by as much as most were hoping. I think SSD prices will gradually get lower from the spring to the fall, where I would expect them to take a more significant dive in relative cost. You see some good deals, but nothing crazy good. If you want a relatively spacious drive you will still have to pay for it. Its not going to get really cheap out of nowhere. The Intel x25-V is still about the same price, and the same speed as it was at launch. A 60GB SF drive is still round $120, the same price as the 60GB Idilinx drives they replace. SSDs are still way better and cheaper than they were 2 years ago. Just don't expect any miracles any time soon.
What if I am traveling and I want to throw a few blu-rays (25-30gb each)from my media center to my netbook to watch on the plane/in the airport etc... I know you can use an external drive and all that, but it is a pain to get it out and have it wired to your setup while you are on the go.
The point is, it will be awesome when we can have a 40 or 80 GB SSD for OS/apps along with a hard drive for media in ultraportable devices...
Im really excited about these new mSATA devices that intel is producing. I just purchased a HP Pavilion dm1z netbook based on AMD's Fusion APU and it looks like it has an open SATA in addition to the HDD, although I have not been able to find out if it supports mSATA...if anyone knows it would be awesome to post it here...
Well, I guess if the Samsung and Toshiba products that preceded it don't count. And in Tomshardwareland, anybody who buys a Macbook Air must not be "the masses"...
Well, of course, a future hybrid solution would be optimal, since dragging that external drive is a pain for all of us, but that's wishful thinking about the rosy future rather than an option right now and here. So either live with your slow HDD, overpay for huge SSD, or endure the agonizing pain of standing in line for check-in, baggage drop, security check, boarding, getting into your seat, and those never-ending additional 60seconds of attaching your dedicated "Movies/music&other junk" ext-HDD.
Besides, watching raw Blu-Rays on an everyday laptop while on a plane is like listening to FLAC or raw PCM through a gramophone or your phone speaker.
The 40 GB version of this device can be had for $100 (albeit a bit slower). How much does a decent external drive cost? 40-50 bucks at the minimum? I would rather have one of these and keep the 320GB HDD in the laptop. Then you get speed and capacity--for what a $50 premium? Hybrid solutions like this are imminent,not too far off in the rosy future. And .mkv playback sounds rather IMHO nice on a decent pair of headphones.
I have no desire to re-encode my entire blu ray collection (i ripped them in native format for optimal quality and to serve as a true backup) using a dual core Athlon II chip just so it will fit on a SSD.
I'm not trying to start a war here; mostly im agreeing with the point of the article, and that is a hybrid solution will be the next big step in mobile computing. The point I was trying to make is that needing more than 128 GB is not so "un-average" these days: I'm not a serious gamer, nor a professional graphics/video/content creator etc. But by the time you use up the space required by windows 7, your software suit, 7-8GB of music etc...etc...etc...its not as uncommon to use up 120GB of space.
The Dell M4400 (15.6" screen) and other dell models allow for removing the CD-ROM drive (no tools required) and replace with a second hard drive or battery. So a 750 GB Western Digital mechanical drive is also in my Laptop.
The finishing touch is a 48 GB File-Mate (Win-Tec) PCI-Express SSD Card that I use for running Virtual PC's. Total of 3 "spindles" in a 7 pound Laptop.
This is for sure a High End setup, but the replacement for the CD-ROM drive is $50 plus the drive you add, everyone can get 750 GB extra for under $150. The enclosure is available for most Dell Latitude and Precision Laptops.
The article complained that two manufacturers produced non-standard devices using miniPCIe connectors, but did not explain why they thought they needed to do this. It complained that the market was fragmented, but adding yet another 'standard' using the same connector seems to also fragment the market. As the article points out in the Lenovo specs, it confuses the market since the connections look the same.
The article showed a diagram where the pink PCIe/SATA signal conversion is either on the motherboard or on the card. In theory, this would mean the motherboard is more expensive with mSATA, and the SSD is more expensive with miniPCIe.
But it seems like that is not the case on the SSD side: mSATA SSDs are currently more expensive than miniPCIe SSDs. Since miniPCIe SSD drives are cheaper, some people are claiming to save money by modifying/rewiring the connections on the miniPCIe SSD so they work in mSATA sockets.
So why not use miniPCIe instead of mSATA ? What did I miss?
(I hope there is a technical rationale I've missed. Or is this simply an industry marketing maneuver to fragment the market so each card is less of a commodity, and drive up profits?)