Intel recently introduced its SSD 330 family, positioned ahead of the SSD 320s and below the SSD 520s. Like the company's highest-end models, these drives employ SandForce's controller technology. We bought all three capacities and ran our tests on them.
Test Setup And Benchmarks
Firmware Notes:
In late April, OCZ released v3.02.06 of its Toolbox software, along with the 2.22 firmware update for the Vertex 3, Vertex 3 Max IOPS, Agility 3, Solid 3, RevoDrive 3, RevoDrive 3 X2 and Synapse lines.
According to the OCZ, the update resolves two specific problems relating to SSD slumber and secure erase, possibly improving performance in some workloads. After updating our 120 GB Vertex 3, however, we were not able to measure any speed-ups. As a result, we elected not to retest all of our OCZ-branded SSDs.
I bought this samsung 830 256gb ssd for $390 five-six months ago
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820147164
now its $275 or $1.074/GB. Better price/stability/performance than those listed above.
au_equusI bought this samsung 830 256gb ssd for $390 five-six months agohttp://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod 6820147164now its $275 or $1.074/GB. Better price/stability/performance than those listed above.
Crucial m4 128GB from Newegg and Amazon @ 124.99. That is less than $1/GB.
Intel should have used non-SandForce controllers. The Vertex 4 (with the new firmware) shows what Sandforce alternatives are capable of, I hope that Intel's next flagship series does something similarly spectacular without Sandforce. I think that Intel could have used the 330s as a stepping stone to get a controller (such as a Marvell controller) up to Vertex 4-like performance (or better) in more universal workloads than Sandforce for their next flagship series.
On that note, why weren't the Vertex 4s included in this review with the other drives?
EoveinOne question, which didn't explained: what Intel SSD is better for SATA 3Gb/sec 320 or 330 series?
I don't think that it makes much difference at SATA 3Gb/s, but the 330s are faster drives, so they might be marginally better.
chimera201When will the price of SSD come down to HDD level? That would be news.
Probably at least not until a cheaper memory than Flash is used in SSDs, so maybe ten to twenty years, if we're lucky.
Am not a mad scientist or anything so I have missed something but to me Intel SSD is as good as any others on the market. I wouldn't see any difference in real world scenario between 330 and 520 or Samsung 830 or even M4. Who cares? I don't anyway. Just get the drive that you trust and that has reasonable warranty (3 years +) and good support. Done.
edvinasmAm not a mad scientist or anything so I have missed something but to me Intel SSD is as good as any others on the market. I wouldn't see any difference in real world scenario between 330 and 520 or Samsung 830 or even M4. Who cares? I don't anyway. Just get the drive that you trust and that has reasonable warranty (3 years +) and good support. Done.
Whether or not a part that is faster for your workloads than others and is faster enough to make a difference depends on what you are doing. If I was doing a lot of storage heavy stuff, like constantly downloading and decompressing large archives, then an SSD that can deal with in-compressible data very well would provide very noticeable gains over any SandForce drive or any lower end non-Sandforce drives.
blazorthonWhether or not a part that is faster for your workloads than others and is faster enough to make a difference depends on what you are doing. If I was doing a lot of storage heavy stuff, like constantly downloading and decompressing large archives, then an SSD that can deal with in-compressible data very well would provide very noticeable gains over any SandForce drive or any lower end non-Sandforce drives.
Fair point. Mind you, if you do that much and it's that important hardly any of standard (consumer grade) SSDs would interest you. Unless you are talking of downloading software and games from questionable sites, then yes - cheap and fast is cheerful.