Intel has put together a solid offering, but I don't see why you wouldn't just get an 830. I might be biased since I have an 830 running in this system, but I have faith in Samsung my first ssds were from them and now almost 2 years later they are running great in their RAID 0.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Intel 520 'Cherryville' Series 240GB SSD
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
I love my X25M-G2 120GB. Have had it for 2 plus years and never a single issue and I've had to reformat and secure erase it twice for a WIndows reinstall.
That alone will get me to pay more for another Intel drive. Not as much of a difference as they are selling for now compared to an M4 or Corsair Force GT but I will pay more. I'm sure the prices will start coming down.
That alone will get me to pay more for another Intel drive. Not as much of a difference as they are selling for now compared to an M4 or Corsair Force GT but I will pay more. I'm sure the prices will start coming down.
Love my Intel X25M-G2 80GB from December 2009, when Intel first updated the bios so Win7 could run the trim support, seems like ages ago, but I have also had zero issues and have seen many of the SandForce controller ssds come along but without the Intel support and amazing ssd toolbox to keep the drive running efficiently I just could not justify purchasing an OCZ or Samsung or Corsair, but that’s just me.
With these new Intel 520s I am definitely adding one to my Ivy Bridge April build component list. Going from 250MB/s 70Mb/s read/write to 500Mb/s 500Mb/s read/write, should be screaming fast!
One strange thing has happened, don't know if it means anything, I haven't noticed a performance drop but the Windows 7 Experience Index was 7.8 when the drive was new and since has fallen to 7.3. Has anyone else noticed this change?
With these new Intel 520s I am definitely adding one to my Ivy Bridge April build component list. Going from 250MB/s 70Mb/s read/write to 500Mb/s 500Mb/s read/write, should be screaming fast!
One strange thing has happened, don't know if it means anything, I haven't noticed a performance drop but the Windows 7 Experience Index was 7.8 when the drive was new and since has fallen to 7.3. Has anyone else noticed this change?
Last edited:
That's something that occurs with SSDs as they get used and abused. You'll see performance degradation on any SSD but it can affect some more than others and usually has a lot to do with garbage collection like TRIM. There's a "new" state and there's a "used" state. The high end SF-2281 drives like the Corsair Force GT do a very good job of retaining that "new" state as well as the Marvell-based drives like Crucial's M4.
If you do a lot of heavy writes on the SSD with large blocks of data the performance can fluctuate. Sometimes it can take a while for TRIM to kick in and clean up the mess, and my guess is that's what happened.
If you do a lot of heavy writes on the SSD with large blocks of data the performance can fluctuate. Sometimes it can take a while for TRIM to kick in and clean up the mess, and my guess is that's what happened.
I do reinstall Windows7 from an image probably more often than most 2 to 3 times a month, would that account for the heavy writes?
No. Heavy writes would be on the order of gigabytes a day.
drleospaceman
Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2009
- Messages
- 518
What's wrong with Samsung's toolbox?
I think we all just feed from our positive experiences with hardware, I bought an Intel 80GB ssd way back in 2009 and have been issue free, and love the toolbox utilities, it is still going strong with no problems, not even a reason to upgrade except more performance, so for me I will go with Intel again, just mho.
when i tested the three drives in RAID 0, i can honestly say that these Intels were very 'level' in their performance...I test arrays of SF drives quite a bit...and they usually do suffer from some notable performance variability. the Intels were the 'smoothest' in this respect that i have tested. The review is up, but you have to google Intel 520 SSD Review (Round Two) in order to find it. i cannot link it here for some reason!
great stuff though, these are nice drives
great stuff though, these are nice drives
SylarPowers
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,263
I think I just have good memories of my Intel G2 and Samsung is new to me as the one to go for. But I'll get the Samsung 830 if there is no reason to go for the intel 520.
christpunchers
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2006
- Messages
- 501
I already have an Intel 510 250GB.
Would it be worth it to sell the 510 and upgrade to a 520? (I should be able to recoup all the cost).
What about write endurance? The 510 is 34nm, but slower than the 520.
Would it be worth it to sell the 510 and upgrade to a 520? (I should be able to recoup all the cost).
What about write endurance? The 510 is 34nm, but slower than the 520.
silent-circuit
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2005
- Messages
- 16,136
I don't see why someone would pay you anywhere near what a new 520 of comparable capacity will cost for a used 510...
If you can flip your 510 and get anywhere close to your original cost on it, I would do it just because that scenario may not always be possible. I doubt you'd see any noticeable difference in most day-to-day use, but you may in more intensive apps and games.
Gotta agree, so repeating myself christpunchers, if you are wanting a 520 and really can unload your 510 for close to what you put into it, do so.
For me, Samsung 830, Corsair Performance Pro, Crucial and Plextor offerings are better value and I'd give up the Intel name and any performance advantage a 520 has for the better pricing on these other models.
BababooeyHTJ
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2009
- Messages
- 6,951
You didn't deal with the C300 006 firmware issue where the drive would stutter. They just recently released an update for the M4 where it would bsod once a day. Crucial's track record isn't exactly blemish free either.
SylarPowers
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,263
I'm going with the Samsung 830 after all. I wish Intel would just do its own sata 3 controller already. That would be worth some extra money... But after all this pondering, I have to agree that an Intel Sandforce 520 240GB isn't worth the $160+ premium over the comparable 256GB 830. For me anyway.
The 120GB is only $229, but if you need the capacity, then...I just cannot force myself to spend money on a Samsung ssd, maybe it's psychological, I got the Samsung 4 door refrigerator in the kitchen and washer and dryer in platinum stainless downstairs, but for an ssd I just have to stick with Intel, also feel sorry for those people who bought a 310, or 320 or 510, what were they thinking? Those drives were substandard in the reviews, not a noteworthy effort by Intel. In fact the last great ssd Intel put there name on was the X25-M series. Why do people buy products with poor reviews, and then regret their decision? That's what reviews are for. Just mho from the base of the mountain.
Last edited:
BababooeyHTJ
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2009
- Messages
- 6,951
You do realize that Samsung makes tons of things. Their hard drives were/are among the best. They make some great memory. Their displays are top of the line. They are one of if not the largest oem of ssds.
How was the 320 or 510 substandard? Did you read the Anandtech 520 review? The Intel 320 is very popular in the server market. Why? Reliability. Do you really think that you'll notice the difference between the Intel 320 and a sandforce in every day use on your average pc? You obviously haven't read too much about the issues that have cropped with their competitors drives at the time like sandforce and even Marvell based drives.
With Intel you pay for the validation, reliability. Thats a lot more noticeable in real world usage than a bit of extra performance that you'll never see.
Come on, now. The Intel 320 had the worst firmware bug a person could possibly dream up.
It's true that you probably won't notice much of a difference in performance. But when the higher performing drive is cheaper it's somewhat of a no-brainer.
It's like Pentium vs. Athlon. Sure you could pay more money for a slower CPU with the top brand, but what's the point?
BababooeyHTJ
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2009
- Messages
- 6,951
Here is the original thread on Intel forums where the bug was found. Count the actual amount of effected users. You've got to remember that Intel had probably shipped far more drives than their competition other than maybe samsung.
Yes, but what percentage of the affected users post on the Intel forum? And even now, after the firmware update, there are still people posting there with the same problem.
BSODs are no fun, but it's better them than losing all of your data. If 5% of X users get BSODs and 1% of Y users end up with bricked drives, I'm going with X, since it's not just about probabilities but also the consequences.
The Intel 510... great drive. The 710... great. The X-25M, etc... great. But the 320 is a turd. How will the 520 end up? Probably fine. But to pretend the 320 is okay and give Intel a pass -- i.e., AnandTech -- is kind of biased. I don't hate on Intel for making a mistake... all the manufacturers are in that boat. It's the idea that Intel is above making those mistakes that I'm calling out.
There are people who are outright terrified of SF drives, but don't bat an eyelash with regard to the 320. Silly, IMO.
BababooeyHTJ
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2009
- Messages
- 6,951
You do realize that this problem also effected the x25m, right? Yet, you claim that the x25m is a great drive yet this drive with the same controller is not? Yeah, must be really widespread.
People are still having this issue? When you make a statement like that you really should back it up with some links.
I haven't seen a single effected 320 user post on this or any other forum that I visit. Sandforce on the other hand, yeah its not that hard to find one. Spin it anyway that you want.
I had no idea the x-25m had the problem as well. I guess Intel is much worse than I gave them credit for.
As for the link, it was right from the Intel forum you linked: http://communities.intel.com/thread/24339?start=30&tstart=0
Latest post a week ago.
As for the link, it was right from the Intel forum you linked: http://communities.intel.com/thread/24339?start=30&tstart=0
Latest post a week ago.
BababooeyHTJ
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2009
- Messages
- 6,951
There are how many users in that six month old three page long thread? You didn't even know about the same issue on the X25m, you've got to wonder how many other ssds have similar issues that you don't know about. Sorry, I still haven't seen one report of this outside of Intel forums.
Like I said spin it any way that you want.
kevinsbane
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2011
- Messages
- 269
Whether or not they posted on the forum, Intel SSDs have been confirmed (by a LONG shot) to have the lowest RMA rates among all SSD manufacturers. By multiple sources too: (one of the french based sites gives running totals of RMA rates; NCIX also commented on the same thing based on their own experience).
There are how many users in that six month old three page long thread? You didn't even know about the same issue on the X25m, you've got to wonder how many other ssds have similar issues that you don't know about. Sorry, I still haven't seen one report of this outside of Intel forums.
Like I said spin it any way that you want.
So we've concluded that Intel is not above reproach. Now the only question is whether or not that faux reliability is worth the real price premium.
So we've concluded that Intel is not above reproach. Now the only question is whether or not that faux reliability is worth the real price premium.
No one ever said (that I saw) that Intel was above reproach. Everyone has had, and will always have, problems; you're basically just playing the odds. And Intel's odds have been pretty good. Not good enough to justify the price premium on the 520, but I haven't heard too many complaints about the 320 (compared to, say, the Agility drives).
SylarPowers
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,263
My Samsung 830 256GB for $340 delivered just shipped from Amazon... Doubled checked the price on the Intel 520... Still wayy to high! Dear Intel, you have out priced me sir! Come back to reality. PS: Can't wait for IVY Bridge!
It's $394.99 on Amazon. How did you get that low?
Similarly, I have purchased the 512GB version of the 830. The price delta between it and the Intel 520 480GB model was well over $300.
This is a large premium for a product that offers no performance or reliability advantage.
I love my X25M G2, but for the next few years Intel is out of the SSD picture for me.
SylarPowers
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,263
I've learned to check Amazon's price when they're not the first vender listed... sometimes they're cheaper but not in stock. They were matching neweggs Samsung 830 256GB SSD price at that time I believe. So I ordered it but it was not ready til now.
And $720 for the Samsung 830 512GB is not shabby. I'd buy that over vs a 240GB-480GB Intel 520... Once your over $500 you might as well save money and get the extra space to boot.
And $720 for the Samsung 830 512GB is not shabby. I'd buy that over vs a 240GB-480GB Intel 520... Once your over $500 you might as well save money and get the extra space to boot.
Last edited:
martinmsj
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,581
I think the M4 at 512 is a better deal. It's been on sale on and off for 660ish. Most importantly for me it's one of the ones recommended (by Anandtech) for the Macbook Pros.
I REALLY need to get a bigger SSD. Currently have a 160GB X25M-G2.
Torn between this and the Corsair Force GT.
I'm still rocking my X58 1366 i7 920 on a EVGA Classified E760 board so the SATA speeds are no big deal to me.
Not sure which one I should get. Reliability trumps everything else by far though.....and I'm very loyal to brands that I trust (including Intel and Corsair).
Have never used Crucial anything in the past....
Torn between this and the Corsair Force GT.
I'm still rocking my X58 1366 i7 920 on a EVGA Classified E760 board so the SATA speeds are no big deal to me.
Not sure which one I should get. Reliability trumps everything else by far though.....and I'm very loyal to brands that I trust (including Intel and Corsair).
Have never used Crucial anything in the past....
Not too shabby. The latencies are a little bit high on this controller, and i think it's holding back the single-threaded performance. But the 64thread read IOPS are better than expected. This card might be better for my work computer where I'm gonna be running a lot of VMs.
SylarPowers
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,263
I just realize why the Intel 520 cost so much. $520 at newegg and Amazon for the retail version... It's like it's trying to live up to its name!!
SylarPowers
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2009
- Messages
- 1,263
$485 for 520 retail 240gb at newegg.