Intel Announces Next in Solid-State Drive Line Up

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Intel Corporation announced today the next in a line of new solid-state drives (SSD), the Intel® Solid-State Drive 510 Series. The new Intel SSD 510 features fast SATA 6 Gigabits per second (Gbps) performance to take full advantage of Intel's transition to higher speed SATA bus interfaces on the recently introduced 2nd Generation Intel® Core™ processor-based platforms. Supporting data transfers of up to 500 megabytes per second (MB/s), the Intel SSD 510 doubles the sequential read speeds, and at up to 315MB/s more than triples the sequential write speeds of Intel's current 3Gbps SSDs, to transfer more data in less time. This makes it ideal for demanding gamers, media creators, performance-intensive workstation users and any technology enthusiast.
 
I missed the SSD Boat when i re-built my rig 2 years ago.. Looks like this next upgrade for me will include one or two of these bad boys. I just built a cheapo Celeron Rig with a 64gb Corsair drive in it for a friend, it stomped my current PC in Windows Load time and generally "snappyness".
 
I won't build a computer without one. I put a Kingston V series unit in a three year old Dell E series laptop and don't think anyone would be able to tell the difference in performance between the Dell and my sig rig. That is, while doing general tasks with it. The Dell is just a Core 2, not the newer Duo chip.
 
"The Intel SSD 510 Series uses proven Intel 34-nanometer NAND flash memory to deliver best-in-class sequential performance of up to 500MB/s sequential read speeds and up to 315 MB/s writes for its high-capacity model. The product is available now and comes in a 250GB capacity priced at $584 and a 120GB at $284, for 1,000-unit quantities. Both products include a limited 3-year warranty. "

this probably what most people want to read.
 
TheBluePill said:
I missed the SSD Boat when i re-built my rig 2 years ago.. Looks like this next upgrade for me will include one or two of these bad boys. I just built a cheapo Celeron Rig with a 64gb Corsair drive in it for a friend, it stomped my current PC in Windows Load time and generally "snappyness".
Click to expand...
Two years ago, I don't think there was a boat to take. Things were still a bit new, and really pricy. So don't fret! But why wait for a new rig to be your reason to get an SSD? There's nothing wrong with jumping in on this now.
 
Megalomaniac said:
"The Intel SSD 510 Series uses proven Intel 34-nanometer NAND flash memory to deliver best-in-class sequential performance of up to 500MB/s sequential read speeds and up to 315 MB/s writes for its high-capacity model. The product is available now and comes in a 250GB capacity priced at $584 and a 120GB at $284, for 1,000-unit quantities. Both products include a limited 3-year warranty. "

this probably what most people want to read.
Click to expand...

So no 25nm. I thought G3 was going to be 25nm.
 
Y'know, people keep saying these things are only going to get cheaper as time goes by, but I'm just not seeing it.

Perhaps it's only at the rate of ~$1 per year...
 
xSystemFailurex said:
Y'know, people keep saying these things are only going to get cheaper as time goes by, but I'm just not seeing it.

Perhaps it's only at the rate of ~$1 per year...
Click to expand...

I am disappointed in the 120GB price. I paid way less than that for my 120 GB G2. I guess the additional performance comes at a cost and that they did not shrink the process thus the no large savings on NAND chips.
 
I was under the impression that most SSD did somewhere in the neighborhood of 250-285MB/S speeds.... how is 30MB/S more triple the speed?

Am I missing something?
 
I believe they are just implying that the write speed is three times faster than their previous generation drives, not in comparison to the competition.

Speaking of that, it will be interesting to see how these compare in the real world with the Vertex 3. At over 500mb/s on both read and write, the ocz drive certainly looks better on paper, but intel usually does a better job with the <4k reads so it may still be competitive.
 
The whole refresh is about a 6GB/s.. It's nice, but I doubt that the upgrade is worth over the current G2 drives.
 
Diznario said:
I believe they are just implying that the write speed is three times faster than their previous generation drives, not in comparison to the competition.
Click to expand...
Exactly:
Intel said:
at up to 315MB/s more than triples the sequential write speeds of Intel's current 3Gbps SSDs
Click to expand...
Although it's triple only if you look at the X25-M. It's only 85% faster with the X25-E... ^-^

It's still the same 34 nm chips as the X25s, I guess their laptop/netbook OEMs needed some 6 Gb/s drives fast. I'd wait for the 20+ nm drives.
The 310 and 510 series are not even available at newegg yet, why bother mentioning them in the article?
 
Some people seem to be missing the fact that the 510 series are not intended to be the successor to the X25-M G2 series. The 510 series is roughly the successor of the X25-E series (although there is some talk of yet a 3rd Intel SSD series, possibly 710 series, for enterprise use using eMLC flash).

The 320 series will be the successor to the X25-M G2 series. Still no official release date on those, but the rumors seem to be saying sometime in March.
 
Last edited:
john4200 said:
Some people seem to be missing the fact that the 510 series are not intended to be the successor to the X25-M G2 series. The 510 series is basically the successor of the X25-E series.

The 320 series will be the successor to the X25-M G2 series. Still no official release date on those, but the rumors seem to be saying sometime in March.
Click to expand...
I see, this makes sense.
 
looks like we're getting closer to maxing out sata3. Even though anything more than sata3 speeds is overkill for now, is there a successor roadmap for a sata3 replacement?
 
Ryan711 said:
looks like we're getting closer to maxing out sata3. Even though anything more than sata3 speeds is overkill for now, is there a successor roadmap for a sata3 replacement?
Click to expand...
I bet that Intel will be pushing its Lightpeak/Thunderbolt as a successor to sata3 (Integrated to the Ivy Bridge chipset).
 
xSystemFailurex said:
Y'know, people keep saying these things are only going to get cheaper as time goes by, but I'm just not seeing it.

Perhaps it's only at the rate of ~$1 per year...
Click to expand...

+1

I know the next gen. of SSDs are slowly being released, but I'm not seeing any drop in price except a bunch of clearance prices on current and old gen. stuff. Im not holding my breath. $1/GB is a ways off from the look of it.
 
If this is the successor of the X25-E this is a large price drop. I find this product a sign that the 25nm process is not performing as expected. I mean there was supposed to be a X25-E replacement that was 25nm and that was supposed to be a product by now.
 
drescherjm said:
I mean there was supposed to be a X25-E replacement that was 25nm and that was supposed to be a product by now.
Click to expand...

I thought that the unofficial word from Intel has been, for several months now, that the X25-E successor would use eMLC 34nm flash memory. It is possible that there is yet a third new series of SSDs coming from Intel, that will be a more direct successor to the X25-E than the 510 series (maybe called the 710 series), coming in 100, 200, and 400GB sizes. In which case the 510 series would best be thought of as a new offering, successor to neither X25-M nor X25-E.

The X25-M successor, the 320 series, will use 25nm MLC flash.
 
Last edited:
Didn't they have that in their slides? I guess that was too long ago when they released their slides.
 
The SSD series that I am reasonably sure of from Intel are 310, 320, and 510. There is also some less widespread talk of 710.

310: mSATA SSD cards, mini-PCIe; 40GB, 80GB

320: 25nm MLC flash SSDs, successor to X25-M G2; 40, 80, 120, 160, 300, 600GB; lowest cost

510: 34nm MLC flash SSDs with Marvell 88SS9174-BKK2 controller; 120, 250GB; medium cost

?710: enterprise SSD with 34nm eMLC flash; 100, 200, 400GB; highest cost

I think some of this information is already out there, but people are under NDA. Still, I have seen some credible looking leaks.
 
drescherjm said:
Didn't they have that in their slides? I guess that was too long ago when they released their slides.
Click to expand...

Yes, there were some slides talking about the next-gen Intel enterprise SSDs using 25nm eMLC flash. Sometime in 1H2010, I think. But the rumors I have been hearing in the past several months were talking about 34nm flash. It may be a confusion between the 510 series, which definitely has 34nm flash, and some forthcoming enterprise series (codename Lyndonville?). If there is a forthcoming 25nm eMLC SSD series from Intel, I'd think it will be either delayed, or very expensive, since I cannot imagine that they have high yields on 25nm eMLC at present.
 
Last edited:
Anyone notice how they are already hitting the cap of SATA II? Time for a PCI implentation
 
I was really hoping these were going to be cheaper, but i guess not. I've been holding off jumping on the ssd bandwagon until I saw what the official pricing was going to be on these, and that's not the news i was hoping for. Guess I'll start looking for a deal on some last gen stuff, I just can't bring myself to drop that kind of money on a hard drive.
 
EnderW said:
http://www.storagereview.com/intel_ssd_510_review_250gb
Click to expand...

I think it is obvious that there is something wrong with some of their measurements in that review (hardware problem, OS configuration, benchmark configuration, etc.?). For one thing, they only measure about 400 MB/s sequential read in IOMeter, while Intel specs 500 MB/s. Intel just does not get their specs that far wrong. And further down they measure 537 MB/s sequential read with CDM. But if you compare CDM sequential write and 512KB random write, the sequential is 325 MB/s, but the 512KB random is 411 MB/s. WTF?

Also, CDM gets 19 MB/s for 4KB random read, but IOMeter only gets 11 MB/s?

StorageReview's SSD reviews have never been especially trustworthy from what I have seen, and this one looks more rushed and inaccurate than most.

I'd wait for a bit-tech review. They seem to have the most reliable data.
 
The IOMeter tests being lower seems to be the result of SR using a Queue Depth of 1, while the Intel spec are with a Queue Depth of 32. In other words, Read speed would scale with Queue Depth. The 512K CDM results seems to be the result of them using a LSI 9260-8i for testing SATA 6Gb/s, since their Vertex 3 and C300 review shows a similar 512K anomaly. The 4K result discrepancy between CDM and IOMark is likely the result of caching. The CDM test is only 500MB, while the IOMark test is likely a few GB. The LSI 9260-8i has 512MB or cache and the Intel 510 has 128MB of cache, so the smaller CDM tests would benefit from increased caching.

If you plan to use the Intel SSD 510 with a LSI 9260-8i, the results are likely accurate.

As for a successor to the X25-E, I was under the impression that Intel went out of their way to partner with Hitachi to sell and market their enterprise SSDs.
The result of their joint effort was the Hitachi Ultrastar SSD400S (Intel 34nm SLC NAND, Intel Controller, Hitachi Firmware, 100/200/400 GB options).

Intel SSD 510 Produce Brief

Hitachi Ultrastar SSD400S Datasheet

If the Intel 710 isn't actually the Hitachi SSD400S, it makes you wonder how they are going to market it without directly competing with their Enterprise storage partner.
 
All good points. One small correction, the 9260 CDM run had a 1000MB extent, as you can see from the CDM screenshot in the discussion forum:

http://forums.storagereview.com/ind...review-discussion/page__p__267435#entry267435

I think that 2MB might not be enough for reaching full sequential speed. I know AS-SSD uses 16MB blocks for sequential I/O tests. I don't know what CDM uses, but evidently enough to measure 537MB/s sequential read.

SR should use IOMeter with the random data setting, so that the Sandforce drives can be compared more reasonably to the rest of the SSDs. And it is even more important that they write random data to the Sandforce drives when they do their power consumption under load tests -- as they are, it is highly misleading.
 
The lack of an ultracapacitor is pretty disappointing. Looks like there won't be a < $500 SSD usable for raid in the near future.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top