Intel officially announced the new SSD 320 Series drives yesterday, which feature proprietary Intel SSD processors paired to cutting edge 25nm NAND flash memory. This new family of drives, however, isn’t geared for ultra-high performance. While still fast, the overarching goals with the Intel SSD 320 series were increased reliability and security. In fact, despite being released after the SSD 510 series which we took a look at a few weeks back, these technically newer 320 series drives do not feature support for the faster SATA III interface. The Intel SSD 320 series drives are SATA II only. We’ve got an Intel SSD 320 series 300GB drive on hand and have run it through a complete suite of tests to gauge its performance versus competing solid state offerings... Intel SSD 320 Series 300GB Solid State Drive Review
I think the biggest thing here is anyone that gets an SSD is at least going to be somewhat of an enthusiast. That being said I also think most of the are going to realize the performance level of this drive is somewhat lacking. All the other features seem great, but it performs at a lower and in some cases much lower than say an OCZ Sata3 unit does. The price is almost the same as well I believe as well.
300 gigs? Woah man, That high... pretty soon we'll be touching even higher number @ lower prices. Cant wait till the day I get to buy a 1tb ssd for ~$200. It will happen
These prices aren't too bad. I want to see what OCZ comes up with now that they've bought their own SSD drive controller company. (much lower SSD drive costs being the thing we want to see,.......)
Dogs are great judges of character, and if your dog doesn't like somebody being around, you shouldn't trust them.
All I can say is if this was sent to HH just to review, I hope yall handled it with car cause damaging this thing and having to pay for it would, you know only cost an arm and a leg
We stopped worring about damaging hardware a LONG time ago. :) The first think I did when this drive arrived was rip it open and take pics.
Marco ChiappettaManaging Editor @ HotHardware.com
Follow Marco on Twitter
Hahaha I've had some terrible experiences getting to excited opening gifts and thing shipped through the mail, and being to harsh in doing so
It's commonly known as NINTENDO-SIXTY-FOURRRRRRR-Syndrome, in honor of the child who almost gave himself an aneurysm when receiving a N64 for christmas.
I can picture it in my head "300 GIGABYTE 320 SERIES INTEL ESSSSS-ESSSSS-DEEEEEE!!!!"
*rip, rip*, *snaps pictures*
Youtube link below :)
You guys should do a test on a SSD to see how much they can take compared to a normal spinning HD. Ie, Drops; run over with car, Oven, ect...
"Never trust a computer you can't throw out a window."
Z77 GIGABYTE G1.SNIPER
G.Skill Ripjaws X 16gb PC2133
Asus Blu-ray burner
Seasonic X650 PSU
Patriot Pyro 128gb SSD
Do they blend?
risky move trading speed for security... i think alot of people wont be interested in this at all
The big thing about SSD's versus a normal mechanical HD is no moving parts (were talking durability wise) As long as it is internally constructed well with sufficient padding (shock protection) it is basically a metal box full of memory chips on a PCB. If you drop a regular HD all kinds of bad things can happen with all the moving parts inside. With an SSD it would seem the risk of damaging it would be way lower.
This would probly quiet my computer by 60%+, I have 4 eSata Drives in my chassy, and it's NOISY. It's so noisey I had to get noise reduction headphones. I look forward to prices being at a level comparable to the old traditional platter HD's level.
One thing on the security thing though, in a professional market that is expected and paid for on a regular basis. Commercially though I agree with DScheive no one is going to think of this as a major plus I don't think.
I just got mine, and for some reason I get different results with crystaldiskmark on my 320 series 80gb:
CrystalDiskMark 3.0.1 x64 (C) 2007-2010 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]
Sequential Read : 256.438 MB/s
Sequential Write : 95.074 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 131.918 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 97.413 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 20.568 MB/s [ 5021.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 41.648 MB/s [ 10168.0 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 21.402 MB/s [ 5225.2 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 49.075 MB/s [ 11981.2 IOPS]
Test : 1000 MB [I: 0.1% (0.1/74.5 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2011/07/25 22:31:51
OS : Windows 7 Ultimate Edition SP1 [6.1 Build 7601] (x64)
Any ideas why? Can the size matter that much?
this is faulty drive I had a dark experience with this defective drive and made a website to share my experience u guys can check on: d a m n i n t e l dot c o m
NEWS TIPS |
This site is intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. The contents are the views and opinion of the author and/or hisassociates. All products and trademarks are the property of their respective owners. All content and graphical elements areCopyright © 1999 - 2014 David Altavilla and HotHardware.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy and Terms