Intel X25-E 32GB SSD - bit-tech.net Forums

Tim S · 17th Dec 2008, 08:29

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...b-ssd-review/1

SSDs might be able to deliver blistering read speeds, but they tend to fall down when it comes to write. Not so the Intel X25-E, which claims both blistering fast read and write speeds thanks to the use of SLC NAND flash memory. We find out if Intel's Extreme series SSD can make the grade and justify its monster price tag.

Jasio · 17th Dec 2008, 08:31

I'm surprised Intel even bothers to send out samples to "enthusiast" sites... I mean, what kind of value rating out of 10 were they expecting? Not exactly shining a good light on their products, sure it performs well but it's such a waste of money knowing you can buy a trio of 300GB Raptors for the same price.

Tim S · 17th Dec 2008, 08:38

On the subject of VelociRaptors, I'll get in before anyone asks "where the VelociRaptor is" - it'll be on its way to us as soon as we're back in the office after Christmas/New Year and we will have a review of it as soon as possible after that.

Toka · 17th Dec 2008, 08:48

Have a good christmas Timmy

The boy 4rm oz · 17th Dec 2008, 08:49

It may be the fastest drive you have seen but for the price only someone truly insane would buy one, especially for only 32GB of storage. Until SSDs come done more in price and can comfortably out perform standard mechanical drives I don't really want to know about them. No point wishing for something that won't happen in a long long time.

Player-x · 17th Dec 2008, 09:34

@ Bit-Tech
I think that these test also should be done whit a controller whit onboard cache, like the $150 Areca ARC-1200 whit 128MB.
A controller like this would companstat the X25-M bad wrigth preformace and properly also enhance the X25-E wright preformace
http://www.areca.com.tw/products/2ports.htm

My 2 cents

spazmochad · 17th Dec 2008, 09:44

Thats a huge flaw you left for the final page, especially on a measly 32gb drive.

Baz · 17th Dec 2008, 10:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by spazmochad

Thats a huge flaw you left for the final page, especially on a measly 32gb drive.

the rewrite issues only became apparent towards the end of testing - didn't really seem fair to include it previously.

Bauul · 17th Dec 2008, 10:18

As a concept product: awesome. Looking forward to the next generation.

Dr. Strangelove · 17th Dec 2008, 10:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baz

the rewrite issues only became apparent towards the end of testing - didn't really seem fair to include it previously.

Is it too late to ask for a nice graph illustrating this "issue"? I guess it does not matter that much I doubt anyone would actually buy the drive, but just because I'm the curious type....

Burnout21 · 17th Dec 2008, 10:27

I have been looking around at SSD drives, OCZ seem just too cheap so i expect performance to be poor!

Basical i am looking you get a tablet notebook which i've choosen already and to swap out the HDD for an SSD to increase the notebooks battery life a little.

Would the change in drives effect the battery performance by much or is this just myth?

Dr. Strangelove · 17th Dec 2008, 10:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burnout21

Would the change in drives effect the battery performance by much or is this just myth?

Hmm I think Bit looked at this and found a small advantage, I remember Tomshardware making a right @ss of themselves when they claimed that SSDs used more power, which they later had to correct. This is also down to the individual drives I think....

(I could be wrong about all of this, could not be bothered to use the search function)

laynesassepd · 17th Dec 2008, 10:39

ok i dont respond here much but you have a $700 + sd card thats 32 gb, which is not that much space right, well what if you loaded say crysis off of your ram say you had 8-16 gb. how fast would that be or is it possible??? $700 plus is crazy for 32 gb. id think if you were prone to use 32 gb (SD) HD at $700 than you would think of 16 gb ram as possibility for a load for a program or game wouldnt this work too

Baz · 17th Dec 2008, 10:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baz

the rewrite issues only became apparent towards the end of testing - didn't really seem fair to include it previously.

Is it too late to ask for a nice graph illustrating this "issue"? I guess it does not matter that much I doubt anyone would actually buy the drive, but just because I'm the curious type....

I tried to get some reliable numbers but they were very unreliable due to the different state of the data in the cells when being rewritten. Sometimes it would be just a second or two slower (presumably most of the cells were set to off), while sometimes it would be more than twice the recorded time. In the end it averages out at about half the speed of the initial write when rewriting, but it's tricky to nail down anything more specific.

Denis_iii · 17th Dec 2008, 11:03

who buys this at these prices? jeez

Nexxo · 17th Dec 2008, 12:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Strangelove

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burnout21

Would the change in drives effect the battery performance by much or is this just myth?

Hmm I think Bit looked at this and found a small advantage, I remember Tomshardware making a right @ss of themselves when they claimed that SSDs used more power, which they later had to correct. This is also down to the individual drives I think....

(I could be wrong about all of this, could not be bothered to use the search function)

That is pretty much correct. TomsHardware made the mistake of using a looping task on the drives. The SSD drives performed this faster and hence executed more cycles, hence using more power relative to HDDs. In real life terms the SSDs are more efficient. However 2.5" laptop HDDs are very power efficient to start with, using perhaps 0.5 Watts at idle and 2 Watts at the very brief moments of activity. So there is not that much on it.

zr_ox · 17th Dec 2008, 12:07

The price is insane, an interesting comparison would be the 64GB OCZ E-Sata drive...just for fun!

Dr. Strangelove · 17th Dec 2008, 12:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baz

In the end it averages out at about half the speed of the initial write when rewriting, but it's tricky to nail down anything more specific.

never mind you fixed it faster than me

DorkSterr · 17th Dec 2008, 12:26

Not worth the money.

steveo_mcg · 17th Dec 2008, 12:29

To you, i can see some enterprise uses for it, small but frequently accessed database that needs to be fast, at a company which can afford to throw money around.

And for us lowly consumers its interesting to see how tech like this evolves.

17th Dec 2008, 08:29	#1
Tim S Pewlius Caesar bit-tech Staff Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ascot, Berks Posts: 18,021	Intel X25-E 32GB SSD http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/200...b-ssd-review/1 SSDs might be able to deliver blistering read speeds, but they tend to fall down when it comes to write. Not so the Intel X25-E, which claims both blistering fast read and write speeds thanks to the use of SLC NAND flash memory. We find out if Intel's Extreme series SSD can make the grade and justify its monster price tag. __________________ Tim on Twitter \| Tim's Blog \| Tim's Flickr The bit-tech Blog \| bit-tech on Twitter \| Join the bit-tech & Custom PC folding team (#35947)

17th Dec 2008, 08:31	#2
Jasio Made in Canada Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: BC Posts: 450	I'm surprised Intel even bothers to send out samples to "enthusiast" sites... I mean, what kind of value rating out of 10 were they expecting? Not exactly shining a good light on their products, sure it performs well but it's such a waste of money knowing you can buy a trio of 300GB Raptors for the same price. __________________ [[Asus P6T \| Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.67Ghz cooled by Noctua UH-P12 Push-Pull Config \| 6GB DDR3-1600 Patriot Viper Xtreme XMP C8 \| nVidia GeForce 280 GTX 1GB \| Corsair HX620 620 Watt PSU \| Antec P182 Case]]

17th Dec 2008, 08:38	#3
Tim S Pewlius Caesar bit-tech Staff Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Ascot, Berks Posts: 18,021	On the subject of VelociRaptors, I'll get in before anyone asks "where the VelociRaptor is" - it'll be on its way to us as soon as we're back in the office after Christmas/New Year and we will have a review of it as soon as possible after that. __________________ Tim on Twitter \| Tim's Blog \| Tim's Flickr The bit-tech Blog \| bit-tech on Twitter \| Join the bit-tech & Custom PC folding team (#35947)

17th Dec 2008, 08:48	#4
Toka Multimodder Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Oxford UK Posts: 116	Have a good christmas Timmy __________________ Cheesecake Appreciation Society

17th Dec 2008, 09:44	#7
spazmochad Multimodder Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 71	Thats a huge flaw you left for the final page, especially on a measly 32gb drive. __________________ "But i like to try out all the holes at least once"

17th Dec 2008, 09:34	#6
Player-x What's a Dremel? Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Bergen, Norway Posts: 8	@ Bit-Tech I think that these test also should be done whit a controller whit onboard cache, like the $150 Areca ARC-1200 whit 128MB. A controller like this would companstat the X25-M bad wrigth preformace and properly also enhance the X25-E wright preformace http://www.areca.com.tw/products/2ports.htm My 2 cents

17th Dec 2008, 10:18	#9
Bauul Sir Bongaminge Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Godalming, near Guildford Posts: 1,553	As a concept product: awesome. Looking forward to the next generation. __________________ Pentium 4 CPU 3.4 Ghz \| 1Gb + 2x512Mb Corsair DDR2 667 Mhz Sapphire Radeon HD 4770 512Mb\| WD Raptor 36Gb, Seagate 300Gb \| Asus P5LD2 SE Ibanez RG 470 Japanese Edition \| 1991 Japanese Lo-TRS Tremolo \| V7 S1 Custom V8 HSH Pickups

17th Dec 2008, 10:27	#11
Burnout21 is true bit-techer! Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Nott's Posts: 4,848	I have been looking around at SSD drives, OCZ seem just too cheap so i expect performance to be poor! Basical i am looking you get a tablet notebook which i've choosen already and to swap out the HDD for an SSD to increase the notebooks battery life a little. Would the change in drives effect the battery performance by much or is this just myth? __________________ DFI P45-T2RS Plus, Q6600, 4GB Reaper HPC, GTX280 & FX3450, X-Fi Xtreme Music, 1570GB Storage

17th Dec 2008, 10:39	#13
laynesassepd TECH Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 11	ok i dont respond here much but you have a $700 + sd card thats 32 gb, which is not that much space right, well what if you loaded say crysis off of your ram say you had 8-16 gb. how fast would that be or is it possible??? $700 plus is crazy for 32 gb. id think if you were prone to use 32 gb (SD) HD at $700 than you would think of 16 gb ram as possibility for a load for a program or game wouldnt this work too

17th Dec 2008, 11:03	#15
Denis_iii Hypermodder Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 873	who buys this at these prices? jeez

17th Dec 2008, 12:07	#17
zr_ox Whooolapoook Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Stalking Orco Posts: 1,117	The price is insane, an interesting comparison would be the 64GB OCZ E-Sata drive...just for fun! __________________ 0ptimizm :PC under review

17th Dec 2008, 12:26	#19
DorkSterr Hakuna Matata Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 541	Not worth the money. __________________ Rampage Formula // Q6600 @ 3.6GHz // 8GB Dominator // X2 4890 940/1125 // SilverStone DA1000 // LCD3090WQXi ''Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.''

17th Dec 2008, 12:29	#20
steveo_mcg What owl? Join Date: May 2005 Location: Edinburgh Posts: 3,978	To you, i can see some enterprise uses for it, small but frequently accessed database that needs to be fast, at a company which can afford to throw money around. And for us lowly consumers its interesting to see how tech like this evolves. __________________ No boom today, boom tomorrow... there's always a boom tomorrow.