intel 320 priced out on the egg

[IntelCeleron]

In my own thought process, if I'm dropping about $500 on an SSD I am out to get the most reliable one at this point. And not to say the others aren't reliable in general, but the Intel is clearly top of the class.

 

[aceO07]

Amazon has the 300GB for around $540. It's higher than the MSRP, but still cheaper than most places. Though it doesn't ship for 1-3 weeks or 1-2 months. (There's 2 versions of the item.)

 

[Dark Shroud]

Once Intel is able to really ramp up production of their 25nm NAND the drives should come down a bit later this year.

That works out for me because I can't budget one until the end of the year.

 

[IntelUser2000]

The NAND watchers are predicting the prices should reach the magical $1/GB as we head towards the end of the year.

 

[bradsh]

How is $550 even remotely competitive when you can find realSSD C300 256gb for a little over $400?

I won't touch a 300gb g3 for more than $440. I think their pricing is utterly ridiculous.

 

[aceO07]

How is $550 even remotely competitive when you can find realSSD C300 256gb for a little over $400?

I won't touch a 300gb g3 for more than $440. I think their pricing is utterly ridiculous.

The C300 stuttering thread is one reason I took it out of consideration.

 

[Morg.]

I keep seeing these numbers:

5000 writes per bit for 34nm
3000 writes per bit for 25nm

Granted most people will not even come close to the 3000 number over the course of their drive ownership. But that is still a 40% reduction.

I see a lot of talking about that .. and it makes me realize noone ever said a word about hdd's, because they're magnetic too and they get bad blocks over time and still this NAND write problem is always pointed at as an SSD issue.
Anyone with some detailed knowledge care to comment ?

And for the rest, with wear leveling and all that stuff + the fact you mostly use those drives for OS / programs , I really don't see how you could kill off those 3000 writes in less than 10 years.

 

[Morg.]

It is annoying that the 510 series do not use Intel's own controller. But these are just a stop gap for the moment. I would certainly still pick one over a Sandforce drive.

Why would it have to use Intel's own controller ?
Your HDD's don't have intel controllers do they ?
So do many of your parts... and there are many areas where other players are much better than intel, like for example you do not use an Intel graphics card

Religion is bad, always

 

[Morg.]

I won't touch a 300gb g3 for more than $440. I think their pricing is utterly ridiculous.

And their supporters think that pricing means that their drives are better for some reason.

 

[Nintendesert]

The C300 stuttering thread is one reason I took it out of consideration.

I've never had a problem with any stuttering.

 

[Phynaz]

I keep seeing these numbers:

5000 writes per bit for 34nm
3000 writes per bit for 25nm

Granted most people will not even come close to the 3000 number over the course of their drive ownership. But that is still a 40% reduction.

You're not taking into account the spare area and other improvements.

What is the size difference in the spare area between a G2 and G3?

Intel's spec for the G3 shows they quadrupled lifespan over the G2.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3965/intels-3rd-generation-x25m-ssd-specs-revealed

 

[imaheadcase]

Why would someone buy a SATA II drive when OCZ and Crucial have the SATA III drives out that smoke these SATA II drives for the same price?

Because %99.9 of people won't notice a difference in computing with it.

 

[beginner99]

The C300 stuttering thread is one reason I took it out of consideration.

yeah the c300 offers very nice price-performance ratio but that issue just makes it unbuyable.

 

[Dark Shroud]

Why would it have to use Intel's own controller ?
Your HDD's don't have intel controllers do they ?
So do many of your parts... and there are many areas where other players are much better than intel, like for example you do not use an Intel graphics card

Religion is bad, always

My HDs are not SSDs so why would they have an Intel controller?

When I am finally able to purchase SSDs they don't have to have Intel controllers. But I would prefer that for Intel's reputation with stability. Because chances are good that I will buy a Intel 510 drive for my boot drive by the end of the year depending on the market.

Intel also rates their 25nm NAND at 5,000 writes which is plenty good enough for me.

 

[aghusker]

yeah the c300 offers very nice price-performance ratio but that issue just makes it unbuyable.

fingers crossed that this works: http://www.vilepickle.com/blog/2011/03/14/00103-fixing-crucial-realssd-c300-stuttering

C300 128GB for $199 is too hard to resist...especially when Intel 510 haven't proven their greater reliability yet (NewEgg reviews aren't great so far)

 

[Edrick]

yeah the c300 offers very nice price-performance ratio but that issue just makes it unbuyable.

In almost every case it was an Intel driver issue. There is a registry fix for it and if that doesnt work, using the MS driver works as well. And most people do not even have the issue.

I guess no SSD is perfect, but in my opinion this C300 issue pales in comparison to the OCZ issues that cropped up over the last few years.

I have owned a Vertex, Intel G2, and now C300. I never want to go back to OCZ. Intel is great and very reliable, just wish performance was better. And I love my C300 so far.

 

[Emulex]

something to be said about reliable storage i'll take that at any cost.

anyone want to trade an intel 120gb for a corsair 120gb (Sandforce)??

 

[drizek]

Why would it have to use Intel's own controller ?
Your HDD's don't have intel controllers do they ?
So do many of your parts... and there are many areas where other players are much better than intel, like for example you do not use an Intel graphics card

Religion is bad, always

My Sandy Bridge motherboard has an Intel SATA controller and its... nevermind.

 

[THizzle7XU]

Amazon has the 300GB for around $540. It's higher than the MSRP, but still cheaper than most places. Though it doesn't ship for 1-3 weeks or 1-2 months. (There's 2 versions of the item.)

Those prices listed in most articles weren't MSRP. They were 1,000 unit quantities, which is the price what Amazon buys them from Intel (or distributer) for. And it's really confusing that Amazon has two versions listed, and the prices differ too. The one with a "1-2 month" wait is currently $539 (SSDSA2CW300G3B5) and the other (SSDSA2CW300G3K5) 1-3 weeks is $609 (from Amazon, not the 3rd parties). The cheaper lists retail box but the more expensive also pictures the retail box in the style of the 510 series. B5 vs K5? B for bare drive, K for adapter kit? Pretty big hike for a metal bracket...

I'm a little shocked at that $539 price at how low it is compared to other places.

Edit: Actually, just read the surprisingly full descriptions for an Amazon computer product. Both have desktop brackets, but the B3 actually has a notebook kit as well for cloning your drive. Now I'm really confused why that is the cheaper version.

 

[THizzle7XU]

Whoops, somehow double posted the edit...

 

[finbarqs]

I've noticed that Intel Drives boot noticeably faster into windows than the Crucial C300's... Wonder that can be said about the 320's vs. 510's!

 

[Edrick]

I've noticed that Intel Drives boot noticeably faster into windows than the Crucial C300's... Wonder that can be said about the 320's vs. 510's!

After owning both on my current rig, I disagree. In fact, I think the C300 is abour 1/2 second faster. But nothing I would even consider "noticable".

 

[finbarqs]

this is owning a c300 256gb (from the hp envy's) sata 2 3gb, and intel g2 160gb...

 

[nanaki333]

i saw newegg has the vertex 3 listed but out of stock now. i'm going to wait for G.Skill or someone to make an SF2000 drive though. too many bad experiences with OCZ SSD.

 

[finbarqs]

bad experiences with ocz all together!