Intel's new SSD 510 series using Marvell controller ?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
razel

razel

Platinum Member
May 14, 2002
2,337
93
101
Looks like 500 series is. Storagereview already has a teaser up and benches in their forum. Intel has a controller, they're just not using it in the 500. There's the 300 and 700 still. Though the 300 might just be updated G2s. Nothing wrong with that.
 
taltamir

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
another review: http://www.storagereview.com/intel_ssd_510_review_250gb

Last year we were told intel G3 will be:
1. their own controller
2. 25nm
3. Available on Oct 2010

Months late with a 3rd party controller and 34nm makes me guess a few things:
1. Their controller's latest version is either slower than the marvel one, or simply not ready.
2. They don't like the 25nm life expectancy drop, especially with their highly aggressive 5 year guarantee (backed by write speed throttling if you exceed a certain GB written per day; which a home user shouldn't hit under normal usage, but is an issue for enterprise)

BTW, didn't the intel G2 boast 50,000 IOPS?
The new 510s claim:
Random 4KB reads: up to 20,000 IOPS
Random 4KB writes: up to 8,000 IOPS
 
Last edited:
S

sticks435

Senior member
Jun 30, 2008
757
0
0
taltamir said:
2. They don't like the 25nm life expectancy drop, especially with their highly aggressive 5 year guarantee (backed by write speed throttling if you exceed a certain GB written per day; which a home user shouldn't hit under normal usage, but is an issue for enterprise)
Click to expand...
Are you referring to drive warranty here? I don't see how they would guarantee the life expectancy for 5 years, but the drive for only 3. I think the press release said 1.2million hours.
 
P

Pneumothorax

Golden Member
Nov 4, 2002
1,181
23
81
Seems like the SSD manufacturers are now content with their prices (or in collusion) and won't be lowering their prices anytime soon. So much for the dreams of ordering a 320gb G3 SSD for $400 and a 160gb for $200.
 
B

bradsh

Member
Jan 8, 2008
31
0
0
i wish anand would chime in as to wtf is going on here. seems he has been ignoring the ssd section as of late
 
taltamir

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
sticks435 said:
Are you referring to drive warranty here? I don't see how they would guarantee the life expectancy for 5 years, but the drive for only 3. I think the press release said 1.2million hours.
Click to expand...

you are thinking MTBF of 1.2 million hours. MTBF on drives (spindle and SSD) is a meaningless lie. A figure they just make up, some people are fooled and claim there is a procedure to it but:
1. All drives in over 20 years had the exact same MTBF of 1.2 million hours, except for WD budget drives which claim 300k to make their more expensive drives look better. Those 300k MTBF drives do NOT have a greater failure rate then their competitors.
They supposedly test it for drive "families" (whatever that means) rather then individual models, but its extremely identical and makes no sense.
2. The process that they CLAIM to use is total BS and has absolutely NOTHING AT ALL to do with the drive's actual reliability. MTBF = Mean Time Between Failures. The average amount of time it takes a drive to fail. But their scheme is such that the more drives you add to the experiment, the higher the figure you will get. And as I said, I don't believe they actually perform said experiment.

Just an FYI, 1.2 million hours running 24 hours a day 7 days a week 365 days a year is 137 years. 300k hours is 34 years.

IIRC intel guarentees that the drive will not run out of writes (in addition to their normal warranty against drive failure) for 5 years of non stop operation. They make sure they will never ever have to honor that guarantee by throttling write speed to about 20MB/s if you are using up the writes too fast. Normal users don't use it too fast (for example, I would take over 30 years to run out) so they never see that throttling. (only the regular limit of 80MB/s write on original firmware and ~95MB/s on newer firmware... which is there to make their X25-E models look better)
 
Last edited:
V

Voo

Golden Member
Feb 27, 2009
1,684
0
76
Completely unimportant and subjective.. but did they have to change the exterior? The old drives looked better :p

And from the benchmarks nothing special - it getting bested in several benchmarks compared to its predecessor is nothing to be proud of and it generally looks quite old compared to the Vertex3 (if the real life benchmarks are significant in the review, don't see a explanation of the methodology and it's too late here to search for one today~)
 
razel

razel

Platinum Member
May 14, 2002
2,337
93
101
I'm pretty disappointed as well, mainly because they're not using their own controller and because of the performance drop when you're not on SATA 6. However, it still performs well, I just expected more, but I remind myself that the controller isn't from Intel. I'm still looking forward to the G2 price drops. I'll be keeping my eyes on the 120GB and reviews for the Crucial offering.
 
K

ksec

Senior member
Mar 5, 2010
420
117
116
Elixer said:
Intel's new SSD using Marvell controller ?
Hmmm....

http://www.pcper.com/comments.php?nid=9804

I guess they didn't have their own controller ready in time ?
Click to expand...

Yes like i have posted it million times but no one believed me.

Again looking at pure Real World Benchmarks, it just shows Random Read Write that SandForce is much better at doesn't offer the linear level of advantage compare to Intel. Taken into account that Sandforce is also faster in Seq Read Write as well.

Now Only if Intel could offer this with lower price then Vertex 3.
 
Last edited:
Makaveli

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,967
1,561
136
They will have to offer this for a lower price than the Vertex 3 if they want anyone to buy it. Performance isn't there to demand a higher price tag!
 
taltamir

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
Makaveli said:
They will have to offer this for a lower price than the Vertex 3 if they want anyone to buy it. Performance isn't there to demand a higher price tag!
Click to expand...

they are probably going to rely on FUD about their competitors to ensure people buy an inferior intel product for a higher price. Just like they have done every time their product was not up to snuff. Intel manages to lead often enough, but sometimes they just completely miss the mark. This is one such time.
 
M

Mhorydyn

Junior Member
Sep 23, 2006
7
0
66
taltamir said:
another review: http://www.storagereview.com/intel_ssd_510_review_250gb

Last year we were told intel G3 will be:
1. their own controller
2. 25nm
3. Available on Oct 2010

Months late with a 3rd party controller and 34nm makes me guess a few things:
1. Their controller's latest version is either slower than the marvel one, or simply not ready.
2. They don't like the 25nm life expectancy drop, especially with their highly aggressive 5 year guarantee (backed by write speed throttling if you exceed a certain GB written per day; which a home user shouldn't hit under normal usage, but is an issue for enterprise)
Click to expand...

Thankfully, the 510 isn't the G3. The proper successor to the X25-M will be the upcoming 320 series.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/intel-solid-state-drive-320-series-to-launch-mid-april/11407.html
 
Makaveli

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,967
1,561
136
Isn't the G3 series SATA 2 and 250/170 for reads and writes?

Believe I read that somewhere awhile back.
 
D

drizek

Golden Member
Jul 7, 2005
1,410
0
71
Makaveli said:
Isn't the G3 series SATA 2 and 250/170 for reads and writes?

Believe I read that somewhere awhile back.
Click to expand...

You mean like Anandtech? http://www.anandtech.com/show/3965/intels-3rd-generation-x25m-ssd-specs-revealed

Those numbers just aren't competitive anymore. If they're going to be calling it the 320 then they are kinda admitting that they can't keep up. 510 is a bigger number than 320...

Still, I think those are some pretty good specs and if it isn't buggy then it should still be a really good all-round drive. The write speeds on my C300 are a bit disappointing, although the 510 seems to be doing quite well at 315MB/s.
 
Makaveli

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,967
1,561
136
My opinon but I believe they weren't expecting the sandforce chip to be pushing 500mb/sec speeds. And their own controller wasn't close to that yet so they choose marvel for the 510 series to fill in the gap. And will probably release their own controller later in the year that can challenge it or maybe in 2012.

You have to remember Intel is a much bigger player than everyone else selling SSD's they can afford to sit and wait and not be #1 for abit.
 
Makaveli

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,967
1,561
136
lol Amd's strategy works best when you are sitting on boatloads of cash =P
 
GodisanAtheist

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
8,162
9,444
136
Makaveli said:
You have to remember Intel is a much bigger player than everyone else selling SSD's they can afford to sit and wait and not be #1 for abit.
Click to expand...

-To put a much finer point on it, Intel can also afford to be #1 too. They can afford it more than any of their competitors.
 
taltamir

taltamir

Lifer
Mar 21, 2004
13,576
6
76
last i checked. Copying tech and being #2 was cheaper then innovating and being #1. Being #1 also allows intel to have much MUCH healthier profit margins.
Intel can afford to be #1, it cannot afford to remain #2 for too long.
 
Makaveli

Makaveli

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2002
4,967
1,561
136
After reading Anand's review of the 510 it does ok but i'm not impressed. If I had a SATA 6GB's board and was looking to upgrade right now I would be looking at the vertex even tho I prefer intel for reliability over OCZ, I just cannot stomach the intel drive with a non intel controller.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom