First Intel G3 review

Thanks to Max PL i found this review. They bought the 80 GB G3 drive on the chinese market.

http://en.expreview.com/2011/03/23/world-exclusive-review-intel-g3-ssd-80gb/15569.html

 

Thanks for posting that Cloudfire.

The only thing I am cautious about with this review is buying on eBay here can be quite risky, buying on the Chinese version has got to be a magnitude 10! Are they sure they bought a genuine Series 320?

Nobody here has their hands on one, but the Chinese have it? Things that make you go hmmmm.

 

They don't seem very different from the X25 SSD's. How were these supposed to be in comparison to the X25 and 510 series?

 

I don`t understand why the random 4K read/writes is WORSE than G2s. According to the specs G3 should increase from 35K Read to 39K, and 8.6K to 23K Write. And the read/write speed was just under 5% increase. If this really is the case then a huge MEH from me.
"chenavd" posted a link to another review but it turned out it was indeed the G2 they tested and not the G3.

 

lol @ the front box Super Fast Hard Drive Replacement

Those benchmarks are a little disappointing...the G3 better be super cheap over G2. Also wasn't it generally the rule of thumb that higher capacities have faster read/write than smaller capacities?

 

Probably a G2 in a fake G3 package... I don't think the G3s perform only about the same as the G2...

Seriously, I guess we'll have to wait for some more reviews before being disappointed.

 

I am not disappointed - I predicted this.

No consumer SSD is going to be better than an enterprise level one (Intel 510).

The higher capacities will be faster - but then, so much for any cost savings.

 

The 510 isn't an enterprise drive, it's Intel's enthusiast consumer drive. The X25-E is the enterprise drive w/ SLC. But yes, the 320 is a disappointment considering it's the new midrange consumer drive and it has the same controller as the G2 (which is probably why the above results and results in the other thread are true):

Intel 320 gets old SSD controller and varying performance - www.nordichardware.com

 

If that review is anything to go by, Im off to ebay to buy a G2 drive......those figures suck big time for a new drive.....

 

If this news has any truth, Intel might be giving up on developing their own SSDs:

Is Intel’s 522 Series ‘SandForce Driven’ SSD Next To Be Released?

Guess it wasn't as profitable for them as it was for OCZ...

 

Yes the Seq write will increase with higher capacity, but the random 4K read/write will stay the same. And in this review they tested the 80GB G2 vs 80GB G3, so the differences will be the same because i`d imagine you get the same increase in speed with better capacity for the G2s as well. If you want more you will have to go higher than 160GB which is the highest G2.

Here is the specs for G3s that i posted in a different thread
60 GB: Seq Read: 200 MB/s, Seq Write: 45 MB/s (lol)
80 GB: Seq Read: 270 MB/s, Seq Write: 90 MB/s
120 GB: Seq Read: 270 MB/s, Seq Write: 130 MB/s
160 GB: Seq Read: 270 MB/s, Seq Write: 165 MB/s
300 GB: Seq Read: 270 MB/s, Seq Write: 205 MB/s
600 GB: Unkown
Random 4K Read/Write: 39 500 IOPS/23 000 IOPS

 

But you do agree that the performance leap between 510 and G2s are HUGE and there is plenty of room for improvement for the G3s? Although G3s will be better than G2s they still won`t touch the 510s specs

 

I'll be better able to agree (or not! ) when I've played with one (510) in a couple of weeks time.

The G3's are a waste of time, imo. Although they may benchmark as 'better' I doubt there will be any real and tangible improvements if used in similar situations.

 

Well. I waited and waited and waited some more for news of the G3. I can only say how disappointed I am thus far. The only way I can see these G3 drives being any kind of success is if they are priced VERY competively, which I doubt they will be when they hit the retailers shelves.

 

I will wait for thoroughly reviews from hothardware and anandtech before i come to any conclusion. I don`t trust this review. If they come to any bad conclusions, there are plenty of other options: Intel 510, Crucial C400, OCZ Vertex 3 (hell no).

 

TBH, im looking now at Crucial C300, X25m and maybe C400.....the 510 maybe but its very pricey in my book.

 

for those interested, some a review and some benches are up for the c400. posted them on pg 3 of my c400 thread

interesting about how it compares to the 510.

i only think the G3 is a good choice for those that dont need super speeds, and dont have SATA3 ports

 

Yeah i agree that 510 cost a golden coin, but i don`t understand why you rather buy the X-25M when G3s are cheaper and will be better

 

But WILL they be cheaper? I know we spoke before about pricing. Since then, I researched the 510 in the UK

£443gbp here Scan.co.uk: Intel 250GB ElmCrest SSD - Solid State Drive - SSDSCMH250A2K5 - SSDSC2MH250A2K5 for the 250gb

£210gbp here Scan.co.uk: Intel 120GB ElmCrest SSD - Solid State Drive - SSDSCMH120G2K5 - SSDSC2MH120A2K5 for the 120gb

No sign of any other capacaties as yet.

Given I can pick up a C300 atm for about £280ish, seems foolish to throw an extra £160 at the 510 as it performs on par on a sataII connection. From what ive seen anyhow.

The X25-m is rock steady and a bit slower and can be had for about £200 for the 160gb G2.

Both seem more appealing to me atm as opposed to either 510 or G3.

What d'ya reckon?

 

This is what VR Zone reported the pricing to be. Not saying its correct.

 

That's pretty damn pricy...

 

ehh.. thats pretty much on par with other similar capacity drives right? at least for the size i'm looking for (120-128gb).

128gb c400 is around $250, 120gb intel 510 is $315, c300 $230..

 

Well compared to current drives which have been around the $1.5/GB scale. I guess we'll see how these drives drop in price when they are more widespread.

 

Except that OCZ doesn't really develop their own SSDs. They just take a controller from someone else (Sandforce is a separate company), and pair it with NAND and PCB to make their SSDs. So basically, the article is saying that Intel will be trying to emulate OCZ (which they kind of already have, in a way, with using the Marvell controller in the 510).

 

Exactly what I was trying to get at Instead of spending R&D on their own controller, it was probably decided that outsourcing to a company such as Marvell and Sandforce would be more profitable.

 

If that happens, I would say I am even more convinced that Intel is slowly getting out of the SSD/NAND/Memory business altogether.

 

Which would be completely insane, because they could have owned the market within the next upgrade and price reduction if they had kept up with the SSD times. Why would they not want to do that? Intel is no stranger to making profits

 

Look into the 10K. They are gradually divesting their memory related business. IMFT(the join venture with Micron) is actually Intel's way of 'let us get out of this business in a not so ugly way' and they are commited to buy 50% or so of the product from IMFT until 2016. and they are also selling other memory related business as well(all at a lost and mostly to Micron).

So contrary to what people believe, their memory related business(NAND etc) was not making any money. They have been struggled for quite a while in this group.

This is no longer their strategy segment and thus it makes perfect sense to just use third party stuff until they are off the hook of the IMFT arrangement.