Intel SSD 510 Series (250GB) or Intel SSD 320 Series(300GB)

I need recommendations and advice of which one to chose. The 510 series is obviously faster and has SATA III while the 320 has SATA II. I also don't care about the 50 gb difference between them.

One of my main concerns is since the intel 510 series is so effiecient and fast Im afraid that i will have less battery than i started with on my laptop. I know the 320 shouldn't consume much battery since its less powerful. The 320 has security disk encryption.The 320 still seems like a decent ssd, but would the speed of the 510 be worth an extra $50? what about battery life consumption between the two of them?

Intel 510(250gb): $609
Intel 320(300gb): $559

And when it comes to wear and tear through use, which one will provide better longetivity.

 

May i suggest that you look at the Crucial M4 too, speed and reliability of the Intel 510 and cheaper than the 320.
newegg.com - Crucial M4 CT256M4SSD2 2.5" 256GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD)
You should know that Intel 320 is suffering from a bug right now that can cause data loss - Intel 320-Series SSDs Affected by Firmware Bug That Causes Data Loss - Softpedia

 

Well Intel 320 has a firmware bug now so I wouldn't buy that unless there comes a fix.

Crucial M4 is nearly $200 cheaper than the Intel 510. The Crucial has better random performance, the Intel better sequential. Crucial M4 also has lower power consumption.

With those prices I would go for M4.

Edit: like hawk said.

 

Yes that bug seems to make computers power cycle themselves death.
Intel's new series SSD's are going to lose credibility.
Hmmm, what to do, "sigh."
And how is there going to be firmware updates by end of July if there hasn't been an official acknowledge of this bug by intel? Well its still and good early for those to use those warranties, but this is dissappointing. Was the 320 ssd supposed to be all about reliability.

Back to the topic at stake, or at my stake.
If I am right the Crucial M4 is almost the equivalent of the intel 510 series (250gb)
So which one do you guys think is more reliable? are there different features between them.

 

Reliability on Newegg is nearly the same.

In favor of Intel: it uses 34nm NAND instead of 25nm.

In favor of Crucial: they are far more experienced with the Marvel controller.

 

Found out the M4 can increase battery life 2x more than the intel 510.
Intel 510 has better sequential speeds but not enough to make a significant impact.
could someone please explain what slow random acces speeds are. The 510 has them. what does it and how is it an inconveience?

 

Long story short, individual performance paramaters can't capture how a drive performs in real world scenarios.

Here's a review that focuses on real world scenarios (several pages):
Crucial m4 256GB SSD (C400) Review - Install Times

 

Tahnks Phil.
I have been enlightened, so both the m4 and the 510 are the same thing except that the 510 costs around $200 more and has twice more the the power consumption. Wow, this makes intel seem like scandulous bandits. They atleast shoudv'e clenched the 320's problem in the rear.

Im still lost though and now I wonder again if getting an SSD is worth it?

 

Well Intel 510 does use 34nm NAND which is more expensive and should last longer, at least in theory.

Is an SSD worth it? that's a question I can not answer for you.

For me personally it's not worth it. This is the reason I'm selling my M4 and keeping my Seagate Momentus XT. The XT for my usage is 80% of the performance of an SSD at 25% of the price. It doesn't boost battery life though.

 

depends, i usually say SSD is not worth it if you have a single hard drive setup, unless you dont need more than 128gb or 256gb of space. Getting an SSD of larger capacities is not worth it, unless you really want to spend a lot of money. But if you have a dual hard drive setup then getting an SSD is an absolute must. I mean you can grab a 64gb kingston SSD for 60$ and get another larger hard drive for data. Not going for an SSD in such a case is stupid.
In your case you are going for a 256gb ssd so i assume you don't have a dual hard drive setup in that case if you are currently using more thatn 200gb in you current hard drive then getting the SSD is not a good idea. is the performance really worth 400$??

 

The 320 is a 25nm with an Intel controller, and the 510 is 34nm with a Marvell controller so they are really 2 different SSD's. I have a X-25 in one laptop, a 310 in my slate, a 510 in my Sager, and a Corsair 128 Nova in my Asus. All have performed well and all blow away my Scorpio Black in my other lappy. And all have shown lower temps over HDD's they replaced. So if your wondering if you should get a SSD, do some comparisons to any HDD and decide.

When I bought my 510, the price was about the same over the M4, and I could pre-order it, but I couldn't find anyone that had one in stock (I was shopping for around 128GB). If I could get it for $200 less, no brainer to me, I would have bought it. Everything I have seen on it showed it was a great drive. Disclaimer: I wasn't buying 256-300GB, only 128, but if I could have saved $100 I would have.

As to the above question, is a SSD worth it, there are many good ssd's, and any ssd will give you a great performance boost over a HDD, if you use it for more than surfing and email. If you do photo or video editing and rendering, you will see a performance increase. If you use it to work with, a slow ssd will kick butt on a hdd in a laptop. I don't have a desktop, so I can't compare something like Raptors in RAID, but in my lappy's the ssd's have shown me real world performance gains, and not just small increments.

 

Forget about all the editing.
There are so many prices out there with 510 and there are so little diffrence between the prices. My gut leans towards the intel's ssd's. But you make a good point the 510 is geared toward more intense applications, and the SATA 2 on the 320 should be plenty good for just regular application use, but intel needs to fix that bug first.

 

So you thought the crucial m4 extra performance didnt fairly match the price.
Phil you probably know way more about SSD's than I do. Tell me, does the 34nm NAND chip have anything to do with twice the battery life consumption of the intel 520 compared to the M4?

 

34nm NAND does use more power than 25nm NAND.

But I don't think Intel 510 uses double the power of Crucial M4. Where did you read that?

Here are some power measurements: http://www.ssdreview.com/review/com...ntel-320-series-300gb-25-inch-4pc10302,54,49/

 

I agree pretty much. I have a single drive bay, but since I don't watch movies on my laptop (I watch on my tv) I changed out my ODD for another drive caddy, put in a 510 and then put a Scorp Black in the ODD bay (If I need the DVD to install, I use an external). But if you use your DVD or CD a lot, or like to watch movies or such, then that is not a good deal for you. It really depends on what your priorities and preferences are. And again, if your going to browse the internet and read email, you won't see much in the way of return on investment with a SSD. Yeah, it will start up faster and load some things faster, but at the price of a SSD vs. a great HDD, no, not worth it in that instance.

Read what Phil said, he is selling his because his use doesn't warrant the money. That is the factor you must use. Will it justify your expenditure? For me it does. But I use mine everyday in work to save time and it pays for itself over the course of a year. That, and that alone is why I have and use SSD's. Mine are for work, and time is money. If I save time, I save or make money. Otherwise, it is just an expensive toy.

 

I think it would make more sense if I said the Crucial saves 2x more battery than the intel 510 250gb
look at this
Crucial m4 256GB 2.5 Inch / 0001, Intel 510 Series 250GB 2,5 Inch / PWG2 - SSD Comparison - SSD Reviews, Data Sheets and Comparison - ssdreview.com

 

Yes I don't think that represents double the power usage. Thing is, power measurements tend to be quite unreliable. Look at what Storagereview found.

Here's more



Now if you dig up another review it will probably come with different conclusions.

 

Okay Phil, I have been enlightened again.

So straight down to business, if it were any of you would you get the intel 510 or not get any SSD at all.

 

What's your usage pattern? that's the all important question.

I boot my computer, run Chrome, Firefox and IE. ~ 3-4 times a month I use Word and Excel. I watch the occasional movie. That's about it. For my usage an SSD is not worth it. The Seagate XT caches everything I need, even when I work with two OSes (Windows & OS X).

For Abidderman it's a different story.

 

Intel is way too expensive to justify the buy, i would either go with the M4 or no SSD at all.

 

I should have added, I never run my laptops to anywhere near their battery life, I use them because I go from office to office, so battery life is not a factor to me. Thus, I have never tested that factor with ssd's vs hdd's, or ssd vs. ssd.

 

And again, listen to Phil. My usage and his are much different. What will you use it for. I put an XT in one of my kids laptops, and it works great for him. It all depends on why you want/need it. And even though I have a 510, if I could have saved money on a M4, and maybe if I could have bought it without saving money, I would have, I just couldn't find one. I don't think if you need a SSD that there are differences you would notice between any of the better ssd's in your real usage. However, I have been following for over a year, and I certainly would defer to Phil, since I have read quite a few of his reviews and really listened to his advice.

 

I though about it and maybe the ssd is or isn't worth it. As for what I do.
I do a little video editing here and there and I am going to take classes towards a degree in information systems, but those are at the bottom of the ladder on intense applications IMO. I also use Microsoft office and i dont play games. So now i must figure out if $500 to $600 dollars is worth the 510.
"Sigh" I am still undecided

 

I didn't see it on the original post, but i am guessing by inference that you need size more so than absolute speed. If so, I would suggest either an XT or a large Scorpio Black. I have used both and my kids have them in their systems, and both work very well and very fast. And both give you speed and size. If you can only use one drive, one of those would be the way to go.

 

I didn't think about memory. Now there is supposed to be some programming involved in information systems, but nothing graphic intense. I will probably have to run a lot of programs at once. I don't think memory will be a problem. but a year from now if i stick with this degree and not switch again then i will
probably be using many programming applications. Also information systems is related to computer science if that helps.

Wow I should put this in the original post to save time.

 

What laptop is this for?

To give you an idea of Seagate Momentus XT application launching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUApK9xRZBA

 

I think i might just go ahead and get the intel 510.
The only thing I cant figure out is what "slow random-acess speeds" are.
Does this mean the read/write sequential speeds can become laggy once every so often.
look at this
Intel SSD 510 Series (250GB) Review & Rating | PCMag.com

 

What makes you want to pay ~$200 more for the Intel 510 over the Crucial M4?

You won't notice any performance difference one way or the other.

Synthetic 'random access speeds' don't really matter, as long as real world performance is good, which is the case for M4 and Intel 510.

 

i still think the m4 will degrade faster than the 510. And my gut still leans towards the 510. Yes $200 is alot more but i happen to have a $100 besbuy giftcard, so that helps.

 

That would only be true if you decide to fill it to 100% capacity. Which is something you should not do.
If you don't, the Crucial won't degrade 1%. Check out the performance after testing here:
Crucial M4 128GB SSD Review or here: Crucial m4 256GB SSD (C400) Review - ATTO Post Testing

Many people tend to buy Intel SSD because of the strong brand name. In reality though some other brands are as reliable as Intel.

 

Consider this: Intel and Crucial use the same Marvell controller on their new drives (Intel 510 and Crucial M4). And they both use Micron NAND iirc (yes, Intel uses 32nm versus Crucial 24nm). The only REAL difference is in the tuning of the drive. The hardware is virtually the same between them

 

Wish I'd had a voucher when I got my 510

I had a similar choice between the Vertex 3 and 510. I chose the Intel because I was more comfortable with it. The idea of a Vertex 3 in my laptop was enough to make me uneasy. Actually having to use it every day might have been disconcerting.

I'm not saying Crucial is anything like OCZ (far from it) but if your not comfortable with the idea of buying the M4 are you going to be comfortable using a laptop equipped with it? An extra $100 in exchange for some peace of mind is money well spent from my viewpoint.

*Shrugs* That's my two cents. It's always great to have something cheap and that smashes benchmarks, but that doesn't help me one bit if i'm worried about damaging it all the time, no matter how illogical that concern may be.

 

The hardware is irrelavent. A PC can be running DOS or XP or Windows 7 or linux and they make a HUGE difference.

That said, no one knows if Intel's firmware(equivalent to OS) is a modification of a Marvell reference design or significant enhancement(i.e. A redhat linux distro vs some home made one by me using stock linux kernel).

 

And no one knows whether the firmware from Intel is more reliable or the firmware from Crucial...

 

exactly. The only good test is field test. The more it is being used, the more tests to iron out problems except for some rookies like SF where they don't know how to handle them after all these reported issues.

 

Correct, I agree completely. Crucial has been using this controller for a lot longer than Intel. That said, I am sure Intel will be well off with it too. Either is an equally great drive, I give the edge to Crucial as it is way cheaper. Similar reliabilities. HARDWARE reliability should be the same, which was my point. Firmware is another story, but both companies have done well in the past. Unlike several of those using Sandforce (OCZ anyone...).

Basically, I vote ABS. Anything But Sandforce. Intel and Crucial head that pack easily.

 

I also would question the need for a large SSD. Yes, I have one but really don't need it.

The best value for the money is a smaller SSD (say 120 GB) and a larger HDD. That solves a lot of your problems if you have a machine with an optical drive.

If you are doing a 120-128 GB SSD the Intel is not that much more than the M4.

 

To me it makes sense to go ahead and get the ssd SATA3 if a laptop has SATA 3 port. Plus like Phil said, you dont want to nearly fillup an SSD's memory for it hinders performance and so it makes sense to go with larger SSD in long run because SSD support high longetivity.

 

To the OP: I had the exact same dilemma between M4 and 510 a few weeks ago, and went for 510, merely because I found it at a price lower than M4 (got a new unopened 120GB 510 in ebay from reputable US seller for around $210 shipped). I admit that the installation was a breeze - no hacking, firmware update, changing windows setting, etc was needed even though I had cloned my hard drive to the SSD, against the reasonable consensus here, and it has been working flawlessly. So I would give Intel credit for that.

Having said that, I do agree that the choice between 510 and M4 should be largely a matter of price: If prices are within ~10% of each other, I would go for 510 by all means. If, however, the price difference is significantly more which seems to be the case with your options, it just won't make any sense. Remember that this is an evolving technology and probably still far from maturity. You could save a few $$ today without sacrificing much, and use that toward getting something substantially better in a while. Just my 0.2 cents.

 

I'd be interested to see the CDM (3x100MB) results for your 510 120GB ?

 

There you go:



(Don't know if it matters, but I did it while my laptop was up and running for a few days with several other browser, word and pdf windows open. Wasn't after a fresh restart.)

 

I ordered the intel ssd 510 series (250gb). This should be work fine on on my T520 thinkpad. Both use SATA 3 port.

 

Cheers mazyarjr. I think it's performance seems about right, though there's probably some mods you can do (like everyone else) to improve it.

 

I have no complaints, but care to explain the suggested mods? As long as they don't involve drastic measures, I may give them a try. Thanks!

 

Take a look at the other threads, including this one...
http://forum.notebookreview.com/sol...-series-4-5-965-chipsets-stamatisx-tweak.html