Some specs of Intel G3 SSDs

[GoCubsGo]

Silly question really but if I buy a dock that holds 2 SSDs for my MP can I mix and match the various generations? I know that is an insanely stupid question but it has crossed my mind.

 

[Gabriel GR]

I didn't mean to make a "No one will ever need more than 640kb" kinda statement and more IOPS are always welcome, but I think what I said (= current consumer high end sandforce-based SSDs are fast enough for you not wanting to desire more, for 2010) stands true for 97,5% users. Of course there are exceptions, as you correctly stressed. Even though even for those exceptions waiting for the g3 is still a bit pointless, since buying a sandforce SSD now will repay itself in boosted productivity for the next X months before G3s come out. (and are safely buyable)

I see your point. And I didn't imply waiting either.

Just pointing that the real benefits of improved SSD's from now on, will appeal more to those that do more than just casual computing.

For example I used vmware converter to copy a database server that is stored on a 8 disk fibre channel RAID storage that costs thousands to my 13" MBP and unindexed queries run much faster on my machine than the server.

Of course the laptop doesn't have the reliability or scalability of the server but it boosts productivity by a margin that no other hardware upgrade did. Doubling IOPS usually requires doubling the number of HDDs (or more) so every significant increase in IOPS is a big deal.

 

[Inconsequential]

The Intel SSDs don't degrade over time as other SSDs do.
I've got a 160GB Postville in my Mac Pro for a year now and it's as fast as on the first day (just benchmarked the drive a few weeks ago).

How did you benchmark?

Because my tests show my 80Gb (which is exactly the same to your 160Gb bar the chip density) slows down by up to 50% over time. Read stays roughly at 100% but write drops dramatically.


Before and after running Intels SSD toolbox:

 

[apolloa]

The main difference between the consumer and enterprise is the type of flash memory. Consumers use Multi level chips while the Enterprise uses single layer chips. With multi-level you get more space, but with single you get more speed and long life span.

This is all from what I've read if there is more or less info on them I'm sure someone will throw it out there.

The enterprise grade MLC SSDs will be rated at 100K PE (Program/Erase) lifespan per cell instead of 10K for the customer MLC SSDs. They will also reserve (Overprovisioning) more of the NANDs for spare area for wear leveling/dead cells/controller related work, suppose a 256GB, it'll be ~190GB GB that can be used instead of customer SSDs at ~220GB. The enterprise grade SSDs will also be paired with a much higher quality controller that's designed for enterprise work with much lower write amplification factor. Look at Sandforce's controllers for an example.



That's the difference between SLC/MLC NANDs, not the difference between enterprise/consumer SSDs. Both enterprise/consumers can use either type of NANDs. Read what I said above on the differences.

There are now enterprise grade MLC, and that's what Intel is using for the X25-E G3 SSDs. Sandforce enterprise SSDs will be using MLC as well. Majority of enterprise SSDs will be going with MLC from now on with better controllers.

Cheers guy's. I think it's a case of wait and see what the prices are then as to which model I get as I suspect the 400GB enterprise will be the faster drive, for a premium. If it's too much I may get the 600GB or 300GB one. Will these drives be better then the sandforce controller ones? Or at least as good as?