Alienware adds 64GB SSD option to ALX desktops

Alienware has already brought some 64GB SSD drives to its laptops, and it's now giving some of its desktops the same solid state treatment as well, with both the AMD-based Aurora ALX and Intel-based Area-51 ALX available with the speedy, and pricey new option. What's more, apparently sensing that its customers wouldn't be satisfied with a mere 64GB, it seems that Alienware is only offering the drives in dual RAID 0 configurations, giving you a total of 128GB and an extra $1,700 on top of the already multi-thousand dollar price tag.

[Shadowise @ Oct 9th 2007 12:06PM]

Guess it's something for the "more cash than sense" crowd. Still, will be great when SSDs are affordable.

[Grant @ Oct 9th 2007 2:30PM]

agreed.
SSD in a desktop makes little sense.
While the speed is great, if you have that much to blow on a HD, you can afford the fastest platter drive, which would still be cheaper and larger.

[veyron @ Oct 9th 2007 12:07PM]

those things look goofy!

[a ham sandwich @ Oct 9th 2007 12:11PM]

u look goofy

[Scooby03 @ Oct 9th 2007 1:14PM]

Ur mum looks goofy

[John McClane @ Oct 9th 2007 1:22PM]

No they do look tacky. Like most PC desktops.

[DickHardknocks @ Oct 9th 2007 12:11PM]

At Prices like these, some company should start LEASING GAMING COMPUTERS.

Solid State drives will be the norm in about 5 years - replacing the obsolete Hard isk Drive. By then, they'll be affordable and reliable. for right now, the early adopters will pay big money for only marginal perforamcne iprovements.

[GoR @ Oct 9th 2007 12:17PM]

Not so marginal. I have a 32gb ssd in my vaio tz190; it rates as a 5.2 on vista's system rate-o-meter.. and functions better than a 10k rpm HDD... the other option was a 4200rpm 1.8 inch HDD; programs load faster on my lappy (with ulv cpu) than most hdd based desktops.

SSD access speeds will only increase over time while HDDs have plateaued.

[dj-kenpo @ Oct 9th 2007 1:05PM]

40mb's vs 80mb's or whatever it's up to now. I second that that's marginal.

if the price difference was $100 then sure, but he's saying for the thousand dollar difference it's silly at the moment unless you really, really need 3ds max to load up in 12seconds instead of 20.

[DickHardknocks @ Oct 9th 2007 12:12PM]

At Prices like these, some company should start LEASING GAMING COMPUTERS.

Solid State drives will be the norm in about 5 years - replacing the obsolete Hard isk Drive. By then, they'll be affordable and reliable. for right now, the early adopters will pay big money for only marginal perforamance iprovements.

[Chris @ Oct 9th 2007 12:40PM]

whoah, deja-vu

[Argot @ Oct 9th 2007 12:46PM]

whoah, deja-vu

[JeffnLA @ Oct 9th 2007 12:31PM]

SSD drives are the future - no doubt about that.

I like when people spend MEGA amounts of cash of the uber-latest, only to have it obsolete in a year or two. The extra 10% performance comes at a 400% cost increase. Suckers!!!!

[dj-kenpo @ Oct 9th 2007 1:06PM]

remember 4 years ago when 17" lcd's for $999 ?
ya..

[George @ Oct 10th 2007 10:12AM]

Shhhhhhh, dude, we need people like those, early adopters, don't tell them not to adopt early.

[JeffnLA @ Oct 9th 2007 2:26PM]

Funny, yes I do remember. I also remember a wealthy uncle of mine had a nano 17 inch tube monitor, it costs $1200!

[strider_mt2k @ Oct 9th 2007 12:53PM]

It's not quite large or obtrusive enough for me.

[Brad @ Oct 9th 2007 4:20PM]

mmmm...I don't usually comment on stuff about PCs, as I'm a Mac user — but are those Klipsch iFi speakers I see in the background???? GOOD STUFF!

[m.edgar @ Oct 9th 2007 7:35PM]

Meh. Why not just add a normal half terrabyte SATA(II) HD?

What I need for my desktop is a mere 16 gig SSD for my primary windows/system apps partition and a seperate 2 gig SSD for my swapfile.

The current sizes of SSD are missing the mark...either give us huge (>100gig) or something we can use (16gig/2gig). 32 or 64 is either too small to serve as real storage and too large to serve as a usefull partition (for the price).