http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/ Engadget Comments for Intel readying 320GB SSDs? http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 7:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 8:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 22nd 2009 3:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
*explodes*]]>Jan 21st 2009 7:41PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 8:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
Funny, but.. incorrect.]]>Jan 21st 2009 9:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 9:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
besides that tho, i actually would like to know why some SSDs follow powers of 2 and some follow the HDD "path" which i could best define as 120, 160, 250, 320, 500, 750, 1TB plus a few others i'm sure i'm forgetting]]>Jan 21st 2009 10:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
@a ham sandwich - you realize it has nothing to do with formatting, but instead marketing people wanting to inflate the numbers on the box to their maximum. The numbers on the box by the manufacturer are essentially different units than those displayed in Windows.

From: Wikipedia
"There are two different definitions of gigabyte in general use:

1,000,000,000 bytes or 109 bytes is the decimal definition, used in telecommunications (such as network speeds) and most computer storage manufacturers (such as hard disks and flash drives). This usage is compatible with SI. Quote from Seagate: "For drive storage capacity, 1 gigabyte = 1,000,000,000 bytes (or one billion bytes).",[1] Similar quotes are found on the websites of other storage manufacturers.
1,073,741,824 bytes, equal to 10243, or 230 bytes. This is the definition commonly used for computer memory and file sizes. Microsoft uses this definition to display hard drive sizes[2]. (The Linux kernel uses the SI value.) Since 1999, the IEC recommends that this unit should instead be called a gibibyte (abbreviated GiB)."

So the box uses 10^9 = 1,000,000,000 bytes = 1 GB and Microsoft uses 2^30 = 1,073,741,824 bytes = 1 GB]]>Jan 22nd 2009 1:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 23rd 2009 12:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 7:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 7:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 10:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 22nd 2009 3:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 7:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
http://product.pelltechnology.com/SSD_320GB_Hard_Drive_Upgrade.asp

SSD 320 GB Desktop Hard Drive for this model for Sale Price : $200.00

Now go playagame!]]>Jan 21st 2009 8:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136319 in raid will still destroy this.... And be MUCH MUCH cheaper.
4 of THESE in raid though, lets not think about that.....]]>Jan 21st 2009 7:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/That would make it difficult to use a computer, I guess I should stay away from SSDs if I want to get anything done...]]>Jan 21st 2009 8:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
hey playa, play with this:

http://product.pelltechnology.com/SSD_320GB_Hard_Drive_Upgrade.asp

SSD 320 GB Desktop Hard Drive for this model for Sale Price : $200.00

Now go playagame!]]>Jan 21st 2009 8:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 9:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5132&Itemid=67
]]>Jan 22nd 2009 12:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
Looks like i was wrong, this all could happen by the end of the year. 320GB is huge, once SSDs will reach 1TB at about $500 the market will change.]]>Jan 21st 2009 7:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 8:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 8:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
The GSkill titan has specs close to the intel x25-m and doesnt have the stuttering problem common to ssds using jmicron controllers (the titan version uses 2 controllers).
500$ for the 256GB and 270 for the 128GB kills the current intel offering.

the upcoming ocz apex ssd seems to have an internal RAID 0.

corsair is getting into the game as well.

On a side note, shouldnt we consider that ssd have almost reached the capacity of HDDs ?? 256GB SSD have come out and 500GB/1TB have been anounced ( i think) in a 2.5in form factor , to which comparable HDDs are at 500GB and 750GB have been announced.

just saying....]]>Jan 21st 2009 9:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 9:24PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 21st 2009 10:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Feb 2nd 2009 5:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/Jan 22nd 2009 7:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/http://www.engadget.com/2009/01/21/intel-readying-320gb-ssds/
I'll buy at that point.

I'll predict that this will be one doozy of a cutthroat business...

]]>Jan 22nd 2009 1:52PM