http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/ Engadget Comments for Intel's 34nm-based 320GB solid state drive creeps closer to reality 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/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 8:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Uh, Ya. Interesting technology. I think for most people, including myself, the price drop is the biggest news here. Yay for semi-affordable solid state drives!]]>Jul 18th 2009 8:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 12:02PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 8:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 9:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/

(thatswhatshesaid)]]>Jul 18th 2009 9:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 9:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 9:27AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 1:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
I don't think the per GB price matters as much if the SSD is just a boot/application/important files drive used in conjunction with another drive. Which is a set-up for a lot of laptop users anyways - smaller internal drive, large external drive usually left at home for storing media.]]>Jul 18th 2009 1:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/ah..i know...it is me that mistaken "expensive" with "expansive"
Sorry for my poor English...]]>Jul 18th 2009 1:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 8:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Price
Performance

Currently SSD is 1 of 3 but still is far away from perfection.
]]>Jul 18th 2009 9:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 9:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609415
]]>Jul 18th 2009 9:55AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 10:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/]]>Jul 18th 2009 10:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
That's what I'm looking for - something to hold Win 7 and the bulk of my installed programs. The rest of my data, like photos, videos, media, documents, etc. will all be on "traditional" hard drive storage.

Of course, we need something like Intel's drives since many of the other still stutter and lag with lots of little random data writes, which is unacceptable to me.]]>Jul 18th 2009 1:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
My work PC has a 40GB HD. Seriously. It's not even THAT old. (Three, four years?) And yes that isn't enough... My home PC has 120GB but I don't actually need all of that - I've got 20GB free at the moment, and if I got off my lazy arse and archived older photos to DVD, that'd jump up to 60GB free. For a new home PC for me, 100GB would be fine, maybe 80 at a pinch. For a netbook, ie anything that isn't my main PC, I'd be happy with 32GB.

Of course some people have and need hundreds of gigabytes - they download (and keep) HD films, or have large porn collections, or are professional photographers, or play (and keep) PC games, etc. That might even be a high proportion of people who read gadget sites. But it's not everyone.

There's still the 'price' issue - 100GB or even 80GB of quality SSD remains expensive - but for a large proportion of people, I don't think capacity is a major problem (even without the option of external secondary drives for media).]]>Jul 18th 2009 7:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 7:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 9:30AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 11:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
yes, I have them. I love them.

Now with the new prices, I can switch some more pc's around here, can't wait :)]]>Jul 18th 2009 9:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/I made the switch over to a SSD from OCZ (Vertex II) and I'm telling you its the best $100 I have spent in the last 5 years on any computer part. I put Windows 7 RC on it and all my frequently used apps. The system jumped from an average computer to super fast. Windows boots up in just under 17 seconds and apps launch in the blink of an eye.
I'm looking to upgrade all my other computers as well and hope that capacity goes up and prices will continue to fall.]]>Jul 18th 2009 9:52AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 12:09PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227393]]>Jul 18th 2009 12:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 1:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 10:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 12:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 4:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 10:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/06/02/ocz-intros-3-5-inch-colossus-ssd-at-computex/, but still, why not 5.25" ones either?]]>Jul 18th 2009 10:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 10:27AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 10:29AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
Comment #1 mmmm idk, it is very possible no doubt, but look at the market for HDD's 2.5" vs 3.5" market, i would assume the same would carry over relatively the same when it would come to SSDs touting 3.5 or even 5.25 over the 2.5

Comment #2 the big selling point about these SSDs isnt just shock resistance, it is that plus the fact that they have extremely high write/read speeds in comparison to SATA or SCSI (i think, at least the price vs performance SCSI vs SSD is better for SSD), which is HIGHLY beneficial for multiple applications (ex. video editing, data base cache disk)]]>Jul 18th 2009 10:32AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
The market for 5.25" storage drives doesn't exist, and there's no reason to create it. ]]>Jul 18th 2009 11:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 4:14PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
With a 2.5" laptop drive, you can use it in a laptop or desktop. And if you only have 3.5" or 5.25" bays, simply get a bay adapter, they're super cheap and were a dime a dozen when the transition from 5.25" to 3.5" drives were happening.

If you make it 3.5" or bigger, you're unnecessarily limiting the market that you can sell too.]]>Jul 18th 2009 6:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
Or expanding it, just by keeping it in the 2.5" factor area you limit the market you sell to, contrary to what you just said.

I can see how a 5.25" wouldnt be good to sell (probably be over priced, etc), but 3.5" 's would be very useful to have (ex. video editing, server caching, etc) Professionals want high performance, low cost, 2.5" drives do not equal both. What would you rather have, 4x 256GB 2.5" SSDs in RAID0 taking up 4 drive slots (maybe only 2x 5.25" with a nicely done adapter) costing 1200$ (exemplary figures) or 2x 1TB 3.5" SSDs in RAID0 taking up 2 drive slots (or 1x 5.25") costing 500$, with room left over for all the other optical/breakout boxes. This would be specifically for video editors and the like who need high speeds and a large amount of room on demand.]]>Jul 18th 2009 8:27PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
or you could simply use something like this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16816111060

and put those four 2.5" drives in the space of 2 3.5" HDD's.

There is no need for 3.5" SSD drives.

]]>Jul 21st 2009 11:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/80GB Mfg Part#: SSDSA2MH080G2C1
160GB Mfg Part#: SSDSA2MH160G2C1]]>Jul 18th 2009 10:38AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 11:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 11:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.solid-state.com/display_article/363806/5/none/none/TCHNE/Applied-targets-22nm-copper-barrier/seed-PVD]]>Jul 18th 2009 11:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/
"in comparison to SATA or SCSI" should say "in comparison to SATA or SCSI HDD's"]]>Jul 18th 2009 10:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 10:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.google.co.uk/products?q=SSDSA2MH080G2C1

those models are also listed on here: http://www.intel.com/cd/channel/reseller/asmo-na/eng/products/nand/feature/index.htm]]>Jul 18th 2009 11:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 11:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 11:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/18/intels-34nm-based-320gb-solid-state-drive-creeps-closer-to-real/Jul 18th 2009 12:11PM