http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/ Engadget Comments for Intel's 34nm X25-M runs like a thoroughbred SSD, costs less 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/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 5:58AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 11:33AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
For me, it'd have to be about $1/GB AND great random read/write performance before I can really jump onboard.]]>Jul 23rd 2009 12:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 24th 2009 2:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 6:00AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 6:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 6:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 11:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 11:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 6:03AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 6:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
*Rolls eyes*]]>Jul 23rd 2009 6:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 6:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 7:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 11:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 12:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 6:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
by my calculation the SSD will cost $1 per GB in 2011 and by 2016/2017 it will be 1 cent/GB so 10 TB SSD disk will cost you $100.]]>Jul 23rd 2009 6:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 12:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
But, read speeds are incredibly fast... and won't that make a huge difference in how fast your computer operates?]]>Jul 23rd 2009 6:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 6:45AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/]]>Jul 23rd 2009 7:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
Anyway, the Random Write Speeds of this SSD are like 100x faster than normal HDs. That's where the difference is made.]]>Jul 23rd 2009 12:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
Overall though, The primary performance increase from an SSD comes from the incredible low random access time. Even crappy SSDs manage huge random read performance, and this leads to very fast boot up times, application launch times, etc. Also, loading large files into RAM will benefit greatly from the similarly huge sequential read performance.]]>Jul 23rd 2009 12:35PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
kick or kicked... ( yes some of us read the post before adding comments )]]>Jul 23rd 2009 6:38AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 6:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
So hurry up and start buying these so you can drive the price down.]]>Jul 23rd 2009 9:04AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 9:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
3 years ago, everyone was *dreaming* of the day when fast SSDs would reach $10/GB.
1.5 years ago, everyone was dreaming of the day when fast SSDs would reach $5/GB.

Now you can get the fastest (MLC) drives on the market for under $3/GB. You can get a 64GB boot drive for $200 or less. 128GB for < $350. People easily spend more on GPUs, and yet an SSD is the single most important upgrade you can make to a computer for overall performance. It's really like night and day versus even a 10K raptor.]]>Jul 23rd 2009 12:39PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
"These drives were reportedly faster in every way, with higher capacity to boot"

These drives have the same capacity and the same sequential write and read speeds. This guy is off to a bad start.]]>Jul 23rd 2009 10:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 12:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
Reported by whom? Intel stated that the sequential write speed and capacity of these drives were identical to the G1 drives.

My point stands.]]>Jul 23rd 2009 1:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
Too late, I already bought them. Raid 5'ing them as we speak. Eat em suckers!]]>Jul 23rd 2009 10:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/Jul 23rd 2009 12:58PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/23/intels-34nm-x25-m-runs-like-a-thoroughbred-ssd-costs-less/
Thinking of getting a new laptop and wanted to pop one of these suckers in there, but obviously if you have the manufacturer do it it's like a $700-900 option. ]]>Aug 11th 2009 12:29PM