Intel 510 series SSD

It looks like the new Intel 510 series 6Gb/s SSD will be hitting the shops by Tuesday.
What leads me to this is that it's currently listed on one of the webshops in Norway, 1 SKU is on stock and the other is expected in 2 days.

Not much info about the drives yet except for whats been floating around on the www, which is :

INTEL Solid-State-Drive 510 series 34nm up to 450MB/s read 300MB/s write

The current available SKU's are
120GB SSDSC2MH120A2K5
250GB SSDSC2MH250A2K5

What surprises me is that there are no reviews or sneak previews for that matter.

It looks like March 1st could be the day :)

Updated Feb 28th

Attachment 112505

Link to Intel 510 series
Product specifications
Product brief

Controller : Marvell 88SS9174-BKK2

Technical specifications
Model name Intel® Solid-State Drive 510 Series
Capacity 120GB and 250GB
NAND flash components 34-nm Intel® NAND Flash Memory multi-level cell compute-quality components
Bandwidth2 Sustained sequential reads
120GB Up to 400 MB/s(SATA 6 Gb/s)
250GB Up to 500 MB/s(SATA 6 Gb/s)
Sustained sequential writes
120GB Up to 210 MB/s(SATA 6 Gb/s)
250GB Up to 315 MB/s(SATA 6 Gb/s)
Read latency3 65 microseconds (120GB and 250GB)
Write latency3 80 microseconds (120Gb and 250GB)
Random I/O Operations per Second (IOPS)4 @QD32
Random 4KB Reads: up to 20K IOPS
Random 4KB Writes: up to 8K IOPS
Interface Compatible with SATA 1.5 Gb/s and 3 Gb/s

--

Reviews
StorageReview
PCPerspective
Anandtech
TomsHardware

--

I have found this test don't know if it is true:
https://picasaweb.google.com/115607942538231455851/SSD#

I hope not because the 4K random read/write are really low.

Edit
found another result, seems better:
http://www.mobile01.com/topicdetail....&last=26161963

I've seen that one as well.

Just discard that test as it was performed on a laptop an no 6Gb/s interface.

From the second link.

34nm for the love of christ. cmon intel...quit dragging your feet.

and where the hell is jetstream?

For some reason Intel have already made the 510 series details available today.

Compared to the details posted yesterday the specs have improved a bit.

Link

Attachment 112504

Looks like a decent drive depending on the price. 0.065ms should lead to good low queue performance. High queue IOPs look to be rather poor by current standard but they don't really matter anyway.

Thats what it looks like and those were also the comments that pcper had in their podcast last friday.

Also, the iops (20.000/8.000) are @ QD 32 so there might be more at higher QDs, but all in all it looks like a decent drive.

1st review is online

:)

Marvell?!! Well that is surely disappointing. It is a good controller but I was still expecting something of their own.

Yepp, Marvell it is.

If all the rumours had been true it would have been Toshiba 32nm NAND but that would just have been too weird, so IMF 34nm it is.

I'm actually about to order the 250GB ;)

Performance is good enough for most applications and if the firmware is OK this should be a great drive, a bit pricy though.

What is the new SSD X10 lineup that Storage Review mention? :confused:

Not sure about X10.
edit: well dooh :)
X10 would be 310, 510, ..., that doesn't quite fit the new 320 or G3.

Another review in development at pcper. Link

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ao1

What is the new SSD X10 lineup that Storage Review mention? :confused:

---

I wondered that myself. It could be X10 like the X25-M, or it could be X10 as in 510, 310, etc., but 310 series is already out, it is mSATA SSD cards. And the G3 sounds like it will be 320 series, so X10 is just odd. If Intel were introducing a third SSD series, I'd think they would at least give it a higher number than X25. X30 or X50 maybe. Perhaps storagereview made a mistake?

My guess is still 310, 510, 710?, ...,

Which would somewhat be in line with the processor series. (i3, i5, i7)

MMmmm price seems high to me (250GB capacity priced at $584 and a 120GB at $284, for 1,000-unit quantities) Just wondering how this ssd will compare to the Crucial C400 ssd. And now seeing the OCZ Vertex 3 at(MSRP of $499 for the 240GB version and $249 for the 120GB version when they launch at the end of March) I guess I will wait for Vertex 3 for price vs performance..

might be interesting to see how this drive score on latency and 4K QD1. maybe with these excellent latency they have it figured out to an extent. maybe they have tailored the firmware for low QD performance above all others, which could result in awesome real life performance for us desktop users.

might kinda be like LSI and areca with the same chip....the LSI2108

the LSI is awesome @ high QD but only 'ok' @ low QD
the areca is 'ok' @ high QD but UBER @ low QD.

same chip different results.

so maybe its all in the tuning. will be VERY interesting to compare this to the V3, but according to the only complete review out there yet the V3 looks a bit better.

but will that ultra low write latency for the intel be better? wow thats a good score, but the score for the V3 might not be correct because of the 8kb page alignment.

http://www.storagereview.com/intel_ssd_510_review_250gb http://smiliesftw.com/x/ughdown.gif

Pretty unimpressive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Computurd

might be interesting to see how this drive score on latency and 4K QD1.

---

It's crap. So is this Marvell controller...
See the review posted by lowfat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zalbard

It's crap. So is this Marvell controller...

---

That is a bold statement :)

The controller in the Intel 510 is the same controller as the Crucial m4 (C400) is using.

Look, there is more too it than just iops, I do agree that iops could be much better but do they really need to?

All in all it performed better in real-life tests than the Crucial C300 in that same review.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anvil

That is a bold statement :)

The controller in the Intel 510 is the same controller as the Crucial m4 (C400) is using.

---

Are you sure it's completely the same? Not just the same manufacturer, but also the same model?
Cause if that's so then they just "don't know how to cook it".
Besides, doesn't all the forum research indicate that QD=1..4 and latency are > all for desktop use? Sequential speeds are already huge anyway...

It's the same controller, there is one huge differense though and that's the firmware.
Micron/Crucial is writing their own and so is Intel.

All research (well most of it) indicates that the performance we want/need is at low QD, maybe a bit more than 4 though, there are bursts where QD reaches > 10 but on average it's quite low.
As for latency there is one common denominator that generally needs to improve and that is max latency and from the looks of it the Intel is great at latency, as they've always been.

The 510 isn't a racehorse and I don' think it was meant to be, I'm expecting more models from Intel :)

Reviewed by pcper Link

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anvil

It's the same controller, there is one huge differense though and that's the firmware.
Micron/Crucial is writing their own and so is Intel.

All research (well most of it) indicates that the performance we want/need is at low QD, maybe a bit more than 4 though, there are bursts where QD reaches > 10 but on average it's quite low.
As for latency there is one common denominator that generally needs to improve and that is max latency and from the looks of it the Intel is great at latency, as they've always been.

The 510 isn't a racehorse and I don' think it was meant to be, I'm expecting more models from Intel :)

---

Yep it's not a racehorse, but it got the price-tag like a Ferrari.

If this is consumer SSD, then that price is high and I thought G3 is meant to satisfy that marked. If it's a high-end SSD, as the price suggests, the performance is not there, at least yet. There is still a little hope that FW-bugs is keeping it back, then better harry and fix it up.
With this price and performance, I would wait for C400 before toughing this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sam_oslo

Yep it's not a racehorse, but it got the price-tag like a Ferrari.
...
With this price and performance, I would wait for C400 before toughing this.

---

Hi Sam,

As usual, all new products carry a large price tag.

Meanwhile I've ordered the Vertex 3 240GB :p:

There are quite a few positives about this SSD but I believe the Vertex 3 is the one to get, sure the M4/C400 will be a great performer but there are no news on availability.

I haven't given up on this SSD yet, it's a great allrounder and real-life performer but nothing extreme.
Still waiting for someone to give it a run with PCMV.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anvil

Hi Sam,

As usual, all new products carry a large price tag.

Meanwhile I've ordered the Vertex 3 240GB :p:

There are quite a few positives about this SSD but I believe the Vertex 3 is the one to get, sure the M4/C400 will be a great performer but there are no news on availability.

I haven't given up on this SSD yet, it's a great allrounder and real-life performer but nothing extreme.
Still waiting for someone to give it a run with PCMV.

---

Hi Anvil,

Yeah, you are the SSD-freak and get all these just for fun and testing :p: but I'm a bit confused about Intel's 510-move. Why should they release a "great allrounder and real-life performer but nothing extreme." just when everybody is releasing next-gen high end SSD, and just before G3 which was meant to fill the spot?

They may still fix it with new FWs, so there is still a bit hope for this SSD, but if the performance remains at this spot, I'm afraid this move means Intel got big problems with 25nm NAND + Intel controller. I hope this doesn't mean a big delay for G3. Because that was our hope for big and cheap "great allrounder and real-life performer but nothing extreme."

Not to change the subject but where is the Crucial C400 at? I thought it was going to be the first out for the SSD.. Also how does this Intel 510 250GB compare to the Crucail C300 256GB?

Quote:

---

Why should they release a "great allrounder and real-life performer but nothing extreme." just when everybody is releasing next-gen high end SSD, and just before G3 which was meant to fill the spot?

---

maybe they are looking for wide mainstream adoption. maybe they can see this as an OEM drive. i could. if the reliability is there, this would be perfect over at best buy for the normal people to buy. this is more than they need.

@Sam

I don't know, maybe they felt they had to release something carrying a 6Gb/s tag and this was what they were able to come up with, who knows, maybe in a few weeks the "G3" suddenly appears?

@Lu(ky
I'm quite sure the M4/C400 will be available soon.

The 510 performed equally well and sometimes better than the C300 in the StorageReview real-life test, pcper called it a pricy but decent performer.
The Intel SSDs also got the SSD Toolbox which is unique and a great tool that should be included with every SSD imho. (OCZ is almost there)

Anands Storage benchmarks on the 510 should be an interesting wait.

edit:

Good point computurd, Intel is probably looking at "the greater picture"

--

Intel 510 SSD now at newegg ------> H E R E

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lu(ky

Intel 510 SSD now at newegg ------> H E R E

---

This is why they has the SSD sale last week?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anvil

@Sam

I don't know, maybe they felt they had to release something carrying a 6Gb/s tag and this was what they were able to come up with, who knows, maybe in a few weeks the "G3" suddenly appears?
..
--

---

Yeah, it's possible, and lets hope so. G3 is our hope for good, big and cheap SSD with a descent performance for most users. That was the promise of G3, if I recall right.

But if 510 doesn't get better with upcoming FWs, and G3 suddenly appears too, then I'm wondering how Intel is going to get rid of these expensive 510.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lu(ky

Intel 510 SSD now at newegg ------> H E R E

---

Wow. I've got 2 in my cart - so tempted. I was going to wait for the Vertex3's to release, or the G3's, but these are out now!

Ugh....

Do yourself a favour and wait a bit or get C300s instead.

Reviewed at Anandtech http://www.anandtech.com/show/4202/t...ssd-510-review

Having read the review it's pretty clear.

The Intel 510 is a great drive!

It's the 2nd fastest drive in Anand's real-life benchmarks and as for PCMV is basically a tie with the C300. (< 200 pts)

It looks like the 510 delivers the iops we need and hopefully the same reliability as the X25 series.

The only issue "on paper" with the 510 is the lack of iops compared to other SSDs but it seems the lack of iops doesn't really matter, we can't reach those limits anyways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anvil

It looks like the 510 delivers the iops we need and hopefully the same reliability as the X25 series.

---

Are you sure about the reliability? I mean I love Intel SSDs to death for their reliability, but those 510s use a Marvell controller, which makes me raise an eyebrow.

I'm not sure, that why I wrote hopefully.

I'm not concerned about the Marvell controller, it's predecessor has been doing great in the C300.
It's more about firmware I think and I do believe in Intels skills in that department :)

In the end, only time can tell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anvil

@Sam
I don't know, maybe they felt they had to release something carrying a 6Gb/s tag and this was what they were able to come up with, who knows, maybe in a few weeks the "G3" suddenly appears?

--

---

And there you have it, the Intel 320 aka G3 :)

Slated for a mid-April launch, the 2.5-inch 9.5mm 320 Series will use 25nm MLC NAND and is available in five capacities: 40GB, 80GB, 160GB, 300GB and 600GB.

The 320 Series will be pushed as 'the fast hard drive alternative' with performance and data reliability as two key focus areas.

Final performance figures and drive lifespan are not available yet, but we do expect them to be pretty much the same as rumored specifications so far:

250MB/sec read, 170MB/sec write
Up to 50K and 40K IOPS for random 4KB read and write respectively
30TB to 60TB worth of 4KB random writes

Link to vr-zone

Dunno about being the second fastest drive... Anandtech clearly ignores QD=1 testing. Doesn't even bother with it.
And at QD=3 the drive is still very slow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anvil

And there you have it, the Intel 320 aka G3 :)

Slated for a mid-April launch, the 2.5-inch 9.5mm 320 Series will use 25nm MLC NAND and is available in five capacities: 40GB, 80GB, 160GB, 300GB and 600GB.

The 320 Series will be pushed as 'the fast hard drive alternative' with performance and data reliability as two key focus areas.

Final performance figures and drive lifespan are not available yet, but we do expect them to be pretty much the same as rumored specifications so far:

250MB/sec read, 170MB/sec write
Up to 50K and 40K IOPS for random 4KB read and write respectively
30TB to 60TB worth of 4KB random writes

Link to vr-zone

---

4K IOPS up from 35K/8.6K... Not bad, not bad. Same capacity at 25nm means lower prices. Sweet. Must resist V3 and 510...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zalbard

Dunno about being the second fastest drive... Anandtech clearly ignores QD=1 testing. Doesn't even bother with it.
And at QD=3 the drive is still very slow.

---

Forget about the synthetic benchmarks for a while and focus on the real-world stuff. :)

This is the the Heavy Workload benchmark

Attachment 112612

Attachment 112613

Attachment 112614

Attachment 112615

Attachment 112616

Attachment 112617

The result is pretty clear, and it's the same with the Light Workload.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Computurd

maybe they are looking for wide mainstream adoption. maybe they can see this as an OEM drive. i could. if the reliability is there, this would be perfect over at best buy for the normal people to buy. this is more than they need.

---

No they are more than likely to exit IMF.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anvil

And there you have it, the Intel 320 aka G3 :)

Slated for a mid-April launch, the 2.5-inch 9.5mm 320 Series will use 25nm MLC NAND and is available in five capacities: 40GB, 80GB, 160GB, 300GB and 600GB.

The 320 Series will be pushed as 'the fast hard drive alternative' with performance and data reliability as two key focus areas.

Final performance figures and drive lifespan are not available yet, but we do expect them to be pretty much the same as rumored specifications so far:

250MB/sec read, 170MB/sec write
Up to 50K and 40K IOPS for random 4KB read and write respectively
30TB to 60TB worth of 4KB random writes

Link to vr-zone

---

Egad!!! I wish I would have found this yesterday as I could have included it in my article about the new Intel/SandForce drive on the horizon. Because of the 25nm NAND, you will probably see the SandForce SF2100 SATA 3 controller within as I am going to take a guess that the Intel controller is becoming completely extinct. Alot of this, of course, is guess work but logically speaking I don't believe we have seen the end of Intel introductions just yet.

That's absurd. Do you have any more evidence for your wild speculation other than a picture of a Sandforce-controller SSD with IMFT flash?

For someone making such ridiculous speculations, I wonder how you could NOT have known already that the Intel 320 series SSDs were due out soon. That has been discussed in forums for weeks now.

Unfortunately I can't follow every forum all the time. Although I enjoy being a member here, I am lucky if I can hit it once or twice a week now.

Wouldn't I look real foolish if I was totally wrong on this? Bookmarked.

Someone once had a vision that the world just might be round and a similar response as your was raised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flamenko

Someone once had a vision that the world just might be round and a similar response as your was raised.

---

There is a difference between "having a vision" and drawing a conclusion based on sound evidence. The vast majority of "visions" are incorrect, since they are no better than random guesses. If there is solid evidence to back up a claim, then the chances the claim is correct can be high, or near certainty, depending on the strength of the evidence.

The only "evidence" you seem to have is a picture of an SSD with 25nm flash memory and a Sandforce controller. But that was at Sandforce's booth. The simplest explanation is that Sandforce would want to get some 25nm flash memory to test with their controllers. Their only choices for 25nm flash are Micron or Intel. Just because they got the Intel-branded version of IMFT 25nm flash does not mean that Intel is going to make a Sandforce SSD. If they had happened to get the Micron version, would you now be publishing crazy articles about Micron manufacturing a Sandforce-controller SSD?

SandForce and Toshiba is more of a "team".

We can not rule out anything but I'm finding this Intel+SandForce thing highly unlikely.
If it was true it would be a pity, we need both forces as well as others to keep on pushing the limits in different directions.

After all Intel has developed their own 6Gb/s controller used in the upcoming Enterprise SSD -> Hitachi SSD400S Link to tweaktown
If you look closely at the picture of the controller the Intel "i" is clearly visible.
It is sort of strange that the controller wasn't used in the 510 but maybe they have another series planned for that controller. e.g. the 710

Anyways, there are several important releases ahead :)

John IO have offended you somehow. Apologies. As I said, lets revisit this in a month or so. I haven't anywhere to hide.

well, intel did shock us all with the Marvell controller. if anyone could have figured that out prior to release they would have been ridiculed. I think the point is this: If intel is already committed to using third party controllers, why wouldn't they use someone else's? especially if they were better? the SF seems to outpace the Marvell in some scenarios.

but that brings me to anvils point: very nice write speeds on the 510. surprising! i am wondering if the SF is so busy due to compression involved with the writing? compression has to add at least a touch of latency to this....

this kind of reminds of a similar situation in the past....the Vertex gen 1 Vs. the Intel. i guess under the heavy workloads the writing just comes into play that much more.
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/i...2301/20652.png

@flamenko....nah john just can be cranky :):rofl:

@CT

Shocked about the Marvell controller, maybe a little but not that much of a shock as one should have thought, more like a disbelief :)

The rumours have been flying all over since about a month ago...
(and not just about the controller :))

As for the 510, it's easily #2 on the Light Workload as well.
You are right about the Heavy Workload, it's a lot about writes, too much for my liking but in combination with the Light Workload it's probably meant to present both sides of the coin.

Well, as for now, SandForce wins them both.
There are other aspects of SSDs though.

I wonder if OCZ has made a special deal this time around? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flamenko

John IO have offended you somehow. Apologies. As I said, lets revisit this in a month or so. I haven't anywhere to hide.

---

More outrage than offense. No apology is necessary, but I hope you will raise your standards of evidence in the future. I think it is irresponsible for any serious publication, web or otherwise, to print such groundless speculation, even with a warning. Even Fudzilla does not print things with such thin evidence.

Considering how high the MB/s is on those graphs, it doesn't look like heavy at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anvil

Forget about the synthetic benchmarks for a while and focus on the real-world stuff. :)

This is the the Heavy Workload benchmark

Attachment 112612

Attachment 112613

Attachment 112614

Attachment 112615

Attachment 112616

Attachment 112617

The result is pretty clear, and it's the same with the Light Workload.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnw

More outrage than offense. No apology is necessary, but I hope you will raise your standards of evidence in the future. I think it is irresponsible for any serious publication, web or otherwise, to print such groundless speculation, even with a warning. Even Fudzilla does not print things with such thin evidence.

---

John... you seem like a really smart guy.... kind of. Rather than ranting as such which you seem to be accustomed to, do a bit of a background and ask the question of why I would ever put such an article out there unless.....

The problem we have anymore is, not only do we need everything handed to us on a plate, but also, we want to be spoon fed.

Toms hardware has published an Review of the 510

Link

edit:
BTW, in the conclusion they are stating stat the next Intel SSD (the X25-M refresh) known as the 320 will be using an Intel controller :)

--

I might suggest that the key to 25nm NAND being used in SSDs is really the write cycle which is significantly lower, keyed with the fact that SandForce write amplification is under 1/1. Accompanied by Durawrite technology, this has the ability to significantly stretch the overall life of the drive. Can present controllers do that?

I have dug into the 320 theory and think that the Sandforce SF-2100 is ideal for exactly that "should Intel not be able to extend the life cycle of that controller" with any expected SSD release. It also answer the question some may have been asking as to why the heck would Sandforce even come out with two 2100 series processors capable of SATA II only.

I also looked at the Intel article with the prototype Intel SATA6 controller and found it interesting but brought me right to the question of why the Marvell is in the 510 right off then? Wouldn't Intel be comfortable with waiting a bit longer until they can release that on a stable setup? Coincidentally, that strongly resembles the RAID chip inside present OCZ Revo drives.

Dont you love when people step out on such a limb as that? Fm Toms: 'That drive will employ Intel’s own controller.'

Started playing with my Intel 510 and will have the review out this weekend. The background on the Sandforce/Intel mix has swamped my time though.

I dont know if the site will allow it and if not, please delete but I have an incredible draw up for a very valuable Intel 975 Extreme coincidentally. I dont know of any tech site having a larger valued draw and know that that particular item may be key in builds of members here.

Maybe I should have started a Intel/Sandforce release Thread on its own... I didnt think it would take over this but there are alot of angles to consider, one of which I just detailed.

The SF-2XXX controller is no doubt a great match for 25nm NAND.

I'm not sure that we are the right people to answer all questions :) but there really is more to it than 6Gb/s ports, there is no magical switch that makes millions of 3Gb/s ports suddenly work in 6Gb/s mode. Meaning: It will take years before all users have upgraded to 6Gb/s capable computers.
Ergo, 3Gb/s devices will be in demand for a long time and that includes SSDs.

But, do you really think that Micron would be releasing the C400/M4 if there weren't any other controllers that could cope with 25nm NAND?

There has been a lot of confusing things happening at Intels SSD department lately (mostly delays) but I don't think that SF is the answer to all problems.
I'm pretty confident that Intel can design a new controller for 25nm NAND and smaller :), after all they have more info on 25nm IMFT NAND than any other except for Micron.

Well, lets wait and see, 1 month left or so...

The key to the Crucial is that they, and others are becoming more transparent in expected SSD life. I believe the average calculation is 40GB a day for 5 years which is still a heck of a feat for ANY consumer. Marvell can then account for lifespan with the consumer and maybe even enterprise as we now realize that servers do much less writing than originally believed.

They key would then be to be able to supply a enterprise or 'enthusiast' level ssd with a significantly longer lifespan which Sandforce seems to have done. As much as we like to kick them in the stomach for their success, their progress in just over a year have been amazing and this can be seen with their new controller.

Many are not aware but it is absolutely impossible for any company not using compression to match their performance. It cannot be done simply because parallel read/write performance (as with the new controllers) can only be accomplished with a write amplification of under 1/1. This has only been accomplished by Sandforce who then steps it up even further with 256 bit AES encryption.

Believe me, I am not pwned by Sandforce at all and, in fact, heard it when I let out articles advising the consumer (and some enterprise clients) that their SF-1200 and SF-1500 were exactly the same controller physically, as are the new SF-2200 and SF-2500 controllers. This was followed by later articles of Sandforces releasing of firmware that significantly upgraded the performance of their drive without announcement. This was only seen in ssd refresh and new drives and not avail in a public firmware update (to my knowledge).

My interest is key in ability of the controller and I really think that Intel got caught which was evident in that roadmap. Why would you put out that drive when others were stepping up significantly? There were no SATA 3 designs on the table then by Intel. Intel then had the same stroke of genius as did many others and invested in both Marvell and Sandforce. The key here is, IMHO, the Sandforce drive is most compatible with the Intel 25nm chips and thats when the introduction will be....right along with the rest.

Just a rant of some senile old guy eheh and by the way...I just laid out my next Intel/Sandforce SSD article here without holding back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flamenko

John... you seem like a really smart guy.... kind of. Rather than ranting as such which you seem to be accustomed to, do a bit of a background and ask the question of why I would ever put such an article out there unless.....

The problem we have anymore is, not only do we need everything handed to us on a plate, but also, we want to be spoon fed.

---

This is why web journalism has such a bad name. Could you have handled it worse? No.

If you have a confidential source, you should mention that you have a confidential source in the article.

I asked you twice if you had more evidence than you presented. But you did not even respond to that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by flamenko

Just a rant of some senile old guy eheh and by the way...I just laid out my next Intel/Sandforce SSD article here without holding back.

---

You can say that again. I'm sure the article will be similarly incoherent and poorly substantiated.