Developers do a lot of 4KB operations. Source files tend to be small as do database updates.
The current market leader in this is the OCZ Vertex 3, a considerably faster drive than the Intel 510. Indeed intel's X25-M is better at 4KB operations than the new drive.
The 510 is a disappointment, get an OCZ Vertex instead, its cheaper and faster for the sorts of operations that matter. See anandtech for more details:
Avoid OCZ. I had a Vertex 2 SSD fail after about two weeks. What's really a big gotcha is that it fails 100% immediately; there are no warning signs as there often are with a hard disk.
I looked into it: I believe that there's actually an assertion that got hit in the OCZ firmware, and then it goes into a lock-down mode. However, there's no way for an end-user to exit this mode and recover any data (it simply won't respond to SATA commands), nor are OCZ willing to unlock it for you.
My only concern with OCZ SSDs are initial quality. Just look Newegg's reviews, there a whole bunch of people who received DOA units or they fail after a month.
"Intel’s SSD 510 costs more and it can serve up better sequential numbers than Vertex 3. However, it’s actually slower than its predecessor in situations where you’re working with lots of small files. The applications where this 250 GB drive makes sense are fairly clear cut. But again, it looks like you’d get a better all-around experience from OCZ’s Vertex 3 when it becomes available." [1]
"My biggest complaints about the 510 actually aren't about Intel's use of a 3rd party controller, instead they are about the drive's lackluster random read performance. In a horrible bout of irony Intel fixed its sequential performance and moved backwards in the random department. Random read performance, as it turns out, has a pretty major impact in the real world.
Random write performance is also pretty low by today's standards, however the impact on most of our real world performance tests is minimal. It looks like we may have hit the upper limit of what we need from 4KB random write performance (at least given current workloads)." [2]
The reliability problems with the Vertex 2 make me wary of anything from OCZ. There are many, many reports of OCZ drives failing within a few days of use, some within minutes of booting up. Plus there are well-documented problems with power-saving modes.
Frankly, SSD failure rates from most manufacturers are so high it should be a scandal. Intel is the only company I'm remotely comfortable buying an SSD from right now.
I thouht 510 is Intel's temporary solution for high-end, needed because the delays with newer X-25 (G3); and the true X-25 successor will be the new X-25 whenever that comes out. Now where will the new X-25 fit in this picture?
I just got the X25 less than a week ago. Now that I've seen the testing on this 510 and the Vertex 3, I'm debating returning the X25 and going for one of these models.
I can preorder the 510 from Amazon for 295, still looking for someone selling the Vertex 3.
It's Fast? It seems barely keep up with previous generations Vertex 2 in real-world tests (PCMark), and new Vertex 3 and other SandForces are even faster, and cheaper.
I really wonder why Intel released a drive that's both more expensive and slower than competition. Of course they have strong brand, as X-25 were really successful.
[+] [-] PKeeble|15 years ago|reply
The current market leader in this is the OCZ Vertex 3, a considerably faster drive than the Intel 510. Indeed intel's X25-M is better at 4KB operations than the new drive.
The 510 is a disappointment, get an OCZ Vertex instead, its cheaper and faster for the sorts of operations that matter. See anandtech for more details:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4202/the-intel-ssd-510-review
[+] [-] justinsb|15 years ago|reply
I looked into it: I believe that there's actually an assertion that got hit in the OCZ firmware, and then it goes into a lock-down mode. However, there's no way for an end-user to exit this mode and recover any data (it simply won't respond to SATA commands), nor are OCZ willing to unlock it for you.
[+] [-] coin|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] calebhicks|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nickbp|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] coin|15 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] ghurlman|15 years ago|reply
"My biggest complaints about the 510 actually aren't about Intel's use of a 3rd party controller, instead they are about the drive's lackluster random read performance. In a horrible bout of irony Intel fixed its sequential performance and moved backwards in the random department. Random read performance, as it turns out, has a pretty major impact in the real world.
Random write performance is also pretty low by today's standards, however the impact on most of our real world performance tests is minimal. It looks like we may have hit the upper limit of what we need from 4KB random write performance (at least given current workloads)." [2]
[1] http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-510-solid-state-6gbp... [2] http://www.anandtech.com/show/4202/the-intel-ssd-510-review
From what I can tell, it's worth waiting for the OCZ Vertex 3, which will be faster, and quite possibly cheaper too.
[+] [-] gamble|15 years ago|reply
Frankly, SSD failure rates from most manufacturers are so high it should be a scandal. Intel is the only company I'm remotely comfortable buying an SSD from right now.
[+] [-] nepenthe2|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] listic|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] svrocks|15 years ago|reply
[+] [-] calebhicks|15 years ago|reply
I can preorder the 510 from Amazon for 295, still looking for someone selling the Vertex 3.
[+] [-] unknown|15 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] zokier|15 years ago|reply
I really wonder why Intel released a drive that's both more expensive and slower than competition. Of course they have strong brand, as X-25 were really successful.
[+] [-] ekidd|15 years ago|reply
There are some theoretical physicists who would dearly love to see that test lab. :-)
[+] [-] wmf|15 years ago|reply