Intel 34nm SSD expected next month

Posted on Wednesday, January 26 2011 @ 21:24 CET by Thomas De Maesschalck

FUD Zilla reports Intel's 34nm SSD with SATA 6Gbps interface will be launched in February. These new storage devices will offer read speeds of up to 450MB/s, write speeds of up to 300MB/s, 20k IOPS at 4KB read and 4K IOPS at 4KB write.

Intel plans to launch these drives in February and the bigger of two is Intel 510 250GB, which is going to sell for $579 at launch. The smaller one is Intel 510 120GB 34nm drive that will debut for $279 in February. The previous performance king, the X25-E with its 64GB storage and 250MB read and 170MB write, still sells for around €600.

About the Author

Thomas De Maesschalck

Thomas has been messing with computer since early childhood and firmly believes the Internet is the best thing since sliced bread. Enjoys playing with new tech, is fascinated by science, and passionate about financial markets. When not behind a computer, he can be found with running shoes on or lifting heavy weights in the weight room.

Loading Comments

Use Disqus to post new comments, the old comments are listed below.

Re: Intel 34nm SSD expected next month
by Anonymous on Thursday, January 27 2011 @ 13:04 CET

250GB is DOWN from the 300GB that was promised for over a year. I suspect the reason is that the durability on the smaller process is hugely reduced and they needed that 50GB as additional buffer to keep the drives from going bad on folks.

We could easily be reaching the end of any improvements on SSD's using current flash technology. Which would mean an end to the price improvements as well. Durability decreases by 80% by dropping a process node. Some of that can be made up in more refined use of the drive space, but much of that will have to go to reserve memory to uphold long term durability with spare memory space. So if you gain 30% in process density, but have to increase your "reserve" memory 25% you've actually not gained much of an improvement in price or drive size. Hence what you are seeing with Gen 3 being only 90GB more than the 160GB and Gen 2 was held to the same size 160GB as the Gen 1.

Future doesn't look very rosy.

Share this story!