There's a LOT of kvetching in the comments below about how LaptopMag didn't include the Intel SSD in their roundup. The rationale is actually very simple: Intel does not make a 128GB SDD for under $450 (Newegg has their X-25M 160GB for $650, but it's currently out of stock).
We couldn't get every drive in in time for the round-up, but the G.Skill Falcon uses the same exact controller as the Vertex, Patriot Torqx, Super Talent UltraDrive ME, and RunCore Pro IV (all of which we reviewed). The Corsair 128M uses the same exact parts and firmware as the OCZ Summit so it should perform similarly.
Not only is it overpriced for four gigs, it's hella huge for four gigs, I don't see where this thing has much use. Most of the SSD's i've seen are at least pretty dang tiny so great for small footprint systems like netbooks, carputers, or a pocket server.
Imagine how fast my 386SX will run with this bad boy in it! Well, ignoring the slot problem, the bus speed problem, the slow memory, the processor incapable of accessing that much information that quickly, and the fact that the power supply died in that thing years ago. Other than that - it would be amazing.
@alexmetal: I would argue that it is more appropriate for home computing than for a server. Servers have more need for scalability and redundancy. SSD RAIDs do not qualify well, for either.
For a home system the life of the SSD will fall well within the usable time frame for a household of users. It will speed up common daily tasks to fall in line with expectations brought about by faster processors, but not borne out by current HDD technology. Folks will be able to transcode video faster (along with GPU transcoding) and perform tasks like large file moving (essential with the growing size of files) in more realistic time frames.
Someone please educate me on this, but I thought one of the advantages of having a SSD is that it doesn't suffer from fragmentation like a conventional disk drive?
@Pai-Yao Eric Wang: I believe Moeyyy came the closest to answering you (yes there is still fragmenting) but left out that the big reason that SSD fragmentation wasn't supposed to be a problem is not just speed but also that a drive reading head doesn't have to zip around a spinning platter looking for the fragments, leading to errors introduced by the mechanics and timing.
What nobody has explained here is why fragmentation is causign a performance problem when it was not supposed to be anymore.
@spazztastic: According to NewEgg reviewers the SSD that was for the 901 did not support the Mini9. The dimensions of this SSD are 69.5 x 32.1 mm If your Mini9 has an SSD that has those exact dimensions then I'd say at least you have physical compatibility. But Buyer beware. And good luck getting dimensional specifics from Dell.
07/30/09
Seriously, RTFA or GTFO.
07/30/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
.................................................|
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/07/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
Just saying.
05/05/09
03/11/09
03/11/09
03/11/09
Alright. Now that I've got that out of my system. Why the fuck is this necessary for anything BUT a server? It's not.
03/11/09
For a home system the life of the SSD will fall well within the usable time frame for a household of users. It will speed up common daily tasks to fall in line with expectations brought about by faster processors, but not borne out by current HDD technology. Folks will be able to transcode video faster (along with GPU transcoding) and perform tasks like large file moving (essential with the growing size of files) in more realistic time frames.
02/20/09
02/19/09
02/20/09
What nobody has explained here is why fragmentation is causign a performance problem when it was not supposed to be anymore.
02/19/09
02/19/09
01/28/09
I could throw one of these in there, and in theory, have better performance AND battery life.
I may just have to do that.
01/28/09
01/28/09
01/28/09
01/28/09
12/11/08
12/11/08