The Intel SSD 330 Review (60GB, 120GB, 180GB)
by Anand Lal Shimpi on August 1, 2012 12:01 AM ESTFinal Words
Of the available SandForce drives, I've felt most comfortable recommending Intel's own. The pass through Intel's validation labs provides that extra peace of mind that hopefully translates into a better overall experience. In the past Intel has been a reliable option in the market but not necessarily the most affordable. The 330 attempts to correct the latter. While other drives are cheaper, the 330 does give you a unique combination of an Intel validated drive at a competitive price point.
The performance delta between the 330 and the 520 is narrow enough that I don't see a reason to recommend the 520 unless you need a higher capacity drive. The loss of endurance is likely something no typical end user would ever notice. Perhaps the lower p/e cycle is enough to keep the 330 out of write heavy enterprise deployments, but otherwise it's a non-issue.
The biggest problem with Intel's SSD 330 really stems from the limitations of its SandForce controller. Performance with incompressible (or software encrypted) data is hardly competitive. As an unencrypted OS/application drive the 330 is great, but if you're planning on using software encryption or will be primarily storing photos, videos and music you'll want to opt for a drive based on a different controller technology.
In the end it's good to see Intel playing aggressively on price. The 330 is likely one of the best SandForce drives on the market, and not having to pay a premium for it is pretty awesome.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
64 Comments
View All Comments
Kristian Vättö - Thursday, August 2, 2012 - link
Check back tomorrow ;-)antef - Wednesday, August 1, 2012 - link
Buy buy buy! Even less than what Anand's chart show. What a deal.bim27142 - Wednesday, August 1, 2012 - link
I am really torn between Samsung 830 128GB and Intel 330 180GB...I am just a typical user and a casual gamer... I've read good reviews about Samsung's performance at since it's not Sandforce based...
Capacity-wise, I really find the Intel 180GB just right enough for me... So I am really torn which one is better for my case... :(
mailrachit - Monday, August 13, 2012 - link
As 'a typical user and casual gamer' myself I was asking the same question Samsung 830 128 GB or Intel 330 180 GB just two months ago when I was making a new ivy bridge desktop rig.I went with Intel 330 180 GB and I must say that I am quite happy with my decision.
The performance is stellar. I trust Intel for reliability and God knows I need the extra space (180 GB - 128 GB).
Look for deals and you can get the Intel one for real cheap (I got it for $110).
angelsmaster - Tuesday, September 4, 2012 - link
hi, i just also bought the 330 series but now, its 240 gb.. did you update the firmware,, cause i cant seem to find one for th 240gb. i know its the same as 180gb model. but i can't seem to make the link work. btw. iam using macbook pro 15" 2011. thank...SewerSoldier - Thursday, August 2, 2012 - link
Hi,I'm currently looking at buying a 120/128GB system/application SSD for use beside a 1TB HDD for media.
I'm deciding between Samsung 830 Series and Intel 330. However in my country the samsung costs 130€ and the intel 112€.
My question is if I'm right in assuming that Intel 330 is the better choice since the better performance of the samsung with incompressible data isn't really important for a system/application drive?
softdrinkviking - Friday, August 3, 2012 - link
disappointed that intel hasn't come back with a new controller of their own. I own and love a 34nm intel drive, and I love how reliable it has been.it seems like intel can really put out good stuff when they put enough R&D into it, but I am not sure about their track record when working with other companies on tech. (like sandforce)
Per Hansson - Saturday, August 4, 2012 - link
Well honestly there have been reports of the "8MB bug" happening even with the latest firmware on the Intel 320 drive so I would not be so sure about that...http://communities.intel.com/thread/24339
http://communities.intel.com/message/162330
http://communities.intel.com/message/161880
softdrinkviking - Saturday, August 4, 2012 - link
Oh yeah, I forgot about that whole fiasco. Still, there is something I don't like about relying on data compression technology to speed up a drive. The potential for catastrophic data loss seems to be higher if you are dealing with multiple levels of logic abstraction. For similar reasons, I never used those drive doubler technologies that were popular before traditional HDDs became so big.Thinking about it from a data recovery point of view, how would this effect the difficulty and cost of recovering data from a drive?
I know the whole recovery process would be totally different from a HDD, but it still could be a consideration.
booomups - Thursday, August 30, 2012 - link
i really wonder about this, since it seems strange if intel says on some drives it does and in others it doesn make sense. in the review it says its enabled for the 180gb version, and not for the 120gb version. how certain is that even in newer drives revisions?and... intel doesnt mention e aes encryption for the 330 drives, but it is a big point for the 520 drives.
any details on that, ita the same chip after all.