The 2011 Mid-Range SSD Roundup: 120GB Agility 3, Intel 510 and More Compared
by Anand Lal Shimpi on June 7, 2011 12:52 PM ESTFinal Words
When I reviewed the 240GB Vertex 3, it looked like game over for all of the other new 6Gbps drives. Intel's SSD 510 was competitive but clearly in second place. Moving to 120GB, the Vertex 3 lost a lot of steam thanks to a reduction in the total number of NAND die. The Intel SSD 510 however still uses 34nm NAND and manages to either outperform or remain competitive with the Vertex 3 in all key areas. Combine that with Intel's track record for reliability and compatibility and I think we have a winner here.
OCZ does have a MAX IOPS version of the Vertex 3 which uses 32nm Toggle NAND. I'm still waiting on my review sample but it's quite possible that the 120GB MAX IOPS drive will be enough to restore OCZ's performance advantage. There are still firmware concerns of course, which SandForce appears to be actively working on. I'm guessing when the smoke clears the best balance of reliability and performance will still be the 510, at least until the current crop of SF-2200 firmware issues get worked out.
In terms of value, Corsair's P3 is actually pretty impressive. My only concern there is the lack of a public firmware strategy at this point, but based on everything we've seen here today it offers the best performance per dollar out of the group.
It's funny how little the recommendations have changed over the years. Intel still offers a good balance of performance and reliability, however if you're willing to take a risk on the reliability front you can get better value elsewhere.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
68 Comments
View All Comments
johan851 - Tuesday, June 7, 2011 - link
I've been wanting a comparison like this for a couple of weeks now, and I'm really glad you provided one. Thanks!Oxford Guy - Thursday, June 9, 2011 - link
Now if we could get a review with the 240 GB Vertex 2.That has been as low as $309 AR at MicroCenter. Yet, despite being able to be found for low prices ($350 AR lately), it's still nowhere to be found in reviews here.
shamans33 - Tuesday, June 7, 2011 - link
I just bought one for $220 before a $20 MIR about 2 weeks ago.Furthermore, your OCZ Agility 3 price is more expensive than the OCZ Vertex 3 price.....
Might want to look into getting pricing from a variety of vendors.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, June 7, 2011 - link
Updated :)aegisofrime - Tuesday, June 7, 2011 - link
You updated the price but not the price per GB. :pI haven't had time to read through the whole article as I have to sleep now, so forgive me if my following question was addressed in the article. I'm considering a 120GB Intel 320, and I'm wondering will performance be lower than the 160GB version?
cactusdog - Wednesday, June 8, 2011 - link
Why no Corsair force 3 drives? Or mushkin ChronosFallen Kell - Wednesday, June 8, 2011 - link
They were all just recalled, that is why.http://forum.corsair.com/v3/showthread.php?t=95825
Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, June 7, 2011 - link
No wonder intel was in no hurry with sata6. Half a watt extra power consumption at idle? Will that be the same for notebooks and tablets? If so then that is a serious problem. Why would power consumption be different at idle anyway?imaheadcase - Tuesday, June 7, 2011 - link
I read sometime back that intel drives performance might suffer simply because of power issues itself. Nothing bad mind you, just that its standby mode interferes with transferring data somewhat. Not sure if thats a firmware or just config error.Jaybus - Friday, June 10, 2011 - link
Because, even though sata6 has improved power management, the higher clock rate simply requires more power. Even at idle, there has to be some communication between the SSD and the SATA host controller. Primarily, it is up to the OS to put the SATA link into sleep mode. In general, sata6 will always use more power than sata3, since you can't get around the physics. Clocking faster requires either more power or a complete paradigm shift to an optical PHY.