View Single Post
  #11 (permalink)  
Old April 11, 2012, 01:05 AM
pitz pitz is offline
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 41
Default

The only place I'd personally fault Linus, and the broader reviewer community in general, is according such a reputation for reliability to Intel, when the 520 series has barely been on the shelves for more than a few months, and certainly hasn't been through the rigours of extensive real-world testing. One of Crucial's bugs actually only showed up after (??) 6000 run hours.

Maybe Intel has the magic formula to SSD greatness with Sandforce/LSI's chipset. Maybe they don't. But most of the reviews I've seen (and watched) seem to hold Intel's products out as being as great as sliced bread. Just in the past 2 years, Intel has suffered some pretty high-profile setbacks despite extensive testing:

a) Cougar Point SATA-6 metallization issue;
b) Intel 320 SSD Firmware issues.

IMHO, SSDs are almost like fine wine. One should let the design age and mature, before one opens their wallet. There are pretty good reasons why the major business PC vendors (Dell, HP, Lenovo) don't generally race to include the latest/greatest/most overhyped SSDs in their products -- they have reputations to protect, and they're not going to risk losing accounts because of an overly aggressive stance in adopting technology. Especially when, for most users, the performance return on buying/spec'ing increasingly faster SSDs is rapidly diminishing.
Reply With Quote