Intel 510 or Vertex 3 which would you choose?

R.C.Anderson

R.C.Anderson

R.C.Anderson

Associate
Joined
20 Feb 2009
Posts
2,260
Location
Ashton-Under-Lyne
so, which would you choose if both were available now?

My plan since upgrade to sandybridge was to get an SSD when the new range comes out, however I'm not sure which to go for.

The main pointers I've got that's causing the problems are:
OCZ has higher advertised speeds in Read, Write, and 4k IOPS
Intel drives are well known for their great reliability
Sandforce based drives only achieve maximum speeds from the transfer of compressible data.

On the drive, it will be my OS, some programs, and games. Data storage will be on a separate disk.

I haven't decided if I will be going for the 120 or 240/250GB drive yet (I don't really want to spend £450+ for 256, however I'm not sure it'll all fit on 120), if I decide on the 256, the Intel is a little faster read and writes, but the same IOPS.

So, which drive would be better if I bought a 120, and if I bought a 240/250?

I know whichever I go for, it'll be a huge increase in performance from my mechanical drive, but I don't want to wish I had chosen something else because it's a bit faster.
 
For me its speed so i would go for the vertex 3

I have a vertex 2 and an intel and they are both reliable
240 would be best but if its just a few games the 120 would be fine
 
Hello R.C.Anderson

I have the same dilemma as you . I have x58 mobo sataII was i'm willing to add a sataIII card to get little bit extra..

Same as you games o/s few programs on ssd rest on normal hdd

I was leaning towards vertex 3(120gb) tho like the reliability of intel and looked @ the new 320's(160gb version)

so now Im just confused lol
 
i got the 510

whilst OCZ drives are ok, i value ultra reliable hardware.

A Word on Reliability

Marc Prieur has been around writing about hardware for as long as I can remember (think back to the old school Tom days). Late last year he published some particularly controversial numbers on his website: failure rates of various PC components according to a French etailer. Among the components were SSDs and the numbers are below:
SSD Failure Rates - Hardware.fr
Intel Corsair Crucial Kingston OCZ
Failure Percentage 0.59% 2.17% 2.25% 2.39% 2.93%

I should add that the numbers Marc published were accurate (confirmed by some of the manufacturers involved), although they don’t paint the complete picture of world wide failure rates - they are an important sample to look at.

ssd.jpg


Other than Intel, none of the companies listed in that article were particularly pleased with the numbers.
Click to expand...
 
I would go for the Vertex 3. Am actually thinking of adding that to my system at some point in the next 6 odd months now that the rest of the 'new gen' SSDs are out.
 
rjkoneill said:
i got the 510

whilst OCZ drives are ok, i value ultra reliable hardware.
Click to expand...

Spyhop said:
I thought the Intel 510 bizarrely doesn't use an Intel controller.
Click to expand...

rjkoneill said:
it doesnt, but with their passion for low failure rates, i doubt they would use something that wasnt up to standard
Click to expand...

I've seen that table before, which is interesting, however with Intel now using a Marvel chip, which Crucial is also using (although not the same model), I would expect the failure rate to be closer to Crucial's, which narrows the gap a lot.
 
Doesn't matter. If you read all of the benchmarks, the Vertex 3 is clearly the overall speed winner.
 
How much of the OS data/Game data is compressible though? Is there enough of it to make the OCZ faster for use with these? How much slower is the OCZ with non-compressible data?
 
I am not sure on the compressible vs incompressible data as most reviews do not mention that. But in the real world tests of gaming and applications the Vertex 3 is generally the fastest. Who cares what kind of data it is if the things you use are the fastest?
 
I went for the for the 240gb Vertex 3 for my desktop PC. Reason: Speed.
I'm going for the 120gb Intel 320 for my laptop: Reason: Price.

I've got a new Sandybridge system and I think it would be a waste to stick a SATA3G drive on it when I'm going for all-out speed. I'm only going to be putting OS/apps/games and RAW images for editing on it so I'd say that most files are uncompressed and therefore take advantage of the new Sandforce controller.

My laptop is pretty old (Thinkpad X61S) and so a Vertex 3 would be a waste :)
 
Spyhop said:
I thought the Intel 510 bizarrely doesn't use an Intel controller.
Click to expand...

rjkoneill said:
it doesnt, but with their passion for low failure rates, i doubt they would use something that wasnt up to standard
Click to expand...

If it does'nt use intel controller, then, this description must be wrong.:rolleyes:

Features:
- Capacity: 250GB
- Controller: Intel
- Read: Up to 500MB/sec (SATA 6Gb/s)
- Read: Up to 265MB/sec (SATA 3Gb/s)
- Write: Up to 315MB/sec (SATA 6Gb/s)
- Write: Up to 240MB/sec (SATA 3Gb/s)
- Random 4KB Reads: Up to 20,000 IOPS
- Random 4KB Writes: Up to 8,000 IOPS
- NAND Flash: 34nm Multi-Level Cell (MLC)
- Interface: SATA-6Gb/s (Backwards compatible with SATA 1.5Gb/s and 3Gb/s)
- Low Power Consumption
- Lightweight (80g)
- Shock Resistant
- Retail SKU Supplied with mounting brackets.
- Supplied with FREE Shogun 2 Total War PC Game
 
Ive never had a problem with OCZ drives..

I built a pc for a friend using a corsair drive and it died after 2 weeks, which is quite shocking. The rma took ages too!
 
The vertex drives remind me of the days of DOS and doublestaker or whatever it was called. It used a driver to compress data on the fly to double your storage.

Anyway the intel 510 seems good and can beat the vertex 3 in a few real world tests. That's the drive I would choose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom