Basically sub 100GB is for cheaper slower drives, helps keep prices realistic for smaller drives.
They might have plans for a 60 GB version in the near future but want to hold out a bit so that early adopters have to buy the larger drives and spend more.>_< Logic fail. Price comparison:
OCZ Vertex 2E 120GB (£180)
OCZ Vertex 2E 60GB (£90-100)
Why is it they can produce the 60GB 2E drive for 50-55% of the 120GB price, but they can't do the same with the Vertex 3? 60GB Vertex 3 drives would sell like crazy, most 'mainstream' users aren't going to fork out £220 for a drive even if it does offer 550MB/s read speeds. Even if they priced a 60GB version at £120-130 they'd still tempt a lot of people away from the C400...
These drives use on-the-fly compression to reduce the number of writes and reads needed to save and retrieve data. Most benchmarks (e.g. AS-SSD and CrystalDiskMark) use incompressible data, which will be slower than highly compressible data (such as what the ATTO benchmark uses).Why does it state a maximum of 500mb/s read/write, when the benchmarks are showing just over half of that?
And I want one. I have a corsair reactor 120Gb here which just came back from RMA. I might just skip reinstalling it and go for one of these . . . .
2 in RAID 0 please
though one could just buy a SATA6 card.