Associate
Must... Resist... Buying...
6 GB/s MS drivers
6 GB/s AMD drivers
6 GB/s MS drivers
6 GB/s AMD drivers
6 GB/s MS drivers
6 GB/s AMD drivers
6 GB/s MS drivers
6 GB/s AMD drivers
Nope.
Basically sub 100GB is for cheaper slower drives, helps keep prices realistic for smaller drives.
This is basically close to saturating SATA 3!!!
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
SATA 6 Gbps would be saturated for sequential reads/writes if you have two of these in RAID 0.
though one could just buy a SATA6 card.