Intel SSD 520 Review: Cherryville Brings Reliability to SandForce
on February 6,
Introduction
The Intel SSD 520
Random & Sequential Read/Write Speed
AS-SSD Incompressible Sequential Performance
AnandTech Storage Bench 2011
AnandTech Storage Bench 2011 - Light Workload
Performance Over Time & TRIM
Power Consumption
Final Words
Intel was rumored to be working on a SandForce based drive for several months now, but even the rumors couldn't encapsulate just how long Intel and SF has worked on this drive. According to Intel, the relationship began 1.5 years ago. Still lacking a 6Gbps controller of their own and wanting to remain competitive with the rest of the market, Intel approached SandForce about building a drive based on the (at the time) unreleased SF-2281 controller. Roughly six months later, initial testing and validation began on the drive. That's right, around the time that OCZ was previewing the first Vertex 3 Pro, Intel was just beginning its extensive validation process.
Codenamed Cherryville, Intel's SSD 520 would go through a full year of validation before Intel would sign off on the drive for release. In fact, it was some unresolved issues that cropped up during Intel's validation that pushed Cherryville back from the late 2011 release to today.
Intel's strenuous validation will eventually make SandForce's drives better for everyone, but for now the Cherryville firmware remains exclusive. Intel wouldn't go on record with details of its arrangement with SandForce, but from what I've managed to piece together the Intel Cherryville firmware is exclusive for a limited period of time. That exclusivity agreement likely expires sometime after the SF-2281 is replaced by a 3rd generation controller. There are some loopholes that allow SandForce to port bug fixes to general partner firmware but the specific terms aren't public information. The important takeaway is anything fixed in Intel's firmware isn't necessarily going to be fixed in other SF-2281 based drives in the near term. This is an important distinction because although Cherryville performs very similarly to other SF-2281 drives, it should be more reliable.
As Intel has been working on this firmware for quite a while, it's likely that the 520 uses an older branch of the SF-2281 firmware that has been updated over the past twelve months.
The BSOD is Back, but Not on Intel
Back in October SandForce announced that it had discovered a firmware issue that resulted in unexpected BSODs on SF-2281 drives on certain platforms. Why it took SandForce several months to discover the bug that its customers had been reporting for a while is a separate issue entirely. SandForce quickly pushed out the firmware to OCZ and other partners. Our own internal testing revealed that the updated firmware seemed to have cured the infamous BSOD.
Just as background, our SSD testing is rarely over once the review goes live. Any drive we recommend gets tossed into a primary use machine somewhere within the company. We keep track of drive behavior, including any bugs or performance issues over time. This long term testing process takes place over months. The results of these long term tests are folded into future reviews and recommendations.
The BSOD is caused by a bug in SandForce's power state logic that ultimately results in the drive disconnecting from the system while it's running. It turns out that Windows isn't a fan of you hot un-plugging the drive it's running on, which results in the BSOD. We had two systems that exhibited the BSOD, both of which were fixed by the update last October.
As luck would have it, our own Brian Klug happened to come across an unexpected crash with his 240GB non-Intel SF-2281 based SSD two weeks ago when he migrated it to another machine. The crash was an F4 BSOD, similar in nature to the infamous BSOD issue from last year. While two of the systems we reproduced the BSOD bug on were cured by last year's firmware update, Brian's system (an X58/Core i7 build) was BSODing regularly playing Battlefield 3. Games end up being a great way to trigger the SF-2281 BSOD issue as they frequently switch between periods of idle and load, which does a good job of stressing the power state logic in SandForce's firmware. I immediately sent Brian an Intel SSD 520 to see if the BSOD remained on Intel's drive. Switching to Cherryville caused Brian's BSODs to go away. Indeed most end user reports of SF-2281 BSODs went away with the fixed firmware, but we've still heard of isolated issues that remain unresolved. Whatever Intel has done with the 520's firmware seems to have fixed problems that still remain in the general SF-2281 firmware.
This is actually a dangerous precedent as it means one of two things. The first possibility is that SandForce has been made aware of flaws in its current firmware and chooses against (or is legally prevented from) disclosing it to its partners. The second possibility, and arguably even worse for SandForce, is that Intel was able to identify and fix a bug in the SF-2281 firmware without SandForce knowing it existed or was addressed. I suspect it's the former but as no one is willing to go on the record about the Intel/SandForce agreement I can't be certain.
Intel did go on record saying that the 520 is expected to have far fewer F4/F7 BSODs than any other SF-2281 drive. I asked Intel if I should read into the phrase &far fewer&, but the answer was no - the 520 is expected to have similar reliability to the Intel SSD 510 and 320.
At the end of the day that's what Intel really brings to the table with the 520. As you'll soon see, performance isn't very different compared to other SF-2281 based drives. Intel's biggest advantage comes from the unique firmware that ships with the drive. Intel is also quick to point out that while other SF-2281 manufacturers can purchase the same Intel 25nm MLC NAND used on the 520, only Intel's drives get the absolute highest quality bins and only Intel knows how best to manage/interact with the NAND on a firmware level. While it's nearly impossible to prove most of this, the fact that we're still able to reproduce a BSOD on the latest publicly available SF-2281 firmware but not on the SF-2281 based Intel SSD 520 does say a lot about what you're paying for with this drive.
And you are paying a premium for the 520 compared to other SF-2281 based SSDs on the market today:
Intel SSD 520 Price Comparison
Intel SSD 520 (SF-2281)
Kingston HyperX (SF-2281)
OCZ Vertex 3 (SF-2281)
Samsung SSD 830
Last year Intel hinted at a move from the consumer market to enterprise server and client markets. The 520's higher price likely won't matter there, but for consumers the higher price is noticeable - particularly with good options from companies like Samsung now available on the market.
Introduction
The Intel SSD 520
Random & Sequential Read/Write Speed
AS-SSD Incompressible Sequential Performance
AnandTech Storage Bench 2011
AnandTech Storage Bench 2011 - Light Workload
Performance Over Time & TRIM
Power Consumption
Final Words
Post Your Comment
to comment.
Galcobar - Monday, February 06, 2012 -
Find yourself having to ship a less reliable drive back to the manufacturer and the price premium disappears. At that point, not having to deal with the downtime and inconvenience of reinstallation is all gravy.
Shadowmaster625 - Monday, February 06, 2012 -
These drives are all built to pretty much the same physical quality standards. Firmware might be a different story, but for firmware it usually doesnt require a trip to the factory. Do you have any evidence to suggest that the physical build quality of an OCZ Vertex 2 is less than an Intel X-25?
hackztor - Monday, February 06, 2012 -
I had a vertex 1 that I had to ship back 4 times, finally I asked for a newer model. Got back the vertex 2. That right there is what Galcobar was talking about. Each time shipping is usually 10 bucks and about 2 weeks turn around time. Sometimes higher premium for better tested parts is worth the extra cost.
pc_void - Monday, February 06, 2012 -
The key word is sometimes.And sometimes you pay a higher price and have the same thing happen.However, you can make an educated guess based upon lots of research. It still doesn't mean it won't happen.
Flunk - Monday, February 06, 2012 -
I don't think firmware alone is responsible for the much lower failure rates of Intel SSDs over say... OCZ.I'm not saying other brands are bad, my Vertex 2 is still going strong with no issues, but these SSDs are built a little bit better than OCZ's drives and most of the other competition.
coder543 - Tuesday, February 07, 2012 -
It's widely known that non-Intel SSDs have reliability issues. Recently they've gotten much better, but they still aren't yet comparable.
taltamir - Monday, March 26, 2012 -
The issue is that there are firmware bugs that intel fixed that sandforce and its other partners do not.You are right that there is no need to ship it back to the manufacturer... because they CANNOT fix it. A replacement drive will have the same bugs.Your only recourse is to live with the bugs and BSODs or sell it second hand and buy an intel.
dmprok - Sunday, April 01, 2012 -
I got Intel X-25 80Gb drive that failed on me TWICE in one year and I lost data.
I picked Intel for TRIM function and because it was highly rated.
First drive was purchased for $280 by my friend and it failed on him in 2 weeks, I thought he was doing something wrong, I bought dead drive from him and RMA'ed.
It failed again for me in 6 months, one day computer just would not boot,
I send it to RMA and got my 3rd drive, I hesitated to install for few months because I lost all faith in Intel SSD drives. I am not a heavy user, I don't run my PC 24/7, also the last drive drive I received does not look like quality made at all, the top of the drive is warped, I am disappointed, considering getting new Sandisk SSD for next upgrade.
nsanity - Tuesday, February 07, 2012 -
Having to ship a drive back means *absolutely nothing*. Hell, having to buy a complete new drive means nothing. The lost productivity when a business who has used a pair of SSD's as a shortcut to IOPS, as the machine BSOD's or drops an array till the system is physically powered off and on again simply dwarfs those costs.I'm a SMB Integrator and having to clean up after the mess of others who have used SF-2281 drives (Corsair Force 3 in particular) to achieve superior IOPS as opposed to using tried and true SAS arrays.Random BSOD's and array's falling off a system is the plague i've seen with the SF-2281's. Firmware updates have really done nothing to help on the Corsair Drives.On the Corsair Force 3 release, to enthusiast/gamer customers, I sold 3 drives, only to RA them 5 times within a month.From that point I essentially told all my enthusiast customers that I would not sell them a Sandforce-based Drive, because I simply do not like unhappy customers, and nothing is more unhappy than someone bringing me a drive back within 48 hours.I realise my sample size is small (Probably about 20-30 SSD's total), but I can tell you that out of the 15 Intel Drives I've seen/touched/supported (X-25M G2's, 320's and 510's), none of them have had any faults what so ever. Every, single, SF-2281 drive has had faults.The advent of Intel making Sandforce based drives leaves me with very uneasy. Intel's reliability is second to none, but I need more than just an anecdotal review telling me that they've &fixed& the SF-2281. I've been burned on a small scale, and i've watched a fellow SMB integrator friend lose thousands of dollars in free labour trying to repair systems based on these drives.I'm looking forward to Anand's part two, using these drives in an Enterprise scenario - and hopefully he's got a machine doing heavy load testing in the mean time to better report on the reliability- or otherwise of these drives.
Copyright & 2017. All rights reserved.
Don't have an account?
Remember Me
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated当前位置：
Intel 160GB(X25-M)报价
这里还有更多经销商报价哦
送至城市：
暂无电商在售，下次再来哦！
正在努力为您加载...
硬件巨头英特尔推出了一款全新的固态硬盘——Intel 160GB/2.5英寸/串...
日，硬件巨头英特尔推出了一款全新的固态硬盘——Intel 160...
国外知名硬件网站PCPer网站近日刊出了一篇性能测试文章，宣称Intel的X25...
广州邦伟电子
上海专业组装电脑实体店
关注Intel 160GB(X25-M)的小伙伴还看了
热门城市：
甘肃省兰州
H湖南省长沙
湖北省武汉
海南省海口
河南省郑州
河北省石家庄保定邯郸邢台唐山
黑龙江哈尔滨大庆
J江西省南昌赣州
江苏省南京苏州无锡
吉林省长春
L辽宁省沈阳大连
N内蒙古呼和浩特
S上海市上海
四川省成都
陕西省西安
山东省 济南青岛烟台
山西省太原
T天津市天津
X新疆乌鲁木齐
Y云南省昆明
Z浙江省杭州宁波温州
加载中，请稍候...
Intel固态硬盘SSD最新报价25nm新制程 Intel新版X25-M固态硬盘到货
来源：pconline 原创&
作者：Michael&
责任编辑：lincong&
　　【 行情】日，硬件巨头英特尔推出了一款全新的固态硬盘&&。随着储存技术的不断发展，传输数率更为快速的固态正成为人们关注的焦点！相比传统机械硬盘，固态硬盘有着高传输速率以及无噪音低功耗等特点。而由于采用了新的25nm制程，在发热量和功耗水平方面，新一代的G3较G2更具吸引力。目前其简包的价格为2280元，彩包则为2340元，玩家们可以关注一下。
广州硬盘最新价格变动表
原价（元）
现价（元）
涨跌额（元）
采集日期：日
更多行情价格变动请点击
&&&&&&&&&&　　采用IMFT的25nm MLC NAND闪存芯片，搭配新的主控芯片，官方给出的最大读取/写入速度为250/170MB/s，支持AES-128。拥有8颗NAND芯片，这样能够完全发挥SSD的写入优势，并且大大增加性能损耗周期。软件测试截图，成绩非常符合官方的给出的参数　　的第三代产品代号为&Postville Refresh&，也就是传说中的X25-M G3 SSD。由于采用了新的25nm制程，在发热量和功耗水平方面，新一代的G3较G2更具吸引力。官方表明该卡的最高写入速度为170MB/s（与G2相比大有提升），读取速度依然维持在250MB/s。
&&规格参数
B/2.5英寸/串口(X25-M)
（&&&&&）&
　　编辑点评： X25-M G3 SSD采用最新的25nm制程，在读写稳定性和发热量方面取得了不错的控制。并且，写入速度可达到170MB/s，是上代产品的2倍，性能进步明显。不过其仍然采用接口规范，因此读取速度较上代产品提升不大。目前的简包为2280元，彩包为2340元，较上代产品更经济实惠。　　[参考价格]： 简包2280/彩包2340元　　[销售商家]：广州市天河区天河路596号2709&& 广州天悉 电话：020-　　[销售网址]：　　[行情查询]：　　[报价查询]：
电商新品荟
总排行榜我在第100位之后
参考价：暂无
网友评分: 3.3
浏览本产品的网友还关注：查看: 57137|回复: 102
【请教】主流SSD筛选：Intel 520、三星PM830、镁光M4
初级会员, 积分 1, 距离下一级还需 3 积分
技术分0 分
资产值19276 nb
联谊分0 分
想换块SSD给T420S用，锁定目前来说比较主流的
Intel 520（180G）、三星PM830（256G）、镁光M4（256G）。
请各位给点建议并阐述下理由给我扫扫盲，谢谢。
[ Edited by&&owla on
入门会员, 积分 0, 距离下一级还需 1 积分
技术分0 分
资产值180 nb
联谊分0 分
830&&830 谁用谁知道
初级会员, 积分 2.5, 距离下一级还需 1.5 积分
技术分0 分
资产值21688 nb
联谊分0 分
初级会员, 积分 2.2, 距离下一级还需 1.8 积分
技术分0 分
资产值16719 nb
联谊分0 分
180g 谁用谁知道
初级会员, 积分 2.4, 距离下一级还需 1.6 积分
技术分1.1 分
资产值14039 nb
联谊分0 分
intel520首选，不过现在有点贵，60GB的添一点钱都可以买320的120GB了。
入门会员, 积分 0, 距离下一级还需 1 积分
技术分0 分
资产值267 nb
联谊分0 分
还是首选Intel，家里台式机用镁光m4，本本用Intel，感觉还是Intel的好一点。
初级会员, 积分 1.1, 距离下一级还需 2.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值13812 nb
联谊分0 分
Intel 520（180G）
入门会员, 积分 0.3, 距离下一级还需 0.7 积分
技术分0 分
资产值3431 nb
联谊分0 分
首选Intel.
入门会员, 积分 0.1, 距离下一级还需 0.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值645 nb
联谊分0 分
180G的520绝对梦幻啊&&看型号上还有7mm的
速度 容量 厚度 除了价格 都太完美了。。。
入门会员, 积分 0.2, 距离下一级还需 0.8 积分
技术分0 分
资产值3268 nb
联谊分0 分
M4，256G，美国亚马逊特价时才约合1800RMB
入门会员, 积分 0, 距离下一级还需 1 积分
技术分0 分
资产值401 nb
联谊分0 分
Intel的520，理由：5年质保，还有7mm的厚度，刚好可以放到主硬盘位。
不过我建议你上320系列（我上周刚买了一块120G的），因为虽然sata2和sata3跑分的差距很大，但是实际使用中你基本感觉不到，你可以参考这个：
[ Edited by&&tomcat514 on
入门会员, 积分 0.1, 距离下一级还需 0.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值784 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #11 tomcat514 的帖子
5年保是因为质量下降了，新的制程读写次数少
镁光、英特尔都有固件门，反而三星的一向比较稳定
入门会员, 积分 0.2, 距离下一级还需 0.8 积分
技术分0 分
资产值2677 nb
联谊分0 分
520,还用考虑吗?
初级会员, 积分 1, 距离下一级还需 3 积分
技术分0 分
资产值19276 nb
联谊分0 分
　“Intel 520 240GB使用可压缩数据的话测试结果非常不错，完胜其他对手，但是一换换回不可压缩数据的话会被自家上一代510 250GB所超越。”
——以上是引用一篇评测的结论，咋看起来会奇怪怎么新不如旧了。
入门会员, 积分 0.1, 距离下一级还需 0.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值784 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #14 owla 的帖子
12楼已经解释了，intel早就不用自己的主控了，和其他厂商没什么区别
但是闪存芯片换了新的制程，反而导致寿命变短、性能变弱，为了维持市场不得已加了保修时间
初级会员, 积分 2.4, 距离下一级还需 1.6 积分
技术分1.1 分
资产值14039 nb
联谊分0 分
LS的解释欠妥。
intel自从320系列起就是25nm闪存，并且已经是5年保。
520系列应该说是“终于换成了SF主控”，因为intel自家的主控实在是落后主流太多，三星、Marvel、SF的性能都远超intel自家的。
并且520依旧是25nm的主控，不存在寿命短之类的。
所谓的不如上一代云云，都是JS存货处理不掉的托辞罢了。
初级会员, 积分 1.4, 距离下一级还需 2.6 积分
技术分0 分
资产值23593 nb
联谊分0 分
保修换新无敌啊
入门会员, 积分 0.1, 距离下一级还需 0.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值784 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #16 hangen 的帖子
是的，320开始就是25nm、5年保修了，520换了主控，还是25nm、5年保修
我也没建议楼主买更早的x25m之类的，只是推荐三星，呵呵，毕竟数据无价，镁光、intel都是以“门”出名的，反而三星没出过类似的事故
入门会员, 积分 0.6, 距离下一级还需 0.4 积分
技术分0 分
资产值5232 nb
联谊分0 分
Intel的320，
理由：5年质保，不是吹得，给你换个盒装的回来怎么都不亏。
要是觉得不爽了，转手也方便
初级会员, 积分 1, 距离下一级还需 3 积分
技术分0 分
资产值19276 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #18 thinkmania 的帖子
好像现在Thinkpad、Mac book原配的SSD中三星占挺大一部分，——OEM大户。
我开始也挺关注PM830的，但是因为自家主控原因，好像功耗相对另外两个超大。
[ Edited by&&owla on
(30.97 KB, 下载次数: 0)
16:31 上传
(36.74 KB, 下载次数: 0)
16:31 上传
(37.07 KB, 下载次数: 0)
16:31 上传
入门会员, 积分 0.1, 距离下一级还需 0.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值784 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #19 arcoye 的帖子
数据无价，SSD不像HDD那样有机会恢复数据，8m门到现在都没完全解决，新固件只是减小了几率罢了
当然，转手确实方便，一方面intel保修服务不错（硬件成本很低，intel也不介意这点成本），另一方面intel党太多了，人云亦云，呵呵
入门会员, 积分 0.1, 距离下一级还需 0.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值784 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #20 owla 的帖子
是的，从SSD出现开始，三星一直就是最大的OEM供货商，价格可能是一方面，稳定性肯定也是有优势的，不然不可能大面积铺货
从SSD上市以来，三星就没什么负面的门出现，唯一被诟病的就是速度慢，但是830系列已经不比sandforce差了
[ Edited by&&thinkmania on
初级会员, 积分 1, 距离下一级还需 3 积分
技术分0 分
资产值19276 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #22 thinkmania 的帖子
我用过的移动硬盘都是三星的，所以对其印象还不错。
830，但就是对其自家新主控的功耗有顾虑。
(25.11 KB, 下载次数: 2)
16:33 上传
(28.55 KB, 下载次数: 1)
16:33 上传
(28.46 KB, 下载次数: 3)
16:33 上传
入门会员, 积分 0.1, 距离下一级还需 0.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值784 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #23 owla 的帖子
功耗其实不会影响很大的啦，大部分时间SSD都是idle，零点几的功耗不会有什么区别
OCZ有白片门，intel有8m门，镁光有5700门，再低的功耗再强的性能，我都不会用这几个牌子
初级会员, 积分 1, 距离下一级还需 3 积分
技术分0 分
资产值19276 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #24 thinkmania 的帖子
镁光好像出0309固件解决5200小时门问题了。
Intel 520不会也有8M门吧？
830 Idle状态还是近乎M4两倍的功耗...
初级会员, 积分 1.1, 距离下一级还需 2.9 积分
技术分0.2 分
资产值8726 nb
联谊分0 分
SSD容量越大功耗越大
拿三星 512G vs其他家小容量SSD，这篇文专门黑三星不是？
入门会员, 积分 0.1, 距离下一级还需 0.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值784 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #25 owla 的帖子
这个只能说明镁光、intel品控有问题，出厂的时候连固件都没保证OK就急匆匆上市了，然后有个门就补一次，再来个门再补一次，而不是有个门就彻底解决，没人能担保这次的门补好后还会不会有下个门（这两家都是n个门了，各代产品都有门，还有门是评测网站给测出来的，纯粹是给大家看笑话）
可以说，这两家完全不把消费者的数据安全放在眼里，纯粹拿大家当小白鼠实验。但是保修“好”，结果还有大批消费者自费当五毛去捧臭脚，拿到个新的替换品就屁颠屁颠的，完全不记得当年数据丢掉的痛
初级会员, 积分 1.1, 距离下一级还需 2.9 积分
技术分0.2 分
资产值8726 nb
联谊分0 分
Posted by thinkmania on
这个只能说明镁光、intel品控有问题，出厂的时候连固件都没保证OK就急匆匆上市了，然后有个门就补一次，再来个门再补一次，而不是有个门就彻底解决，没人能担保这次的门补好后还会不会有下个门（这两家都是n个门 ...
intel靠谱的只有G2
最新固件已经好久没发现问题了
初级会员, 积分 1, 距离下一级还需 3 积分
技术分0 分
资产值19276 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #27 thinkmania 的帖子
所以那个5年质保在一定程度上是给我们的公测补贴对吧？
排除一些因素凭心而论，亚洲那两个发达国家部分产品还是比较用心的。
入门会员, 积分 0.1, 距离下一级还需 0.9 积分
技术分0 分
资产值784 nb
联谊分0 分
回复 #29 owla 的帖子
我觉得可以这么理解，呵呵
是的哈，东芝、三星目前看来是质量最稳定的了，酒精考验
三星830性能已经很强了，东芝还需努力
银牌荣誉勋章(注册8年以上会员)
注册8年以上会员
月全勤勋章
Powered by Discuz! X3.2 &
Comsenz Inc &