New 192GB SSD from Transcend runs at high speed
Two of the most important specs of SSD drives that are used in place of HDDs are the read/write speeds. The speed of the SSD can make or break the performance of any system that uses one. A newly released SSD from Transcend promises to keep systems humming along with read/write speeds of 150/ 90 MB per second. The drive stores a respectable 192 GB of information which makes this new 2.5 inch drive quite nice. There are no pricing available yet which is another important spec for SSDs but I can tell you this drive looks really nice.
(via engadget)
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
I feel this article fails to communicate serveral important points.
-Intel X25 SSDs are about double this speed. So this announcement is nothing groundbreaking.
-The technology used in SSDs plays a significant role, because MLC based ones seem to have potentially performance-crippling write lags. I guess Transcend uses MLC?
-Most of the speed gain in SSDs comes from their insanely high IO/s, not from high continuous transfer rates.
Also, we need to know what controller this SSD uses. If it uses a JMicron controller, stay FAR away. The MLC drives with JMicron controllers are known for horrible stuttering and latency issues (OCZ, Transcend, Patriot, G.Skill, etc.)
That is one thing that has been keeping me from trying out an SSD. Studdering where the whole sytem freezes for a second or two is not acceptable. I think they should have worked some of these problems out before they started pushing them. Or focus more on SLC where you dont have that problem, and with more people putting their energy on that technology maybe it will drive the prices down some!
Thus far the Intel X25-M has been immune from the whole stuttering issue, primarily because Intel developed their own 10-channel controller.
I’ve been running them for over a month now and they absolutely scream.
Now down to $384 shipped from Newegg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167005
I couldn’t agree more with the above posts.
This is a REALLY BAD ARTICLE. 0 points for any journalistic credibility.
And what I find even more frightening is the fact that a slew of SSD drives were released recently (e.g. Corsair’s Samsung rebrand), some of which have issues (OCZ/G.Skill), some of which don’t (Samsung). So why does jkontherun report on only this SSD? Did some perhaps get paid by Transcend?
Very, very , very disappointed!
We have covered a lot of SSDs in the past. We don’t get paid by anybody for coverage.
MemoRight drives offer by far the best performance, although the Intel drives are more friendly on the wallet. I’m hoping some 512GB models hit the market soon.
James, please get your eyes checked…or a new set of glasses.
Very weak. A real journalist would do a follow up story. See Tom’s Hardware … they screwed up their first SSD article but then they followed up with a very detailed, very long correction article. THAT is professionalism!
I guess this proves why blogs are being belittled as a “wanna-be journalists playground”. Posting a link to someone else’s article and regurgitating the information from that article is anything BUT professional, interesting or journalistic!
And JK: You might have covered other SSDs before but those postings were equally bad. Either get your facts straight or don’t report about the topic at all!
PS: Read the Anandtech article and the notebookforums SSD thread. Educate yourself!
I’ve made it clear here that we welcome all comments, both positive and negative. Speaking for myself, I personally have no issue whatsoever with constructive criticism. It makes my writing better.
However, I don’t find it appropriate for folks to pile on with negative commentary by using different identities under the same IP address. That’s what’s happening in this thread and I’m starting to see it in others as well.
I wouldn’t think that I’d have to do this, but clearly I do:
If you’re going to leave comments, that’s great! :) I just pointed out yesterday that we all generally benefit from the conversation. However, if you’re going to participate in the conversation, do so with respect and transparency. Meaning: if you can’t stand behind your comment using the same identity *all* of the time, then *perhaps* you shouldn’t leave it. I personally don’t think that’s a difficult rule to follow. Fair enough?