Soldato
The reviews are out today. 250Mb read!
Theres a few reviews about. Try these:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Intel-x25-m-SSD,review-31316.html
http://www.techradar.com/products/computing/components/storage/intel-x25-m-463486/review
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=616
http://www.laptopmag.com/review/storage/intel-x25-m.aspx
A quote from Tomshardware
For all those who feels NCQ is pointless for SSD's...
Theres a few reviews about. Try these:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/Intel-x25-m-SSD,review-31316.html
http://www.techradar.com/products/computing/components/storage/intel-x25-m-463486/review
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=616
http://www.laptopmag.com/review/storage/intel-x25-m.aspx
A quote from Tomshardware
The question is a good one: how the heck did Intel manage to create a MLC flash SSD that is faster than a high-end SLC product? And why do the drives store 80 GB or 160 GB, while silicon-based chips typically have capacities of 32, 64 and 128 GB? The answer is multi-channel flash. Intel uses its own SATA/300 controller and addresses ten different MLC flash channels at once, using a 16 MB cache memory. It also employs native command queuing (NCQ) to be able to distribute read and write operations across the available channels efficiently.
For all those who feels NCQ is pointless for SSD's...
Last edited: