- Joined
- Dec 26, 2006
- Location
- Land of Long Horns
- Thread Starter
- #21
A general question, what makes the Intel controiller so much more superior, Intel never usedto be into data storage or what?
Last edited:
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
The first diagram is Indillix's barefoot controller (in most SSD's now), and the second explanation is the best I could find about Intel. I'm not sure about samsung.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. Looking at the printed circuit board you’ll realize that the bottom carries the controller and the cache memory together with five of the ten memory channels (two flash chips each). The top side holds the other ten chips.
The current generation of 50 nm NAND flash stores 32 Gbit (4 GB) per chip. If you now use 20 of them (two per channel times 10 channels) you’ll reach exactly 80 GB. If you distribute reads and write across 10 channels it is obvious that performance will scale beautifully. However, we’re curious about how Intel implements the 80 GB (or 160 GB later on) on the 1.8” form factor, as 20 flash chips plus controller plus DRAM doesn’t fit into the 1.8” envelope (although the double-sided printed circuit board does). Intel will have to work with a smaller number of higher density flash chips, but we can only speculate about the layout. The specification of “up to” 250 MB read and 70 MB/s write performance indicates that not all models might perform alike.
Nobody had any experience doing SSD level flash controllers, so everybody kind started out from scratch. This was probably part of the reason the JMicron controllers were so bad. What Intel had was a lot of talent (opportunity), a flash production without enough market (motivation), and a lot of money to throw at it (resources).A general question, what makes the Intel controiller so much more superior, Intel never usedto be into data storage or what?
Read up on Fusion I/O as well if SSD's interest you Brolloks.
They're making 1TB 3.5" SSD form factors that plug into the PCI-e slot. They're for the enterprise atm, but eventually we might see some consumer SSD's that go into the PCI-e slots.
Those SSD's act like a cache to 100+ TB storage arrays. Capable of doing 1,000,000+ IOPS.
Drives using Indilix: OCZ Vertex, OCZ Agility, Patriot Torqx, G.Skill Falcon, Super Talent UltraDrive GX
The main reason I ask is that there have been some good deals on 30gb Indillix controller drives and the upcoming 40gb Kingston (rebadged Intel) is enticing,
Keep in mind, that 40gb drive doesn't support the Intel TRIM and GC software. I am excited to see how that 40gb Kingston drive pans out so I can put it in all the cheap laptops and netbooks for friends and family. But for us enthusiasts it really is between an Intel drive or Indillix.