02-13-2010 05:03 PM
Intel,
Will you be providing G1 TRIM support in a future firmware upgrade for your early SSD adopters? Please give a yes or no answer.
Thank you,
Robert
Austin TX
02-19-2010 10:38 AM
I think that's the real point: the drive does not do what it did when we bought it. The performance drops dramatically, unavoidably, and without (at the time) warning with normal use.
Now as to what Intel claimed, I, like 99% of drive purchases, did not scour the legaleze--legally, you may well be right. (I presume you're right, if their license is anything like a software license.) But practically, unless Intel plainly mentioned in their literature that "note that the performance of the Intel X25-M G1 drive will more-or-less permanently plummet after a short period of use", this was in effect very misleading on their part.
No one is complaining that the newer G2 is better than the older G1; G1 users are complaining because their astonishingly pricey drives had a serious, undisclosed, and uncorrected design flaw.
02-19-2010 12:24 PM
Does the performance really plummet? My reading of various reviews was that, after an initial problem was fixed, the long-term performance of the G1 drives was really quite good.
Does the optimization tool work on G1 drives?
02-19-2010 01:12 PM
Well, used G1 performance is still good compared to regular hard drives (though some users report stutters; I get that too occasionally, but am not sure it isn't just Windows rather than the drive), but poor compared to a new G1 (or a new or used G2 with trim). People bought (expensive) G1s based on the reported new performance, since the "degrade after first use" defect/weakness/whatever was unknown at first. (Indeed, Intel denied it, initially.)
Alas, the Intel optimization tool does not work with G1 drives.
I can understand Intel deciding it's not cost effective to fix this problem; I'm (we're) just ticked they didn't do anything decisive to help G1 users out, like exchanging the drives for G2s, or offering a G2-for-G1 discount, or something like that. (There was a firmware update that reduced the problem; while that made the drives usable again, that didn't come close to eliminating the problem).
02-19-2010 02:44 PM
Your point is valid but it depends on how you would answer the following questions.
First the facts. The performance of a G1 drives degrades significantly over time and TRIM would resolve that problem.
1. Should "out the box" performance (or something at least close to it) be something that is sustainable?
2. Is it unreasonable that you have to secure erase your drive to regain "out the box" performance?
If the answer is yes to either question is it really unreasonable to ask why TRIM is not being provided?
What Intel specify is irrelevant because if you read their SSD product specification sheet you will find this statement in the small print.
"The products described in this document may contain design defects or errors known as errata which may cause the product to deviate from published specifications".
Semantics......Did Intel say they would provide TRIM for G2 drives? Did that include raid? Are you sure? Did they actually say that? If you want TRIM support for raid maybe you have to wait until Q4 this year when the G3 drives come out and the G2 suddenly becomes "obsolete".
EDIT: and just for the record:
The OCZ core does not count because it should never have been on the market in the first place. It had serious issues that TRIM would not resolve.
02-22-2010 08:49 AM
Last post on this issue. (I promise. In fact it's going to be my last post on this site).
@ jonat. So does that mean graphic cards should not get driver updates to improve reliability and add new features? Maybe AMD/ Nvidia should make their video cards obsolete before each driver update so they never have the inconvenience or cost of updating their drivers?