Intel SSD 520... 180 GB

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by Scataphagos, May 5, 2012.

  1. Trying one out in my XP, SATA II trading rig. A bit snappier than former X25-M, but not so much as to justify the cost of upgrading. (Expecting a significant jump in performance when installed in wife's notebook, however.)

    Cloned X25-M to 520 in 40 seconds. X25-M to X25-M takes about 3 minutes.

  2. i have found that not all laptops are equal and some are just as slow with a ssd as without...
  3. Yes... the mobo and its goodies have an impact on how the system or even SSDs perform.... though SSDs usually improve the performance of laptops significantly.
  4. What SATA interface on your rig?

  5. SATA II. Would be faster, of course, on SATA III.
  6. Sorry, missed that in original post.

    My SATA 1.5 laptop does better with 320 Intel than old dieing 5400rpm.

    I think I saw on slickdeals Intel 320 180g for $160 via newegg.

    That might be cost effective for your wifes laptop.

  7. I've got some 320s also.... have done cloning with all the ones I have (X25-M, X25-V, 320 and 520), and the 520 is about 4x faster than any of the others.... but in general computing functions it's not "faster enough" on a SATA II desktop rig to justify the upgrade cost.... might be worth it on the laptop... they tend to benefit significantly with fast SSDs. Will benefit from SATA III speeds on the 520 when eventually moved to a SATA III machine, however.
  8. You really notice it in time to boot or load large applications. Not so much elsewhere.
  9. i bought a ton of them & noticed the biggest difference with HDD clone vs. fresh install - which most would say has enough issues to call that quits as-is.

    I am interested to learn if SSD really does anything except extend laptop battery life...