Leaked roadmap reveals Intel SSD plans

Engadget has come upon a leaked Intel SSD roadmap that reveals the company’s plans for the coming two quarters. According to the official-looking slide, which was originally posted by German site Computer Base, Intel will release a quartet of new 2.5" solid-state disks in the fourth quarter of this year.

25-nm flash and much higher capacities are on the menu for the next round of X25-M drives, which will reportedly be offered in 160, 300, and 600GB flavors. The value-oriented X25-V will become available in an 80GB capacity, and the existing 40GB model looks set for return with new flash chips in the first quarter of next year. That’s when we’ll also see 160 and 300GB versions of Intel’s 1.8" X18-M drives.

In addition to rolling out new consumer SSDs, Intel has plans to update its enterprise-oriented offerings. The roadmap suggests that a Lyndonville replacement for the X25-E is due in the first quarter of next year. This drive will be available in 100, 200, and 400GB capacities, and it looks like the flash will be "enterprise-grade" MLC rather than the SLC memory used in existing X25-Es. SLC memory typically has a tenfold advantage in write-erase endurance over MLC flash, but there’s no indication that the 25-nm flash chips in the new X25-E models are any more robust than what’s coming in the next-gen X25-Ms.  The slides do suggest that Lyndonville offers better write performance, though.

Naturally, none of these leaked details have been confirmed. Intel is certainly due for an SSD refresh; the X25-E still hasn’t been granted TRIM support, and the X25-M G2 is already more than a year old. The slide has since been removed from Computer Base at Intel’s request, so it’s probably legit.

Comments closed
    • juampa_valve_rde
    • 10 years ago

    well if intel releases a sata 6 gbps ssd, without having a single southbridge supporting it, they are lame…
    and if they release a new ssd for sata 3 gbps, there is little room to play catch up with the sandforce’s and c300 so whats the point?

    • NeelyCam
    • 10 years ago

    Prices????????

      • sweatshopking
      • 10 years ago

      $1,000,000!! well it might as well be. I can’t afford it no matter how much it costs!

      • NeelyCam
      • 10 years ago

      It’s over $9,000??

        • sweatshopking
        • 10 years ago

        9000$ is in fact a LITTLE bit over my budget.

    • anotherengineer
    • 10 years ago

    Hmm I was thinking of getting a 120GB sandforce drive this coming January, but I guess I should wait and see how intels new 100GB x25-E is………wow thats a long wait, now I know what the Nvidia fanybois felt like waiting for Fermi 😉

    • indeego
    • 10 years ago

    /[<#1,<]/ q[

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 10 years ago

      Eh…what performance gains?!?

      You’re looking at this from an entirely different perspective than the other squillion of us. I don’t know how I’d tell the difference between a previous generation Kingston drive or a SATA 6gbps RealSSD in use.

      What I do notice is the amount of storage space I need at a given price, and that Intel is just about rigging their introduction of new manufacturing processes to screw with it.

      Intel’s early “surprise” shrink last summer actually led to SSD prices increasing because they built up tons of hype and were never in stock. Intel may beat everyone to the punch, but it doesn’t mean they’re making enough to satisfy demand and pass on any significant savings compared to everyone else.

    • Voldenuit
    • 10 years ago

    I thought SLC drives (as the X25-E is) don’t need TRIM because there is no block rewrite penalty? Internal garbage collection should be more than sufficient, right?

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 10 years ago

      Who art thou which dares to eschew the significance of catchy marketable acronyms in favor of the devil’s dark instrument of logic? Blasphemeat! He’s a witch! Burn him!

        • sweatshopking
        • 10 years ago

        seconded. Motion passed. Vuldenuit is going to be burned.

        • Shining Arcanine
        • 10 years ago

        SLC drives have block rewrite penalties. What they do not have are JMicron controllers.

      • Shining Arcanine
      • 10 years ago

      That is a misconception. It arised because the first NAND flash SSDs were SLC-based and worked well enough that no one noticed the block rewrite penalty. When the first MLC-based NAND flash SSDs came out, they had the horrible JMicron controller that made it quite noticeable. MLC drives based on other controllers were similar to the SLC drives, but as far as performance goes, all NAND flash based SSDs suffer from the block rewrite penalty.

    • OneArmedScissor
    • 10 years ago

    Great, so we’re due for a repeat of last summer. Prices will probably stagnate or even go up all over again. If they make the 160GB drive $225, it’s not really going to be doing anyone any favors by that time. I can’t see Intel selling a higher capacity and faster drive for a lower price than its predecessor. They’re bound to be paying out the bunghole to move to 25nm.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This