Thursday, July 12th 2012

Intel Plans Price Cuts for Consumer SSDs

Intel is planning a series of price cuts for its three current consumer SSD lines, the SSD 320, SSD 330, and SSD 520. The new prices could take effect from August, and will render several models with price per GB under $1. While prices of most lower-capacity SSD 320 series products are left untouched (partly because they are being phased out of the market), those of the 300 GB and 600 GB are cut significantly. The 300 GB SSD 320 could get a price cut from US $519 to $464, while that of the 600 GB SSD 320 could go down from $1,059 down to $879.

Intel's current mainstream SSD line, the SSD 330, could face price cuts on some of its best selling models. The 60 GB model could see its price go down from $94 to $69, the 120 GB from $149 to $104, and the 180 GB from $234 to $154. Intel's performance SSD line, the SSD 520 series, sees prices cut for nearly every model. The 60 GB model is down from $109 to $99, 120 GB from $189 to $139, 180 GB from $279 to $199, 240 GB from $349 to $259, and 480 GB $809 to $594. The new prices restore competitiveness of Intel's consumer SSD lines against competitors' offerings, as SSD prices continue on their free-fall.

Source: VR-Zone
Add your own comment

21 Comments on Intel Plans Price Cuts for Consumer SSDs

#1
Elmo
Great just F****** great after i bought it.
Posted on Reply
#2
mtosev
great news intels is my favorite manufacturer
Posted on Reply
#3
qwerty_lesh
yeah awesome news, glad to see such significant cuts for intel ssds :D
Posted on Reply
#4
Andrew Moore
We have just dropped the price (acting a little earlier and taking a hit initially) so I should think more will follow before the expected August movement :)
Posted on Reply
#5
Widjaja
Well other manufacturers are going to have to follow suit if they want to sell.
Posted on Reply
#6
reverze
other manufactures had such low prices for months already, reason intel barely sold their SSDs
Posted on Reply
#7
atikkur
good.. bring more cuts... we need into $0.5/GB level. :roll:
Posted on Reply
#8
ironwolf
From what I have seen lately, in the 64-128 GB range, anything <$0.75/GB is considered good, <=$0.50/GB is the sweet spot. Not sure about anything >128 GB though.
Posted on Reply
#9
Octavean
Yeah, I’ve seen 240GB for ~$150 and 360GB for ~$200. That’s about 0.625% and 0.56% respectively. Intel is still on the high side in terms of price respectively but the quality and reliability still make it desirable.

Good to see these price cuts as a significant SSD price drop was predicted some time ago but never seemed to materialize.
Posted on Reply
#10
Morgoth
im not gona pay more then 60 euro for 500gb..
Posted on Reply
#11
slybunda
if they are still sticking with sandforce then they better half the price for thise unreliable drives.
Posted on Reply
#12
Liquid Cool
Their still not competitive? Still 20% higher on the 128gb I just purchased. No worries, prices have only begun to fall. Another 50% haircut this year is my call.

Depression dead ahead.

Liquid Cool
Posted on Reply
#13
cedrac18
Samsung > Intel, hell crucial as good as Intel to. I don't think other manufactures need to worry about what Intel does or doesn't do.
Posted on Reply
#14
mastrdrver
by: btarunr
.....While prices of most lower-capacity SSD 320 series products are left untouched (partly because they are being phased out of the market), those of the 300 GB and 600 GB are cut significantly. The 300 GB SSD 320 could get a price cut from US $519 to $464, while that of the 600 GB SSD 320 could go down from $1,059 down to $879.....
Not enough. When you can get the 256GB and 512GB Crucial SSDs for ~220 and ~400 respectively, there really is no reason to get the Intel drivers. Not to mention that the Crucial drives will perform TRIM by themselves even with in RAID which you loose with the Intel drives when you go to a RAID setup.

When I can save money and get 90% of the performance of an Intel SSD, what is the motivation I would spend more?
Posted on Reply
#15
happita
by: mastrdrver

When I can save money and get 90% of the performance of an Intel SSD, what is the motivation I would spend more?
Because it is Intel, and YOU MUST SPEND.....OBEY...OBEY!!
Posted on Reply
#16
Octavean
by: slybunda
if they are still sticking with sandforce then they better half the price for thise unreliable drives.
Actually, the way I hear it Intel does Sandforce SSD units right:
Intel was rumored to be working on a SandForce based drive for several months now, but even the rumors couldn't encapsulate just how long Intel and SF has worked on this drive. According to Intel, the relationship began 1.5 years ago. Still lacking a 6Gbps controller of their own and wanting to remain competitive with the rest of the market, Intel approached SandForce about building a drive based on the (at the time) unreleased SF-2281 controller. Roughly six months later, initial testing and validation began on the drive. That's right, around the time that OCZ was previewing the first Vertex 3 Pro, Intel was just beginning its extensive validation process.

Codenamed Cherryville, Intel's SSD 520 would go through a full year of validation before Intel would sign off on the drive for release. In fact, it was some unresolved issues that cropped up during Intel's validation that pushed Cherryville back from the late 2011 release to today.


Intel's strenuous validation will eventually make SandForce's drives better for everyone, but for now the Cherryville firmware remains exclusive. Intel wouldn't go on record with details of its arrangement with SandForce, but from what I've managed to piece together the Intel Cherryville firmware is exclusive for a limited period of time. That exclusivity agreement likely expires sometime after the SF-2281 is replaced by a 3rd generation controller. There are some loopholes that allow SandForce to port bug fixes to general partner firmware but the specific terms aren't public information. The important takeaway is anything fixed in Intel's firmware isn't necessarily going to be fixed in other SF-2281 based drives in the near term. This is an important distinction because although Cherryville performs very similarly to other SF-2281 drives, it should be more reliable.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5508/intel-ssd-520-review-cherryville-brings-reliability-to-sandforce
Posted on Reply
#17
Velvet Wafer
ah, poor money bags... seems they werent happy with selling the most expensive SSDs without much Reason, and no one buying them anymore ;)
Posted on Reply
#18
D007
a HD for 800 bucks.. Think I'd rather build an entire computer for 800 bucks..
it's just not cost effective, not even close..
Posted on Reply
#19
Wrigleyvillain
PTFO or GTFO
by: Elmo
Great just F****** great after i bought it.
Nature of the beast and happens to us all. Still sucks when it does though.
Posted on Reply
#20
XNine
CaseLabs Rep
Awesome! Consumers win on this one! Woot!
Posted on Reply
#21
Filiprino
480 GB $809 to $594
This can't be serious. $200. 25% price cut.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment