X200 with Intel 160GB SSD v. Lenovo 128GB SSD v. 160GB 7200

[Hazarrd]

I'm in the market for the Lenovo x200 and wanted to get some feedback from the more-informed community about storage options. I have a general understanding of SSD v. HDD, but wanted to get more information on which option is best. As indicated in the title, the three options I'm considering are: (1) Lenovo's 128GB SSD (they claim that it is "Lenovo" that manufactures it, does anyone have info. on who really manufactures it?), (2) Intel's 160GB SSD, or (3) the old-school 160GB 7200RPM drive.

I don't do any intense computer work outside of excel, word, web browsing, etc., but I'm a multi-tasker, meaning that I have many of these programs open and running at the same time (obviously this only affects memory, not storage). Anyway, I'd like to get some more thoughts about the differences between Lenovo's SSD and Intel's (other than size and price) and whether or not it's really worth getting an SSD at this point in time.

Thanks!

[tomh009]

This is a little bit difficult question -- the definition of "best" really depends on your objectives. What are you looking for from your X200? Maximizing performance? Stretching battery life? Maintaining disk capacity? Minimizing noise? And what kind of a budget do you have for this?

For me personally, I decided that the current SSDs were still too expensive for what they are. Many have performance issues, and the cost per GB is still quite high (almost as high as the cost per MB on my first SCSI drive!), plus the power consumption is not very impressive yet.

So I instead picked up a Hitachi 5K500.B. It's almost as fast as the 7K200 in my old X61 (thanks to the high data density), and at 5400 rpm it's very quiet and vibration-free. It also has lowest-in-class power consumption, something that the hard disk manufacturers have spent the last few years optimizing. And on top of that it has 500 GB of space for only about $100 ... that will do nicely for me personally while I wait for the SSDs to mature.

[Hazarrd]

Well, I guess I'd like to know the differences between the the SSD options. One is significantly more expensive than the other. What is so much better about the Intel drive than the lenovo (which I presume is Samsung)? Also, does it make more sense for me to get the crappiest drive offered and then just purchase my desired SSD drive elsewhere to save some cash? How would I get the OS onto that drive?

[sjthinkpader]

Almost every reviewer such as Tom's Hardware and Anand gave the intel X25-M top marks. Most importantly, it doesn't degrade performance from use as much as other brands.

A secure erase will restore performance to an used SSD but it will take some work. For now, intel is the best if you don't mind spending that level of money.

Most of us here dealing with X40/X41/X41t are buying 32GB/64GB CF or no name 1.8 inch SSD from $75-$250. The newer 5400RPM 1.8 inch HDDs are almost as fast as older 7200 HDD due to much higher areal density. Here is comparison of these storage devices.
http://forum.thinkpads.com/viewtopic.ph ... 1&start=30
I am planning to test an older version of Samsung 1.8 inch SSD.

I have a Hitachi 200GB 7200RPM (7K200) drive in my T60 but I haven't tested it yet. This is the older version hence lower areal density than 7K320 but performance should still be decent.

[Tableteer]

I agree SSDs are expensive. The 128GB Samsung inside my X200 costed me about $500 extra.

That said, I am really-really pleased with performance. There may be other non-price related factors to consider as other posters have mentioned. But when Vista Ultimate boots in 50-60 seconds which includes a liesurely fingerprint swipe time to the point where you no longer see a timer on the mouse cursor, then one says never again to HDDs...no matter how little they cost.

[tomh009]

(...) But when Vista Ultimate boots in 50-60 seconds which includes a liesurely fingerprint swipe time to the point where you no longer see a timer on the mouse cursor, then one says never again to HDDs...no matter how little they cost.

Boot? Boot? Is that something you do frequently?

It's been almost three weeks since I last rebooted by X200s (Vista Business); I usually only do it for Windows updates. But that's infrequent enough that I don't mind the extra minute or two for the full boot -- coming out of sleep is pretty much instant anyway.