Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel 530

Reasons to consider the
Intel 530

Report a correction
Thinner thickness 7 mm vs 10 mm More than 25% thinner thickness
Front view of Intel 520

Reasons to consider the
Intel 520

Report a correction
Faster random read 50,000 IOPS vs 41,000 IOPS More than 20% faster random read
Slightly faster power consumption (Idle) 0.6 Watts vs 0.01 Watts Around 120x faster power consumption (Idle)

Features Key features of the Intel 530  vs 520 

random read

Intel 530
41,000 IOPS
Intel 520
50,000 IOPS
Intel says it's put a lot of work into tuning the SandForce SF-2281 controller to improve performance and reliability.
Intel 520 | by Tech Radar (Feb, 2012)

random write

Intel 530
80,000 IOPS
Intel 520
80,000 IOPS
What Intel hasn't done, however, is deliver a drive that immediately takes down the opposition in terms of raw performance.
Intel 520 | by Tech Radar (Feb, 2012)

sequential read

Intel 530
540 MB/s
Intel 520
550 MB/s
Thanks to the use of aggressive compression technology, impressive headline data transfer rates can sometimes translate into slightly pedestrian real-world performance.
Intel 520 | by Tech Radar (Feb, 2012)

sequential write

Intel 530
490 MB/s
Intel 520
520 MB/s
So Intel isn't making any showbiz claims for basic performance.
Intel 520 | by Tech Radar (Feb, 2012)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

storage

Intel 530  vs
520 
Capacity 240 GB 240 GB
Interface SATA III SATA III
Interface speed 6 Gbit/s 6 Gbit/s
Controller SandForce SandForce 2281
Memory type MLC SLC
NAND process size 20 nm 25 nm
Maximum shock force 1,500G 1,500G

form factor

Intel 530  vs
520 
Form factor 2.5" 2.5"
Mfg warranty 5 years 5 years
Thickness 7 mm 10 mm
Weight 78 g 78 g

manufacturer performance

Sequential read 540 MB/s 550 MB/s
Sequential write 490 MB/s 520 MB/s
Random read 41,000 IOPS 50,000 IOPS
Random write 80,000 IOPS 80,000 IOPS
Power consumption (Idle) 0.01 Watts 0.6 Watts
Power consumption (Active) 0.2 Watts 0.85 Watts
MTBF 1,200,000 hours 1,200,000 hours

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus