text:
MSI AfterBurner Overclock Application Discussion forum This forum is intended for MSI customers for questions on the AfterBurner Overclock Utility based off Rivatuner. In this section the users help each other out with answers as well as support staff from MSI.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skin developed by: vBStyles.com
Copyright (c) 2017, All Rights Reserved. The Guru of 3D, the Hardware Guru, and 3D Guru are trademarks owned by Hilbert Hagedoorn.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Intel Core i5 3470 Review: HD 2500 Graphics Testedby Anand Lal Shimpi on 5/31/2012 12:00 AM EST
- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Ivy Bridge
- GPUs
66 Comments
Back to Article
etamin - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI just glossed through the charts (will read article tomorrow), but I noticed there are no Nehalems in the comparisons. It would be nice if both a Bloomfield and a Gulftown were thrown in. If Phenom IIs are still there, Nehalem shouldn't be THAT outdated right? Anyways, I'm sure the article is great. Thanks for your hard work and I look forward to reading this at work tomorrow :) Reply
SK8TRBOI - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI agree with etamin - if Phenom is in there, a great Intel benchmark cpu would be the Nehalem i7-920 D0 OC'd to 3.6Ghz - I'd wager a significant percentage of Anand's readers (myself included!) still have this technological wonder in our everyday rigs. The i7-920 would be a good 'reference' for us all when evaluating/comparing performance.
Thanks, and awesome article, as always! Reply
CeriseCogburn - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkIt's always "best" here to forget about other Intel and nVidia - as if they suddenly don't exist anymore - it makes amd appear to shine.
Happens all the time. Every time.
I suppose it's amd's evil control - or the yearly two week island vacation (research for reviewers of course) Reply
LancerVI - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkThrow me into the list that agrees.
Still running a i7 920 C0. the Nehalems being in the chart would've been nice. Reply
jordanclock - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkThat's what Bench is for. Reply
HanzNFranzen - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI have to agree as well. I have an i7 920 C0 and often wonder how it stacks up today against Ivy Bridge. I'm thinking that holding off for Haswell is a safe bet even though I have the upgrade itch! It's been 3 years, which is great to have gotten this much milage out of my current system, but I wanna BUILD SOMETHING!! Reply
CeriseCogburn - Monday, June 11, 2012 - linkIt's whole video card tier of frame rate difference in games, plus you have sata 6 and usb 3 to think about not to mention pci-e 3.0 to be ready for when needed.
Buy your stuff and sell your old parts to keep it worth it. Reply
jwcalla - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI'm guessing the stock idle power consumption number is with EIST disabled?
I've been waiting for some of these lower-powered IVB chips to come out to build a NAS. Was thinking a Core i3 (if they ever get around to releasing it), or maybe the lowest Xeon. Though at this point I might just bite the bullet and wait for 64-bit ARM... or go with a Cortex-A15 maybe. Reply
ShieTar - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkIf a Cortex-A15 would give you enough computing power, you should also be happy with a Pentium or even a Celeron. The i3 is already rather overkill for a simple NAS.
I have a fileserver with Windows Server Home running on a Pentium G620, and it has absolutely no problem to push 120 MB/s over a GBit Ethernet switch from a RAID-0 pack of HDDs while running µtorrent, Thunderbird, Miranda and Firefox on the side. Power consumption of the complete system is around 40-50W in idle, and I havn't even shopped for specifically low-power components but used a lot of leftovers. Reply
BSMonitor - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkYeah, the CPU is just 1 part of the power consumption puzzle.. And since in "file sharing" mode, it will almost always be in a low power/idle state... An ARM CPU would show little improvement..
But if you ever offloaded any kind of work to that box, you'd have wasted your money with an ARM box, as no ARM processor will ever match real task performance of any of the x86 processors. Reply
MonkeyPaw - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkYou can always go with the 2120T. It's only 35W (4 threads) and would beat the pants off the other 2 options you are considering.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8... Reply
nubie - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI have to second the G620, they are damn cheap, about half the price of the 2120T, and you aren't losing any level 3 cache. Reply
SleepIT - Friday, June 15, 2012 - linkI use the mini-ITX Atom-based boards running Ubuntu/Webmin for NAS's (OS on thumbdrive, 4 x 2Tb drives on the latest). Performance is stellar! Reply
majfop - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkUpping the Turbo Boost multipliers for the 400 MHz overclock is only on Z75 and Z77, right? That makes it very much less "free" I would say.
There seem to be some reasonable budget option B75 and H77 motherboards, not to mention the previous socket 1155 offerings with an updated BIOS to accept the IVB processor. Reply
iwod - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI sometimes wish Intel could just present a Lineup for OEM, another for Retail Consumers. To greatly simplify Lineup. Just looking at the Lineup Hurts my brain and eyes, they could just offer all CPU with HT, 2 / 4 Core Variants with Speed Differentiation would be MORE then enough for me.
Then AMD is plain stupid for not capturing more market shares with their APU. Their new CEO has it right, where he had watched AMD systematically shoot itself in the foot, over and over again. Reply
BSMonitor - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkIt's ALL for OEM's. Retail CPU consumers are such a tiny fraction of the pie. Consumers just jump in where the CPU fits them best.
The only consumer aimed retail products are the high end i7 hex-cores. Reply
silverblue - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkRory Read wasn't responsible for Fusion in any way; the only thing he can realistically do here is to push as many resources at getting APUs out of the door as possible. Reply
thunderising - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkOne could have atleast hoped for HD3000 in a 200$ chip, not HD2500 crap Reply
ShieTar - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkHD3000 is not 500 HDs better than HD2500, it is in fact an older, less capable version of HD graphics. The numbering scheme is admittedly silly, but thats to be expected from Intel by now.
In the end, this CPU is not meant for gamers, not even if they want Ivy Bridge for a low cost. For 60$ less than the 3470 you will soon get the 2 core / 4 threads i3-3220. For a low budget gamer, this will still give you more than enough CPU power to team with any GPU you can afford. And those 60$ you saved can buy you an AMD 6670, which should be at least twice as fast as HD4000.
The 3470 makes much more sense for people that can accept minimal GPU power, but appreciate the increased CPU power of the (real) quadcore. Think office PC handling massive excel files with loads of calculations: Not enough to warrant a Xeon based system, but definitly enough to make the 60$ premium from a dual core worthwhile. Reply
CeriseCogburn - Monday, June 11, 2012 - linkThe idea that any poor sap has to game on any 2000, 2500, 3000, or 4000, or llano, or trinity, is too much to bear.
What a PATHETIC place to be. How the heck is someone going to spend on HD3000 or HD4000 and the board and accompanying items and not have $75-$100 for say a GTX460 ?
I mean how badly do these people plan on torturing themselves and what point are they really trying to prove ?
They could get a $100 amd phemon 2 and a $100 GTX 460 if they want to game, and be so far ahead...
This whole scene is one big bad freaking JOKE. Reply
duploxxx - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkyou could ask why even bother to add a GPU here, it is utter crap.
now lets have a look at teh other review what they left in the U 17W parts ...... Reply
PrinceGaz - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkBecause most people don't buy a PC to play the latest games or do 3D rendering work with it. Reply
CeriseCogburn - Monday, June 11, 2012 - linkCorrect PrinceGaz, but then we have the amd fan boy contingent, that for some inexplicably insane fatnasy reason, now want to pretend llano, trinity and hd graphics are gaming items...
The whole place has gone bonkers. But a freaking video card, every *********** motherboard has one 16x slot in it.
mother of god ! Reply
ananduser - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI noticed you ran a BF3 bench and assumed that the game is playable on a HD4000. Have you actually played the game with the HD4000 on a 32 player map. I dare you to try and update this review and say that BF3 is "playable" on a HD4000. Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link"The HD 4000 delivered a nearly acceptable experience in Battlefield 3..." I wouldn't call that saying the game is "playable". Obviously, the more people there are on a map the worse it gets, but if you're playing BF3 on 32 player maps (or you plan to), I'd hope you understand that you'll need as much GPU (and quite a bit of CPU) as you can throw at the game.
That said, I'll edit the paragraph to note that we're discussing single-player performance, and multiplayer is a different beast. Reply
ananduser - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkWell, when one sees 37 fps BF3, one might wrongly assume that: "OMG 37 FPS on a thin and low powered [insert ultrabook brand]"; I'm going tomorrow and buying it.
I think that playing the game for 5-10 minutes with FRAPS enabled and providing highest/lowest FPS count for each hardware setup is more revealing than running built-in engine demos. Reply
CeriseCogburn - Friday, June 01, 2012 - linkDon't forget this applies to AMD Trinity whose crappy cpu will cave in on a 32 player server. Reply
ananduser - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkOh and I doubt single player performance will ever touch that 37 data point as well. Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkOn the quad-core desktop IVB chips it surely will -- that's why the result is in the charts -- but for laptops? Nope. I think the best result I've gotten (at minimum details and 1366x768) is around 25-26FPS in BF3. Reply
ltcommanderdata - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - link"Intel has backed OpenCL development for some time and currently offers an OpenCL 1.1 runtime for their CPUs, however an OpenCL runtime for Ivy Bridge will not be available at launch. As a result Ivy Bridge is limited to DirectCompute for the time being, which limits just what kind of compute performance testing we can do with Ivy Bridge."
The Intel® SDK for OpenCL Applications 2012 has been available for several weeks now and is supposed to include GPU OpenCL support for Ivy Bridge. Isn't that sufficient to enable you to run your OpenCL benchmarks?
If not, the beta drivers for Windows 8 also support Windows 7 and adds both GPU OpenCL 1.1. support and full OpenGL 4.0 support including tessellation so would allow you to run your OpenCL benchmarks and a Unigine Heaven OpenGL tessellation comparison. Reply
Ryan Smith - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkYour completely right. We were in a rush and copied that passage from our original IVB review, which is no longer applicable. Reply
SteelCity1981 - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkIntel could have at least called it a 3500 and slap 2 more EU's onto it. Reply
fic2 - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkAgreed. I don't understand why Intel basically stood pat on the low end HD.
But then again like everyone else I never understood why the HD3000 was only in the K series and maybe 5% of K series users don't have discreet gpu so the HD3000 isn't being used. Reply
CeriseCogburn - Monday, June 11, 2012 - linkGood point. Lucid logic tried to fix that some, and did a decent job, and don't forget quick sync, plus now with zero core amd cards, and even low idle power 670's and 680's, leaving on SB K chip hd3000 cores looks even better - who isn't trained in low power if they have a video card, after all it's almost all people rail about for the last 4 years.
So if any of that constant clamor for a few watts power savings has any teeth whatsoever, every person with an amd card before this last gen will be using the SB HD3000 and then switching on the fly to gaming with lucid logic. Reply
n9ntje - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkSo this must be a midrange desktop chip? Horrendous performance on the graphics side from Intel again.
Very curious how AMD's trinity dekstop will perform, at the same pricerange it will be obvious it will obliterate Intel's offerings on the graphics side. What's more impressive AMD is still on 32nm.. Reply
7Enigma - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkFor me this IS the perfect chip. No use for the GPU so cheaper = better. I would need a K model though for OC'ing potential, but I'm glad to see that if I can't have my CPU-only (no GPU) chip, at least I can have a hacked down version that is more in line with a traditional CPU. Reply
silverblue - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkWhat Intel should really be doing here is offering the 4000 on all i3s and some i5s to offset the reduced CPU performance. If you want to give AMD something to think about, HD 4000 on an Ivy Bridge dual core is very much the right way of going about it. Reply
CeriseCogburn - Friday, June 01, 2012 - linkThen Intel has a lame trinity level cpu next to a losing gpu.
I think Intel will stick with it's own implementations, don't expect to be hired as future product manager. Reply
ShieTar - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkInterestingly enough, Intel will also happily sell you what is basically the same chip, without any GPU, 100 MHz slower but with 2MB extra L3-Cache for the same price. They call that offer Xeon E3-1220V2. And it is 69W TDP, not 77W as the i5-3470.
Who knows, the bigger Cache might even make it the better CPU for a not-overclocking gamer. If normal boards support it. Reply
Pazz - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkAnand,
Following on from your closing statement with regards to the HD 4000 being the miniumum, will you be doing a review of the 3570K? Surely with this model being the lowest budget Ivy HD4000 chip, it'll be a fairly popular option for many system builders and OEM's. Reply
BSMonitor - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkf they truly were interested in building the best APU. And by that, a knockout iGPU experience.
Where are the dual-core Core i7's with 30-40 EU's??
Or the AMD <whatevers> (not sure anymore what they call their APU) Phenom X2 CPU with 1200 Shaders??
When we are talking about a truly GPU intense application, a LOT of times single/dual core CPU is enough. Heck, if you were to take a dual-core Core 2, and stick it with a GeForce 670 or Radeon 7950.. You would see very similar numbers in terms of gaming performance to what's in the BENCH charts. ESP at the 1920x1080 and below.
Surely Intel can afford another die that aims a ton of transistors at just the GPU side of things. AMD, maybe. Why do we get from BOTH, their top end iGPU stuck with the most transistors dedicated to the CPU??
I find it hard to believe anyone shopping for an APU is hoping for amazing CPU performance to go with their average iGPU performance. That market would be the opposite. Sacrifice a few threads on the CPU side for amazing iGPU.
Am I missing something technically limiting?? Is that many GPU units overkill in terms of power/heat dissipation of the CPU socket?? Reply
tipoo - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkWell, their chips have to work in a certain set of thermal limits. Maybe at this point 1200 shader cores would not be possible on the same die as a quad core CPU for power consumption and heat reasons. I think Haswel will have 64 EUs though if the rumours are true. Reply
Roland00Address - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkThere is no point of a 1200 shaders apu due to memory bandwidth. You couldn't feed a beast of an apu with only dual channel 1600 mhz memory when that same memory limits the performance of llano and trinity compared to their gpu cousins which have the same calculation units and core clocks but the gpus perform significantly better. Reply
silverblue - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkPossibly, but at the moment, bandwidth is a surefire performance killer. Reply
BSMonitor - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkGood Points. But currently, Intel has Quad Channel DDR3-1600 up on the Socket 2011. I am sure AMD could get more bandwidth there too, if they step up the memory controller.
My overall point, is that neither is even trying for a low-medium transistor CPU and a high transistor GPU.
It's either Low-Medium CPU with Low-Medium GPU (disabled cores and what have you), or High End CPU with "High End" GPU.
There is no attempt at giving up CPU die space for more GPU transistors from either.. None. If you someone spends $$ on the High End of the CPU (Quad Core i7), the implementation of iGPU is not even close to worth using for that much CPU. Reply
Roland00Address - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkQuad Channel is not a "free upgrade" it requires much more traces on the motherboard as well as more pins on the cpu socket. This dramtically increases costs for the motherboard and the cpu. Both of those are going against what AMD is trying to do with their APUs which will be both laptop as well as desktop chips. They are trying to increase their margins on their chips not decrease them.
You have a large number OEMs only putting a single 4gb ddr3 stick in laptops and desktops (thus not achieving dual channel) in the current apus. You want think those same vendors are suddenly going to put 16gbs of memory on an apu (and it is going to be 16gbs since 2gb ddr3 sticks are being phased out via the memory manufactures.) Reply
tipoo - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI'm curious why the HD4000 outperforms something like the 5450 by nearly double in Skyrim, yet falls behind in something like Portal or Civ, or even Minecraft? Is it immature drivers or something in the architecture itself? Reply
ShieTar - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkFor Minecraft, read the article and what it has to say about OpenGL.
For Portal or Civ, it might very well be related to Memory Bandwidth. The HD2500 can have 25.6 GB/s (with DDR3-1600), or even more. The 5450 generally comes with half as much (12.8 GB/s), or even a quarter of it since there are also 5450s with DDR2.
As a matter of fact, I remember reading several reports on how much the Llano-Graphics would improve with faster Memory, even beyond DDR3-1600. I havn't seen any tests on the impact of memory speed from Ivy Bridge or Trinity yet, but that would be interesting given their increased computing powers. Reply
silverblue - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI'm sure it'll matter for both, more so for Trinity. I'm not sure we'll see much in the way of a comparison until the desktop Trinity appears, but for IB, I'm certainly waiting. Reply
tipoo - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkHaving half the memory bandwidth would lead to the reverse expectation, the 5450 is close to or even surpasses the HD4000 with twice the bandwidth in those games, yet the 4000 beats it by almost double in games like Skyrim, even the 2500 beats it there. Reply
JarredWalton - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkIntel actually has a beta driver (tested on the Ultrabook) that improves Portal 2 performance. I expect it will make its way to the public driver release in the next month. There are definitely still driver performance issues to address, but even so I don't think HD 4000 has the raw performance potential to match Trinity unless a game happens to be CPU intensive. Reply
n9ntje - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkDon't forget memory bandwidth. Both the CPU and GPU use the same memory on the motherboard. Reply
tacosRcool - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkkinda a waste in terms of graphics Reply
paraffin - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkWith 1920×1080 being the standard thesedays I find it annoying that all AT tests continue to ignore it. Are you trying to goad monitor makers back into 16:10 or something? Reply
Sogekihei - Monday, June 04, 2012 - linkThe 1080p resolution may have become standard for televisions, but it certainly isn't so for computer monitors. These days the "standard" computer monitor (meaning, what an OEM rig will ship with in most cases whether it's a desktop or notebook) is some variant of 136#x768 resolution, so that gets tested for low-end graphics options that are likely to be seen in cheap OEM desktops and most OEM laptops (such as integrated graphics seen here.)
The 1680x1050 resolution was the highest end-user resolution available cheaply for a while and is kind of like a standard among tech enthusiasts- sure you had other offerings available like some (expensive) 1920x1200 CRTs, but most people's budget left them with sticking to 1280x1024 CRTs or cheap LCDs or if they wanted to go with a slightly higher quality LCD practically the only available resolution at the time was 1680x1050. A lot of people don't care enough about the quality of their display to upgrade it as frequently as performance-oriented parts so many of us still have at least one 1680x1050 lying around, probably in use as a secondary or for some even a primary display despite 1080p monitors being the same cost or lower price when purchased new. Reply
Beenthere - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkI imagine with the heat/OC'ing issues with the trigate chips, Intel is working to resolve Fab as well as operational issues with IB and thus isn't ramping as fast as normal. Reply
Fritsert - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkWould the HQV score of the HD2500 be the same as the HD4000 in the Anandtech review? Basically would video playback performance be the same (HQV, 24fps image enhancement features etc.)?
A lot of processors in the low power ivy bridge lineup have the HD2500. If playback quality is the same this would make those very good candidates for my next HTPC. The Core i5 3470T specifically. Reply
cjs150 - Friday, June 08, 2012 - linkAlso does the HD2500 lock at the correct FPS rate which is not exactly 24FPS. AMD has had this for ages but Intel only caught up with the HD4000. For me it is the difference between an i7-3770T and an i5-3470T Reply
DLeRium - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkThis is a replacement of the i5-2400. Actually the 3450 was, but this is 100mhz faster. You should be comparing HD2000 vs HD2500 as well as these aren't top tier models with the HD3000/4000. Reply
bkiserx7 - Thursday, May 31, 2012 - linkIn the GPU Power Consumption comparison section, did you disable HT and lock the 3770k to the same frequency as the 3470 to get a more accurate comparison between just the HD 4000 and HD 2500? Reply
shin0bi272 - Friday, June 01, 2012 - linkany gamer with a good quad core doesnt need to upgrade their cpu. Who's going to spend hundreds of dollars to upgrade from another quad core (like lets say my i7 920) to this one for a whopping 7 fps in one game and 1 fps in another? That sounds like something an apple fanboy would do... oh look the new isuch-and-such is out and its marginally better than the one I spent $x00 on last month I have to buy it now! no thanks. Reply
Sogekihei - Monday, June 04, 2012 - linkThis really depends a lot on what you have (or want) to do with your computer. Architectural differences are obviously a big deal or else instead of an i7-920 you'd probably be rocking a Phenom (1) x4 or Core2 Quad by your logic that having a passable quad core means you don't need to upgrade your processor until the majority of gaming technology catches up.
Let's take the bsnes emulator as an example here, it focuses on low-level emulation of the SNES hardware to reproduce games as accurately as possible. With most new version releases, the hardware requirements gradually increase as more intricate backend code needs to execute within the same space of time to avoid dropping framerates; being that these games determined their running speed by their framerate and being sub-60 or sub-50 (region-dependent) means running at less than full speed, this could eventually be a problem for somebody wanting to use such an accurate emulator. From what I've heard, most Phenom and Phenom II systems are very bogged down and can barely get any games running at full speed on it these days and from my own experience, Nehalem-based Intel chips either require ludicrous clock speeds or simply aren't capable of running certain games at full speed (such as Super Mario RPG.) Obviously in cases such as this, the performance increases from a new architecture could benefit a user greatly.
Another example I'll give is based on the probability through my own experiences dealing with other people that the vast majority of gamers DO use their rigs for other tasks too. Any intensive work with maths, spreadsheets, video or image editing and rendering, software development, blueprinting, or anything else you could name that people do on a computer nowadays instead of by hand in order to speed the process will see massive gains when moving to a faster processor architecture. For anybody that has such work to do, be it for a very invested-in hobby, as part of a post-secondary education course, or as part of their career, the few hundred dollars/euros/currency of choice it costs to update their system is easily worth the potentially hundreds or thousands of hours per upgrade cycle they may save through the more powerful hardware.
I will concede that in today's market, the majority of gaming-exclusive cases don't yield much better results from increasing a processor's power (usually being GPU-limited instead) however that's a very broad statement and doesn't account for things that are heavily multithreaded (like newer Assassin's Creed games) or that are very processor-intensive (which I believe Civilization V can qualify as in mid- to late-game scenarios.)
There will always be case-specific conditions which will make buying something make sense or not, but do try to keep in mind that a lot of people do have disposable income and will very likely end up putting it into their hobbies before anything else. If their hobbies deal with computers they're likely going to want to always have, to the best extent they can afford, the latest and greatest technology available. Does it mean your system is trash? Of course not. Does it mean they're stupid? No moreso than the man that puts $10 a week into his local lottery and never wins anything. It just comes down to you having different priorities from them.
The only other thing I want to address is your stance on Apple products. Yes the hipsters are annoying, but you would likely lose the war if you wanted to argue on the upgrade cycle users take with Mac OSX-based computers. New product generations only come about once a year or so and most users wait 2-3 generations before upgrading and quite a few wait much longer than the average Linux/Windows PC user will before upgrading. The ones that don't wait are usually professionals in some sort of graphic arts industry (such as photography) where they need the most processing power, memory, graphics capabilities, and battery life possible and it's a justified business expense. Reply
CeriseCogburn - Monday, June 11, 2012 - linkPeople usually skip a generation - so from i7 920 we can call it one gen with SB being nearly the same as IB, so you're correct.
But anyone on core 2 or phenom 2 or athlon 2x or 4x, yeah they could do it an be happy - and don't forget the sata 6 and usb 3 they get with the new board - so it's not just the cpu with IB and SB - you get hard drive and usb speed too.
So with those extras it could drive a few people in your position - sata 6 card and usb 3 card is half the upgrade cost anyway, so add in pci-e 3 as well. I see some people moving from where you are. Reply
ClagMaster - Saturday, June 02, 2012 - linkThe onboard graphics of the Ivy Bridge processors was never seriously intended for playing games. It is intended to replace chipset graphics for to support office applications with large LCD monitors. And it adds transcoding capabilities.
@Anand : If you want to do a more meaningful comparison of graphics performance for those that might be doing gaming, why not test and compare some DX9 games (still being written) of titles available 5 years ago. Real people play these games because they are cheap or free and provide as much entertainment as DX10 or DX11 games. Frame rates will be 60fps or slightly better. Or will your sponsors at nVidia, AMD or Intel not permit this sort of comparison.
Its ridiculous to compare onboard graphics to discrete graphics performance. A dedicated GPU, optimized for graphics, will always beat a onboard graphics GPU for a given gate size.
The Ivy Bridge graphics (performance/power consumption) , if I interpret these comparisons that have been presented correctly, is also inefficient compared to the processing capabilities of a discrete graphics card. Reply
vegemeister - Wednesday, June 06, 2012 - linkAs you mentioned, I'd like to see some mention of the 2D performance. I use Awesome WM on a 3520x1200 X screen, and smooth scrolling can sometimes get choppy with my Graphics My Ass GPU.
I'd like to upgrade my Core2 duo, but I'm not sure whether the HD2500 graphics in this chip will suffice, or if I need to be looking at higher end CPUs. I don't really care about the difference between shitty 3D and ho-hum 3D. Reply
P39Airacobra - Tuesday, July 01, 2014 - linkThat's a shame that they still sale the GT 520 and GT 610 and the ATi 5450, When a integrated GPU like the HD 2500 out performs a dedicated GPU it's time to retire them from the market. I bought a 3470 and I am running a R9 270 with 8GB of 1600 Ripjaws. I tried out the HD 2500 on the chip just to see how it would do, It honestly sucked, But for videos and gaming on very low settings it works, It actually surprised me. But I don't think I could ever stand to have a intergrated GPU, What's the point in buying a i5 if you are only going to use the integrated gpu? It does not make sense, You may as well keep your old P4 if you are not going to add a real GPU to it. This is why I don't understand the point of a integrated GPU inside a high end processor. Reply


text:
Samsung SSD 840 Pro (256GB) Reviewby Anand Lal Shimpi on 9/24/2012 7:00 AM EST
- Posted in
- Storage
- SSDs
- Samsung
- Samsung SSD 840
96 Comments
Back to Article
KPOM - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThis looks like a nice SSD from Samsung offering top tier performance combined with low power consumption. Reply
nathanddrews - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkAgreed. I love my Samsung 830 drives, so at least now I know where to go when I upgrade! Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI came THIS close to buying an 830 yesterday for my laptop. I even did a search for "Samsung 840" to see if there was any news of a successor, to no avail. Still, something stopped me from doing it, and it looks like my procrastination paid off... Reply
HisDivineOrder - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkExact same thing happened to me. Think the sales were just a little too good lately. Made me suspicious. Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkHa ha, come to think of it, I know exactly what you mean. And not that the 256GB 830 isn't a good deal at $200, but I think the improvements in the 840 Pro will be worth it.
I wish I could justify the cost of a 500/512GB drive, but I can always throw my laptop's original HD in a hard drive caddy if I need more storage. Reply
Grok42 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkSame here. I kept seeing the 830 show up in sales but couldn't find any rumors about a next generation drive. I've been putting off my new build for a while now. Prior to waiting on the 840 I waited for the next Nvidia release which ended up being the 660TI. I get everyone worry about a new SSD drive but by the time I actually pull the trigger on everything it will have been out a month and I'll know by then. Reply
TrackSmart - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkIf you can get the 830 at a massive discount, why not go for it? A couple of thoughts:
1) I would never put a new-to-market SSD in on of my machines. It's not worth the risk. Check back in 6 months, or a year, and see how they have held up.
2) There's no discernible difference in performance among any of the top-tier SSDs under normal workloads. Anand and company make these drives jump through flaming hoops (i.e. their Bench suite) before they see differences between the drives under normal workloads.
I'd rather buy something that is fast, proven reliable, and at a good price. I'll let others be the crash test dummies for new SSDs. Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkYeah, I thought about that, too. Why not go for a cheaper, proven drive that's nearly as fast? On the other hand, I bought a 320 based on its reputation for reliability, and a month later, bam, 8MB power bug, so you really never know.
In my case, my laptop is not a mission-critical device; I have a desktop, as well as access to other laptops in the house, so if it suddenly needs service, it's not the end of the world. It's on me to do regular backups, and the 840 Pro has a FIVE YEAR warranty. So I think maybe I will be the crash test dummy this time, for the heck of it. Worst case scenario, I can always just toss the original hard drive back in there. Reply
peterfares - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThe thing is, you're not going to ever notice the difference between the 830 and the 840, or even the Crucial M4. I've seen the 256GB Crucial M4 for as low as $140 in the past couple weeks. That is a much better purchase than the 840 if the 256GB 840 is any more then $180 or so. Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkBack when I got my Intel 320 SSD, I bought it because of Intel's reputation for reliability. Then they went with Sandforce controllers and I just don't trust them anymore. Meanwhile, Samsung also developed a reputation for reliability, and I'm inclined (perhaps unfairly) to trust them over other manufacturers.
I'll be curious to see what Samsung and Anand have to say about the failure of the unit used for this review. I could still see going for the 830 if there's an indication that reliability HAS been compromised in some way. Reply
nextel2010 - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkI couldn't agree more. I have two Samsung 830's, and they have been bulletproof. I used them to replace two Intel 520's, one of which was BSODing several times a day, and the other intermittently, both on previously stable systems. The SF-2281 controllers on those still need work, in spite of Intel's best efforts to date. The 830's have reliable, proven controllers. In practice, they are as wicked fast as the 520's. I never regretted switching over from Intel. While the 840's are likely to take the performance crown, to me, the 830 is fast enough, and new controllers make me nervous. Give me a year of proven stability, and I'll consider switching (of course, the 850 will be out by then...). Reply
FunBunny2 - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkThe only problem with waiting a year: with Moore still in control (mostly, really, integration) controllers go out of style in a year. I wonder how long any stable manufacturers (let alone the likes of OCZ) will still have a controller 3 or 5 years out?
IOW, just as we don't really need the "improved" iPhoneX every so often, the same is true in the SSD space. It's planned obsolescence. Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkAfter moving my Steam folder from my SATA II Intel 320 160Gb to my SATA III Samsung 830 64GB and seeing basically no difference in load times, I have to say that I'll probably keep my eyes peeled for deals on the 830, rather than jumping on the 840. If I could get a 512GB for my laptop for under $400, I'd jump on it and not worry about the difference in performance. Reply
HisDivineOrder - Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - linkAgree on the massive discount, but... so far I haven't seen a "massive discount." The 256gig drive I've been eyeing has been hovering around the $200 price point for a long time now. That's not massive to me. Newegg priced it once for $180 and that was pretty decent for a "massive" discount, but they only did that twice and haven't done it in a long while (ie., since I had the cash to invest).
This is especially relevant when I expect the 840 Pro to drop around that point ($200-ish) once supply matches demand within a couple of months. I'm not interested in beta testing TLC for Samsung either.
And I'd probably pay an extra $20 ($220) to have the superior performance/perf per watt of the 840 when push comes to shove. Reply
dananski - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkVery impressive indeed. Quite a decent improvement on their main performance competitor - their own 830. Don't think it'll be necessary to upgrade from said 830 in my desktop, since that is lovely and fast already, though with the far lower power consumption this could be an ideal laptop upgrade for pretty much anyone :) Reply
Eeqmcsq - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkMmm... bumping up against that SATA 6 Gbps wall. I can't wait for SATA Express to bust through this wall. I know the faster interface won't make much difference for typical real-world use cases, but SSD performance has increased so quickly over the past few years, I don't want to see its progress slowed by an interface bottleneck. Reply
iwod - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkYes we really need those quick. And hopefully straight to PCI-E 3.0 as well so it would provide us a true Bi-Directional 2GB/s
I think we will hit diminishing of returns once we hit that high numbers with the current software. Reply
nathanddrews - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkWhile a 2GB/sec sequential access would be awesome - no disagreement there - it won't feel like much of an upgrade without a significant gain in random IO. A drive that hits the 6Gbps peak in random 4K access would impress me more. Reply
Grok42 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkWhatever the next interconnect is, I hope they build it for the next 10 years. I'm tired of all these incremental improvements requiring different cables. Maybe I've just been building computers too long? Reply
Denithor - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkSATA Express isn't going to require a different cable. Go read the article for more details. Reply
iwod - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkTrue but i think there will be a bottleneck somewhere else once we hit certain number of Random Read. Anand already has results that any more then 40~50MB/s random wrote give us any more benefits. I think it would be similar for Random Read as well although we have so far not reach that point yet.
Of coz these results are with today's software. Things could be different again when we reach that limit. Reply
leboon - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThanks for the review. I must say that the random comments interspersed throughout the article about the regular 840--which isn't even being reviewed-- seemed rather strange and out of place.
On topic though, this new Samsung drive looks very promising and I'm looking forward to grabbing one of them when they're released, to breathe new life into an aging laptop. Reply
Kristian Vättö - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThat's because we didn't get any information about the regular 840 until a few hours before the NDA was lifted, but at least I feel like it was still important to note that such drive exists.
There will be a review ASAP though. I just came back to my hotel room and found a gift box with a 250GB 840 in it :-) Reply
nathanddrews - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link"Joy!"
-Stimpy Reply
Grok42 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkQuit yammering and get to testing and writing! I'm guessing that is the 840 non-pro? Never mind, don't answer that, just focus. Reply
dishayu - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkActive power : 0.068W
Surely this has to be a mistake? I can't imagine any drive today with such low active power today. Reply
DanNeely - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI'd like to know what Samsung's measuring for that number too; Anand measured the 840 pro an order of magnitude higher during write operations. Unless that number is just for the controller and not for the flash too there's something not right about the gap between that number and what AT's measuring. Reply
iwod - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI think that is only the controller. You have to include the LP-DDR2 as well.
Its Working power is still higher then Intel. Although i dont like sammy, i hope the final product will be even better then this. Reply
LGrill - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI was thinking the same thing. Reply
ssj3gohan - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThis is completely correct. Anandtech and basically every other review site out there measures power consumption wrong: they measure it while *not* booted into an OS that supports SATA power management. With DIPM (device initiated power management) enabled, the drive should hit this power consumption easily.
Same goes for pretty much every other SATA SSD these days. They're all well below 0.3W idle except for Sandforce drives. For instance, all Intel drives (intel- and marvell-based) are about 75 to 100mW idle. Reply
kensiko - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkInteresting!
Can Anand comment on that? Or verify it? Reply
jb510 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkSame question. How do the Samsung provided numbers comparing the 830 to 840 on page 1:
Active Power Use 0.24W 0.068W
Idle Power Use 0.14W 0.042W
Jive with the actual test numbers? Reply
Guspaz - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI must be missing something, but on the first page, the rated power usage is:
Active Power Use : 0.068W
Idle Power Use: 0.042W
While the actual measured use is 0.31W for idle and over 3W for active. That's about 50x higher, what's going on here? Reply
btb - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkYeah, and no measurement of read power usage. Even though the typical user probably do an order of a magnitude more reads than writes. But thats a general anandtech testing problem, too much focus on the write specs instead of the more important read specs. Reply
ssj3gohan - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkSee my comment above here: Anandtech measures the power consumption wrongly. DIPM is not enabled, which causes ridiculously much higher power consumption. Reply
krumme - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThe Anand hd bench was an excellent tool for comparisons, and one of the great tools Anand provided for us for delivering bm that reflected real world usage.
What i derived from the first 2010 results was that the samsung disk was bad, but not so bad as it was portrayed by the reviewers and Anand. They were not worth their money, but they were slammed way to hard. At that time if we look at fx. strartup times, they were practically as fast as the fastest, so the criticism was ok, but a tad overblown.
At that time many producers was as Anand said, not focusing enough on random 4k, but i can say for sure, nothing but random 4k write was usable here at anandtech at that time too :) Reply
sheh - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkAs usual, I'm curious about the data retention properties of drives, and how they change across a drive's lifespan as P/E cycles increase. It would be difficult to check directly, but perhaps the manufacturers can reveal the details? I also wonder if TLC will be disastrous in this regard. Reply
Kristian Vättö - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI asked about that in the Q&A session we had with Samsung engineers today but unsurprisingly, they couldn't tell us specific numbers. I hope to get my hands on 120GB 840 and 128GB 840 Pro to see what's the write endurance like, though that will take a while to test. Reply
FunBunny2 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkIt looks like even the Pro has no standby cap? How can that be anything better than a toss away consumer drive? Reply
sheh - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThey couldn't/wouldn't give numbers on P/E cycles or retention time?
If you have a secret AnandTech stash of P/E exhausted drives (or could create one :), how about checksumming everything and testing every few months? Reply
Pneumothorax - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkWhile the 840 Pro kicks ass, I wonder if the 3bpc 840 is going to have less endurance while offering the same performance as the previous gen 830 drive... If that's the case buy them up while they're on sale in the next few months before they run out. Unless another SSD maker comes out with a drive that tops the 840 Pro, it's going to command a premium price per gb for some time. Reply
Pixelpusher6 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI ended up buying a Samsung 830 about a year ago and I have absolutely loved it, fast performance plus rock stable. I might consider grabbing one of these when the price comes down a bit.
I was wondering if say Samsung or any other SSD manufacturer didn't care about power consumption as much, and say clocked those 3 cortex A9 cores @ 700Mhz instead of 300, would 4k random performance increase significantly? Or are these SSDs mainly limited by firmware still even at 300Mhz, so increasing the clockspeed won't have much impact. What about if they added a 4th core instead of increase clock speed? Reply
apmon2 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI would be interested to see numbers for the 840 pro and other SSDs for random 4k read performance at high queue depth.
On my Samsung 32Gb msata SSD I get about 60Mb/s of 4kb random read at queue depth of 1. However at e.g. queue depth of 10 I see random read rates of over 250Mb/s!
I don't know how typical hi depth 4kb random read are on desktop loads, but for server applications like e.g. databases it is pretty common. Reply
frombauer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link... to replace my aging Intel 320 series (300GB). Just wondering if it will make a tangible (in my eyes) difference in day to day use, since I don't care about benchmarking. Maybe it will be better to pick up a cheaper 830 which is proven to be reliable... either way, the Intel will go to my PS3 since I'm pretty sure it will be nearly useless to sell in the used market. Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI'm kind of in a similar boat, kind of wanting to upgrade my desktop's 160GB 320 with a drive that's faster and a bit more spacious. I had paired it with a 64GB Samsung 830 to free up the space used by the memory swap file, but I probably wouldn't do that if I got a larger drive.
I could probably use the 64GB drive for my Steam folder, but I'd still be left with the 160 GB 320, as well as another 40 GB 320...it's like, what would I use those drives for? I guess I could hang onto them for when I get around to building a Linux box... Reply
FunBunny2 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link-- I had paired it with a 64GB Samsung 830 to free up the space used by the memory swap file
I've always wondered: a swap file gets hammered, so when partitioning a drive with some swap and some user file system, does leveling only happen *within* the user defined partition? Or does the controller (or varying by controller) level across devices without regard to partitions?
If not, then a sacrificial small drive as swap is much safer. Reply
DanNeely - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkWIth any modern SSD there's no correlation between where a file is located on the nand ships and the location the file system driver is telling the SSD to write to. Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI had thought about that as well, when I decided to move the swap file; I wish Windows would let you move the hibernate image file too, for the same reason. That being said, though...I'm just not that worried about it, anymore. I don't think swap files or even hibernating your computer are going to do your SSD in prematurely. Reply
iamezza - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThere really wouldn't be any difference in day to day usage, unless you have some really out of the ordinary patterns. Most day to day stuff will hardly stress an SSD at all. Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkReally? 'Cause I have to say I never felt that the 320 quite lived up to all the hype about SSDs. And the sequential read times of the 840 should be significantly higher than those of the 320, right? Meaning that your boot times, application load times, level load times, etc. should be noticeably faster? Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI think I might move my Steam folder to my 64GB 830 (if it hasn't grown too large) and see if Portal II level load times improve. The write times take a hit due to the smaller number of NAND chips, but the read times should be mostly limited by SATA 3 bandwidth. I'll try to pop back in here with a report of any improvements that I see. Reply
Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkLong story short, despite the fact that the 830 64GB beats out the 320 160GB in seven of eight CrystalDiskMark tests (88% in sequential reading, 95% in 512K random read, and so on, except for 4K random write with a queue depth of 32, where the Intel is 70% faster)...
...I honestly can't say it takes noticeably less time to either load games like Portal, Portal 2, or Quantum Conundrum, or to load levels/saves in those games. Portal 2 might start up a tiny bit faster on the new drive, but I certainly wouldn't swear to it. Reply
repoman27 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThe article mentions that this drive uses the new Toggle 2.0 interface which operates at 400 Mbps, however individual packages are clearly capable of more than that if 8 packages can provide sequential speeds greater than 400 MB/s.
My understanding is that both ONFI 3.0 and Toggle 2.0 support data rates of 400 MT/s. It would seem that the maximum transfer size for ONFI is 8 bits, so they claim 400 MB/s for the interface. Is the 400 Mbps number for Toggle 2.0 a per die figure? Is it not also capable of 8 bits per transfer and thus 400 MB/s as well? Reply
Kristian Vättö - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link400Mbit/s is the speed of the Toggle-Mode 2.0 interface but the the interface is 8 bits wide, making the maximum throughput 400MB/s per interface. I know it's stupid that they say 400Mbps because it's just confusing Reply
MrMilli - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link"The basic architecture of the controller hasn't changed. Internally there are three ARM9 cores now running at 300MHz."
It's not using ARM9 cores any longer. It's now using Cortex R4 cores. I would say that's a big enough change to say that the basic architecture has changed. Reply
Kristian Vättö - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkYou are correct. Samsung's reviewer's guide originally said ARM9 but yesterday's slides said ARM R4, hence the confusion here :-) Reply
Jocelyn - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkThank You for the review Anand, but is there any chance you and Kristian could start controlling the variables that are not being tested in future SSD reviews? CPU power saving features (EIST/Turbo) being left on in some reviews, while off in others, definitely affects performance. Reply
jwcalla - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkI have yet to see an SSD that gets better than 75% of the SATA theoretical max -- even SATA II drives. Can the interface really have 25% lost to inefficiencies? That seems like a lot of overhead. Reply
repoman27 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkSATA uses 8b/10b encoding, so 6Gb/s becomes 600MB/s. Then, just like any transfer protocol, there's additional protocol overhead. The AS-SSD sequential read speeds posted by this drive would demonstrate just better than 85% efficiency, which is not too shabby. Reply
Oxford Guy - Monday, September 24, 2012 - link"The first Samsung MLC SSDs were reliable, they just weren't worth the money when you had much better options from companies like Intel."
Intel stuck it to X25M G1 owners by refusing to provide a firmware update to support TRIM. If you're going to praise Intel and criticize Samsung so much in the opening of an article, that should have been noted. Reply
stoked - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkDo these drives include power loss protection like the Intel 320's? Reply
Kristian Vättö - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkSimply and shortly, no. However, Samsung showed a few enterprise SSDs as well, which may have (they were simply on display, so I'm not sure). Reply
lunadesign - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkAnand - How does this drive do in cases where TRIM isn't an option? How does it compare to the M5 Pro in this area? Reply
kpo6969 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkAnand- If you only had a choice of two drives to put in your own system would you go with this one or the Plextor M5 Pro? Just wondering, thanks. Reply
Zoomer - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkHowever, the new Sandforce controller isn't out yet. We'll see. Reply
Magichands8 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkTechnically this all looks great. Nice performance and power characteristics across the board. But where is the real distinguishing factor? All these drives are getting capped out thanks to SATA limitations and how much am I going to notice the difference between 500 MB/s and 490 MB/s in real world usage? Prices remain high and capacities remain low. We have reliability, high performance, low power usage and even TRIM over RAID now. SAMSUNG, INTEL, MICRON, OCZ, SANDISK, are you listening?! We need higher CAPACITIES, NOT irrelevant PERFORMANCE gains from intermittent firmware tweaks every six months!
I read somewhere that it's going to take another year/year-and-a-half for them to build/expand/retool plants to the point where we can see reasonable capacity increases at reasonable prices but it's very frustrating and disappointing to see basically no improvement upon capacities with extremely sluggish price improvement. It's getting to the point where I'm not even interested in new SSD reviews anymore.
However if capacities ever hit 2TB+ for $250-$300 I have a hard time imagining what could compel me to buy traditional HDDs when my main concerns with such an array would boil down to a mechanical failure somewhere, heat, noise and space (which are all addressed by SSDs). I'm sure that the new tech coming down the pipes for magnetic storage are going to do wonders for capacities but at some point that almost becomes a liability since there will always be a huge performance bottleneck. Reply
seapeople - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkConsidering that I paid ~$2/GB for an Intel SSD just 18 months ago, and now drives that are twice as fast are selling for half as much, I'd say you're being unreasonably impatient. Reply
Grok42 - Monday, September 24, 2012 - linkPrices are going down, they are still just very high per GB compared to magnetic drives. If they can get in the range of double the cost of HDDs in the next 2-3 years I think you'll see everything move over to SSD given all the other benefits.
I think what you're feeling is that the capacity isn't going up at all. I can't really see being able to buy a 2TB SSD for less than $400 in the next few years. I do see being able to buy a 250GB drive for $80 which is about 2x what an equivalent 500GB regular HDD costs if you bought two SSDs. Seems capacity is very non-linear and nothing has improved. Reply
FunBunny2 - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkThe capacity issue could be mitigated a whole bunch if the SSD folks built them on 3.5 form factor. Some truly enterprise SSD vendors till do. The volume difference is substantial. Instead, we get TLC stuff. Reply
Death666Angel - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - link3.5" drives have the same dice in there as 2.5" drives and the controller PCB layout wouldn't be any cheaper either. If you look at prices of current generation SSDs, the 256GB version usually have the best price/GB. Unless you are saying that NAND packages with more dice are more expensive (which I can't see when I compare drives of different NAND package sizes with one another, often enough those with 4 dice are cheaper than those with 2 dice), then I don't see how going to 3.5" SSDs is going to make capacities cheaper. Reply
B3an - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkWhen will you guys have the 840 Pro added to Bench? Reply
Kristian Vättö - Thursday, September 27, 2012 - linkHere you go: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/665 Reply
hrrmph - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - link
On the recent SSD reviews, thanks for taking the time to let us know about the tool box utilities!!
After years of using OCZ, I just deployed my first Intel 520 a month ago. It's a solid 'no hiccup' performer so far.
Now that the 840 Pro makes Samsung competitive with the best SSDs on performance, warranty, and utilities, I look forward to trying it out.
I particularly like the idea of being able to use the Samsung Magician software to set the spare area. All of my machines have other drives for bulk data, so being able to allocate some unused space on the SSD for use as spare area seems logical.
- Reply
zer0sum - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkWhy are some SSD tests on AT being run with Z68, 2500k @ 3.3ghz with turbo and EIST enabled, 1600Mhz ram, and then this one with H67, 2600k @ 3.4 with turbo and EIST disabled, and 1333Mhz ram?
Does this effect performance in any of the tests? Reply
Per Hansson - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkIt very well might, EIST has been known to cause problems for SSD's in the past.
Also would be very interesting to hear Anands thoughts on the power consumption concerns raised above (DIPM: Device Initiated Power Management) Reply
Per Hansson - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkA quick Google shows the first link to Anandtech's own forums, and a quite good confirmation that EIST affects performance by a quite noticeable margin!
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=eist+ss... Reply
zer0sum - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkOk, I had lower than expected 4k write scores with my 3570k @4.5ghz, using EIST and turbo mode so I went with some advice and ran a single thread of prime95 whilst doing an AS-SSD run.
Big difference!!
http://www.overclock.net/t/1242088/official-vertex... Reply
mr. president - Tuesday, September 25, 2012 - linkNice review. I'd still want to see more 'exotic' use cases tested and especially ones that test garbage collection where TRIM isn't available.
ZiL ZFS and software RAID spring to mind. Or, from a more consumer oriented standpoint, the PS3 can benefit from an SSD but it has no TRIM support. Reply
serpretetsky - Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - link"Assuming the premature death of our review sample was a fluke and not indicative of a bigger issue,"
Care to elaborate on this? It simply failed after you guys ran all the tests on it?
Is there any way you guys might get another sample and run it through the same (or harder) tests?
Thanks for the review, you guys are awesome. Reply
capeconsultant - Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - linkI second this request :) Reply
Kristian Vättö - Wednesday, September 26, 2012 - linkWe managed to run all of our normal tests (i.e. the stuff needed for this review) and Anand was simply running some enterprise tests to see how the 840 Pro behaves there. This is quite normal testing for us, so it's not like we were trying to break the drive on purpose.
A new drive is already on its way to Anand, plus I have the regular 840. Reply
Benny_k80 - Friday, November 16, 2012 - linkWhat happened to the information about the defect drives? Did Samsung have any explanation? Reply
hasseb64 - Thursday, September 27, 2012 - linkWhy the big differens between claimed and tested power consumption?
Roughly 3 watts is very high in a ultrabook, are there any sub 1 watt SDD left out there? Reply
Per Hansson - Friday, September 28, 2012 - linkhasseb64: look at the previous comments regarding DIPM & EIST.
There might be some problems with the testing performed, lack of DIPM can have a huge power consumption difference...
The sampling interval of the device they use to measure power consumption is also very important since SSD's switch power states very very frequently... Reply
GullLars - Friday, September 28, 2012 - linkI just have to say, this drive impressed me. If the stability is the same as 830 Samsung has a real winner here.
One of the things i note here is something i've noticed the lack of in other SSDs earlier, and been vocal about. Since the SSDs have large DRAM buffers, they should easily be able to use it as a read-ahead for small block sequential and low QD sequential reads. Going by the iometer 128KB seq read and ATTO graphs, i'd say this is exactly what samsung has done.
It also seems they have implemented a decent sized write buffer to do the same for writes. Let's hope it's implemented safely so you don't loose or corrupt data on powerloss.
I've been recommending 830 lately, and if early reports (after the first month) indicate 840 pro is stable, it will be the my recommendation if the prices are decent.
With the maxing of SATA 6Gbps getting close (or is already here?), it's now time for SATA Express or just native PCIe SSDs. Reply
thefizzle656 - Monday, October 01, 2012 - linkHey Kristian between the 840 Pro and the M5 Pro which would you choose? It would be going into a 2011 MBP for both OS X and Boot Camp. I'm looking to get a 512 GB drive and it looks like the M5 Pro is going to coming in at less than $450, so my thought is to get the drive that is the cheapest. Please let me know. Thanks. Reply
chrcoluk - Friday, October 12, 2012 - linkWhilst these benchmarks all look pretty sweet, they ultimately dont mean much.
In real world usage I expect a 840 PRO wont feel any faster than my 830 at all, and the fact they sweep aside a quickly driving drive as not relevant is a worry.
Whilst performance is important, reliability is something I value higher. Also value for money shouldnt be ignored either, so in my opinion the best thing about this drive is it is making the 830 cheaper.
Also the non pro 840 uses TLC which I suspect reduces life expectancy and increases CRC error rates, I would avoid the normal 840 completely whilst MLC drives are still on the market.
So thanks for the review and thanks for the price drops samsung so now I can buy another 830 this time for my laptop :). Reply
dgigibao - Wednesday, October 17, 2012 - linkSeveral times you recommend the Samsung 830 for Mac OSX users for the same kind of controller whitch Apple in puts in their factory SSD. Whould would recommend 840 Pro for Mac OSX users to? Reply
Benny_k80 - Tuesday, November 13, 2012 - linkWhat happened to the information about the defect drives? Did Samsung have any explanation? Reply
FCss - Wednesday, November 14, 2012 - linkI was about to buy this SSD today and just went through the article again and saw the update about the second drive dying. I hope it's not a design flaw. Reply
Benny_k80 - Thursday, November 15, 2012 - linkMe too. I'm about to order one but i wont do it until i get any clarification :( Reply
Beaver M. - Sunday, November 18, 2012 - linkI guess thats why they are still not available/have been not available for so long.
Still, Samsung should have told Anandtech already whats going on... Reply
KenCl - Monday, November 26, 2012 - linkI'm seeing them in stock all the time now. I was just about to order one when I saw that updated comment about both samples dying. I was patting myself on the back for not jumping in on the bleeding edge and had decided that now the technology is mature enough and reliable plus the comfort of the 5 yr warranty so time to dive in....
Of course, 2 samples dying, while a bit off putting, is far from statistically significant.
Well, there are a lot of good deals on Intel SSD's right now.... Reply
gerlin - Thursday, January 24, 2013 - linkHas anyone successfully enabled encryption?
When I enable the HD Password setting in my BIOS, as soon as I reboot the laptop and enter the password when prompted I get a disk error message. I have tried this on two different ThinkPad laptops and with two different SSD 840 Pro Drives.
Luckily, I can go back into BIOS, enter the password I created and remove the password and the drives show up fine. I read that some OCZ SSD drives had issues with BIOS passwords and that was fixed with a SSD firmware update. I don't know if this has a similar issue with my ThinkPads.
I talked to Samsung support, though they basically said it should work and they have not heard of any issues. I don't think many users actual enable the BIOS HD Password (and therefor enable the encryption protection).
I don't think there is really anything I could be doing wrong *though I would be happy is someone could tell me I am), since it is a simple matter of just enabling the password in BIOS. I know I am using the assigned password and that the drive accepts it, since it lets me past the prompt when I put the correct password. The problem is that at that point the drive looks invalid to BIOS. It doesn't just skip the drive, I get a "Error 0200 Failure Fixed Disk 0" error and my only option is to enter BIOS.
I have an old conventional drive with hardware FDE that works fine on the same laptop.
So, again, I am just wondering is this is working for anyone else? Reply
Breta - Monday, February 25, 2013 - linkBeware of these drives. They are not reliable. I have 2 piece of this. They can't be used in the RAID Array. They freeze in the range 2-48 hours and become unavailable to next computer power off/on cycle. Samsung refuses any support to correct this bug. Samsung support said.
"Samsugn does not provide RAID support regarding the units. The units can be placed in the array however it is at the users discretion." Reply
TorwaK - Wednesday, April 03, 2013 - linkThanks for the heads up. I was planning to buy 2 units of 840 Pro and use them in RAID 0 mode. :( Reply


text:
Learn more about R G TREVORROW LIMITED. Check the company's details for free and view the Companies House information, company documents and list of directors.
Know about every new company document that is added!
Take advantage of our watch this company feature free of charge and have notifications sent directly to your inbox. Whenever a new document appears on this website, or if their particulars change, you will be immediately informed about such changes. To monitor these changes, all you need to do is click on watch this company.
Information about the Private Limited Company R G TREVORROW LIMITED has been prepared for information purposes only. It is not intended to be nor does it constitute legal advice. This is public information provided by the official company register.


text:
By clicking submit you agree to our T & CBook Now
You will receive your OTP on 9986293101Want to change your mobile no?
We will contact you shortly.
"Are you looking for good painters in B. Narayanapura, Bangalore who can paint your dream home? Your search ends at Gapoon.com! We offer the most convenient painting experience to our customers through our reliable and trusted services. We offer wide range of customized packages to choose from according to your needs and requirements."
The first impression that a visitor forms about you and your tastes is how your house looks from outside. So its very crucial to be very careful while choosing the colours you use so that it reflects your personality perfectly. Our professionals not only help you in choosing the right colour and texture but also help in turning your dream home to reality. With upfront economical rates and highly professional services, Gapoon provides the best painting contractors in B. Narayanapura, Bangalore. With the special weatherproof, waterproof or anti-fungal paints, Gapoon offers the best and most reliable way to enhance your sweet home's look and life.
The process of exterior painting involves jet water cleaning, chipping out the loose particles, crack fixing using Dr. Fixit, primer if applicable, single/double coat painting, post paint cleaning etc. The most skilled painters in B. Narayanapura, Bangalore carry the painting job with the most advanced machinery.
Painting work executed professionally Painting was done in my 3bhk apartment. I am satisfied with quality and post cleanup of floor. I recommend their services.
Good service Customer service and the staff are very well behaved and professional. Would recommend to go for their services.
Good service Helpful enough to help with sorting the issue. A good follow-up after the service was done.
Explore our wide range of trending services and get acquainted with the array of painting services that we provide through the help of our vendors. Our trending services are a right option for all your household problems. Check and choose the below-mentioned painting services as per your requirement.


text:
Sorry! We do not have any doctors in Sector 48. So, we have listed other trusted and experienced doctors in Gurgaon
List of best Paediatric Ophthalmologist Doctors from trusted hospitals in Sector 48, Gurgaon. Get detailed info on educational qualification, experience and other credentials of Paediatric Ophthalmologist Doctors in Sector 48, Gurgaon. Check OPD schedule and book appointment online with best Paediatric Ophthalmologist from top hospitals in Sector 48, Gurgaon. Call 8010- 994- 994 to talk to in-house Credihealth experts for FREE medical assistance to choose the right Paediatric Ophthalmologist, get options for Second Opinion or other other medical assistance.
A paediatric ophthalmologist is a doctor who is qualified for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases and disorders related to the human eye of an infant to that of a growing child. Paediatric Opthalmologist is both a medical and surgical expert in the treatment of eye diseases such as Conjunctivitis (pink eye), Stye, and Blocked Tear Duct.


text:
Everyone deserves beautiful skin, but not everyone's skin acts the same. That's why you need a skin care regimen that addresses the unique features of your skin's needs.
This Skin Scientific Personalized Analysis ("skin s.p.a.") will help identify your skin condition and create a personalized regimen that gives you the products perfect for your skin, so your skin acts and looks just as beautiful as you are.
In a few short steps we will create a skin care regimen customized for your skin. All you have to do is:
• Let us know your Skin Sensor™ results
• Answer a few questions
• Receive your personalized analysis and skin care regimen


text:
Maurkice Pouncey apologizes for supporting Hernandez
Published: Monday, July 15, 2013 at 1:13 p.m.
Last Modified: Monday, July 15, 2013 at 1:13 p.m.
PITTSBURGH — Pittsburgh Steelers All-Pro center Maurkice Pouncey has apologized for wearing a baseball cap supporting former college teammate Aaron Hernandez.
Pouncey and his twin brother Mike, a center for the Miami Dolphins, were photographed wearing hats that read "Free Hernandez" during their co-birthday party in Miami on Saturday night.
Hernandez played at the University of Florida with the Pounceys from 2007-09. The former New England Patriots tight end is charged with murder in the killing of Boston semi-pro football player Odin Lloyd. Hernandez has pleaded not guilty.
Maurkice Pouncey posted on his Twitter account Monday he understands the "seriousness of the situation involving my former teammate." Pouncey added he regrets making light of the situation and apologized if he offended anyone.
The Steelers had no immediate comment.
Reader comments posted to this article may be published in our print edition. All rights reserved. This copyrighted material may not be re-published without permission. Links are encouraged.


text:
Verizon iPhone 4: Thoroughly Reviewedby Brian Klug on 2/13/2011 9:32 AM EST
35 Comments
Back to Article
shakyone - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkWife got the VZ iPhone 6 days ago. I use an Android phone. After one week, I have yet to experience one dropped call of 23, since it arrived, (used Android's call Log). It is as reliable as her VZ Blackberry. The audio is as good too. My brother has an AT&T iPhone 3GS. I don't talk to him that often, but it has dropped calls on me 3 of the last 7 times I called him in the last four months. I don't have much experience with friends that have the AT&T iPhone 4G. Reply
MonkeyPaw - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkATT iPhone 3G user here. I have dropped calls all the time. Doesn't matter where I am. Our other phone is a cheap T-mobile phone, and even with a cheap 2 year old flip phone, calls rarely failed. The worst that happened was poor call quality on occasion. Reply
Wiggy McShades - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkWhere do you live? I'm in the Boston area and have never once had a dropped call using an iphone 3g and now an iphone 4. I'm pretty certain my location is why I've had such a great experience with at&t, are you not near a major city? Or is it really just luck that the area I'm in is well covered? Reply
JimmiG - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkThat really is abysmally slow.. not fast enough to watch video at decent quality, for example. I get around 3500kbps down/1400 up in my apartment on the outskirts of town using the HTC Desire and HSDPA, faster near urban centers.
I wouldn't call it a smartphone unless you get at least 2Mb, maybe 1.5Mb/s out of it, since slower speeds render many of the features unusable, limiting you to texting and maybe browsing with images turned off. Reply
dagamer34 - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkSome signal is better than no signal at all. Reply
Shadowself - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkThis is *absolutely* true. Some signal is better than none.
However, as the article mentions, this is very dependent on the individual. One person may almost never experience dropped calls on AT&T due to where and when they use their phone. In such a situation that person may adamantly prefer the AT&T iPhone over the Verison model. Alternately, another person may use their phone -- even in the same city -- in locals and at times where the phone routinely drops calls due to AT&T's network issues. In this case that user would just as adamantly prefer Verison over AT&T.
My wife's personal experience is that the parking lot of her office is a true Verizon dead zone. There is virtually no detectable signal there at all even with very sophisticated equipment and large antennas. You have to move several hundred yards from her parking lot (in almost any direction) for any Verizon phone to work. Verizon has known about this dead spot for over 8 years and has yet to negotiate a new tower in the area (or modify existing towers) to fill that hole. Therefore, for her Verizon is not an option.
It all comes down to what you need and *your" use. Reply
vol7ron - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkOh no. These Verizon vs AT&T flame-wars are almost worse than the Microsoft vs Apple.
At least in the later, you had a constant product difference. In service providers its subject to location. And in major cities, I've never had a problem with AT&T except in metros, where they didn't have antennas and Vzn decided to put some up and large venues where you got a lot of units in one tight area at the same time, like large conferences or concerts.
I've had just as much trouble with Verizon black spots as I've had with AT&T. It's all based on where you are and where you travel. Reply
asandok - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkIn ifixit's teardown they say the wi-fi antenna is what you point out to be the cell antenna. Which is it? It looks like they made a boo boo. Awesome write up though! Love these! Reply
Brian Klug - Monday, February 14, 2011 - linkIndeed, the component they pointed to and called the WiFi antenna is the first of two cellular feed lines, and that part has indeed not changed. It's for cellular (and was on the GSM/UMTS iPhone) and not WiFi. Even the FCC correctly labels it as being a feed line for cellular. WiFi has always been at the top in the same place with the same package, though the WiFi antenna did change slightly with the Verizon version.
-Brian Reply
Montrey - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkFunny you mention how inaudible the vibrate is. I had my Verizon iPhone on vibrate during a physics test Friday, it rang in the pocket of my jeans and my professor heard it 20 feet away and threatened to kick me out if I didn't turn off my phone. Maybe he just has superhuman hearing, I thought it was pretty quiet, especially compared to the droid eris it just replaced. Reply
hsew - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linklolnoobs and LOLphone?
I lol'd at the speed tests. Makes me wish I bought an iPad when the data was still unlimited. Reply
guest123 - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkFirst off, thanks for the typically thorough review, Brian.
I wonder, though, about your conclusion that the Verizon iPhone is "significantly less prone to unintended signal attenuation." True, in the "cupping tightly" scenario the Verizon iPhone is now in line with other leading smartphones, and in the "holding naturally" scenario it improves on the performance of the At&T model. But the Verizon iPhone is still significantly more prone to attenuation in the "holding naturally" scenario than any of the phones you've listed. To me, this was always the real point of the attennagate controversy: as your chart shows, the At&T iPhone is more prone to attenuation when held naturally than other phones are when held in a death grip. Based on your results, the Verizon version has improved, but only to the extent that it attenuates about as badly when held naturally as other phones do when death-gripped. That still seems like a non-trivial problem. Reply
jmcb - Monday, February 14, 2011 - linkI'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed that..... Reply
jmcb - Monday, February 14, 2011 - linkNoticed that when held naturally its still worse than any other phone on the list.... Reply
7Enigma - Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - linkI agree with you as well. I did not like the wording in this section as 99% of people using a PHONE are going to hold it like a PHONE. So while the other numbers are nice to have for specific usage scenarios, the one that is the most important, while improved, is still significantly worse than anything else (other than the AT&T iPhone). Reply
mike55 - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkI've noticed that the AT&T iPhone 4's have varying degrees of warmer screens than the relatively cooler screen on the AT&T unit you mentioned in this review. I would be interested in seeing how the different screens compare in terms of black level, maximum brightness, color accuracy, etc.
Maybe you guys could get a bunch of units and compare them. It would be interesting to see how other smartphones fare in terms of display panel variance from unit to unit. I'm sure all of the display nerds like myself would appreciate such an article. :D Reply
cgalyon - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkHow does this review not say, "it's the iPhone 4, on Verizon. The radio is different, the rest is the same."? Reply
7Enigma - Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - linkIf that's what you think why click on the review? And why comment? Reply
Voldenuit - Sunday, February 13, 2011 - linkWell, obviously the EU regulatory iconography (CE, CE compliance identifier, CE Alert icon) didn't need to exist anymore since a CDMA phone is pretty useless in Europe.
I'm surprised that the FCC label also vanished, though. Reply
LTG - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link1) Great facts - You somehow took a topic I thought would be a snoozer and extracted quite a bit of interesting detail i hadn't read before.
2) Great prose - The general approach, style, and constant attention to what readers are thinking. Feels like we're discovering it all with you.
3) Technical writing mistakes - i didnt notice any! I know it sounds like a really lame point. But it actually is a nice benefit to not be jarred out concentration by typos or grammar mistakes. Its like a luxury on the Internet and makes the experience so smooth.
With all the comments critical of writing here I think its fair to call out the opposite side as well.
Peace - Reply
walmartshopper - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link"With the phone facing up, the first cellular antenna consists of the new strip at the very top. The second is the strip running from the bottom left, across the bottom, and up the right side of the phone. The far left side with volume buttons and the vibrate switch is part of the WiFi and Bluetooth antenna."
In the picture below that, the phone is face down, so shouldn't the colored labels be reversed? Reply
ol1bit - Monday, February 14, 2011 - linkI know in the city it "might" not make a difference, but here in Phoenix, AZ (no hills, etc). My AT&T work phone drops out just driving from Goodyear to downtown on the morning commute (I-10). My Verizon droid does not.
Next up: offroading
Doesn't matter where I have been, my AT&T phone lost signal pretty much as soon as I hit the dirt. My friends Verizon phones worked 90% of the time.
So I waited and waited for a powerful Smart phone on Verizon and I got my Droid. No more no-signal! I was on a power line dirt road 30 mile from Prescott with terrain mapping on and seeing the little more that cow trails on one of my 3 day quad trips, it was a big help!! My work AT&T phone dead for the entire 3 days!
So the difference may not be much in the city, but where Verizon really shines is outside of the city. It was simply amazing that I had data so far out and not even voice with my At&T phone. Reply
7Enigma - Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - linkI kept finding myself trying to figure out which phone in your review was the Verizon and which the AT&T. For those of us not up on the lingo of UMTS and CDMA it is a bit confusing. I would have preferred if you had just changed these to say Verizon and AT&T so I could read it more fluidly without constantly having to sit and think which carrier you are talking about.
Great review though!
Thanks Reply
chupacabramike - Thursday, February 17, 2011 - linkGuh I can't believe people are still defending at&t service. Look at any customer satisfaction stat..any of them and you will see Verizon soars while at&t sinks. Being able to actually use your phone as a phone priceless. Thank you Apple and Verizon for finally giving us a choice. Reply
pshen7 - Thursday, February 17, 2011 - linkCan't wait for the Verizon iPhone! I'm tired of the dropped calls from ATT. My contract is up too so switching should be easy. I'm sure millions feel the same way like I do.
Peter, founder of http://koowie.com : Search.Post.Connect. Reply
Laughing Coyote - Thursday, February 17, 2011 - linkFYI, the AT&T iPhone 4 doesn't come with a SIM ejector tool either. Though it apparently does in some other countries.
http://www.apple.com/iphone/specs.html Reply
skyflyrr - Thursday, February 17, 2011 - linkWorking in the RF wireless field I must commend you on the first accurate tear down and labeling of components of the Verizon iPhone 4. Reply
Reviews of Reviews - Friday, February 18, 2011 - linkFor a not-quite-so-thorough review of this review, check out www.reviewsofreviews.com Reply
fadam - Sunday, February 20, 2011 - linkOn the second page, it seems that the paragraph describing the location of the antennas does not match the photo. The text references the iPhone being "face up" while the photo shows the phone face down. The highlighting of the antennas would need to be mirrored in the picture in order to match the text. Really enjoyed the writeup. Reply
asandok2 - Monday, February 21, 2011 - linkThanks for the reply! I thought that would be the case! I found a thread on macforums from last year where a guy speculates that the backplate has something to do with the antenna system too.
Any idea if there is truth to his theory?? Is that part of the cellular antenna too?? Thanks in advance! Reply
pshen7 - Tuesday, February 22, 2011 - linkNow that the iPhone will be part of Verizon, will there be less dropped calls? I don't know if the dropped calls were because of ATT network or the high volume of iPhone usage. If its the latter than the dropped calls will still continue. I am switching my service to Verizon so i guess I will find out.
Peter Shen, founder Koowie.com Reply
vks - Tuesday, February 22, 2011 - linkPlease leave a comment at below link:
vs-technologyhub.blogspot.com/2011/02/best-10-iphone-apps.html Reply
deepakjulien - Monday, March 21, 2011 - linkVerizon getting the iPhone would be a great news, but I feel upgrading at this point of time is not reasonable beacuse of these reasons listed here - http://deepakjulien.com/why-you-should-not-buy-the... Reply
deepakjulien - Monday, March 21, 2011 - linkHere is the network coverage and data plan review of the AT&T 3G and Verizon 3G networks and also few points one should know even before considering switching from GSM to CDMA network technologies - http://deepakjulien.com/verizon-vs-att-iphone-4.ht... Reply
George Kanyowile - Monday, September 03, 2012 - linkMy iPhone 4 reads Designed by Apple in Califomia Assembled in TaiWan . CALIFOMIA + TaiWan ? Please help . Is this an original ? The serial number checked out when I followed one link , however. Reply


text:
Posted: 08 Aug 2006, 10:28
The Eten M600+ is a Pocket PC Phone and as expected it offers a lot but nothing more than the standard functionality. A plus is the large amount of integrated memory (256MB), but despite the powerful processor (400 MHz) you should not expect miracles. The display is a standard one and does not stand out neither in terms of quality, nor in size. The major problem is the basic phone functions the ringtone volume is not high enough and the sound quality during conversation in both directions is low, distorted and annoying. Design-wise it's pretty ordinary and does not catch the eye, while a bad impression comes also because of the fact that the buttons are not lit and are inconvenient to use


text:
This service offers detailed analysis and a five-year forecast for the technology and telecommunications industry in Philippines. It supplements this analysis with a long-term economic forecast and key market data.
You can choose to purchase an annual subscription to this content, 30-day access or individual articles.
After purchasing, you will be able to access your content online and in PDF report format. Access to this content is provided on a single-user licence* basis.
You can also purchase individual articles from the latest edition. Simply select the articles that you want and add to cart.
You can also purchase past editions or articles. Simply select the past issue that you want and add to cart.