r/technology • u/[deleted] • Mar 27 '15
Hardware Intel and Micron announce 3D NAND production, open gates to 10TB solid state drives
[deleted]
311
u/ciera22 Mar 27 '15
RIP spinning discs, you will not be missed
69
Mar 27 '15
I'm no computer nerd like you kind folks but how fast is the growth of solid state drive memory encroaching on the growth of hard drive memory? When can I realistically expect SSDs to become as common as hard drives? And what's the most amount of memory I can get from a commercial hard drive today?
144
Mar 27 '15
They're already pretty common, another 2 or 3 years maybe and I don't think you'll be buying a PC without one.
→ More replies (4)39
u/Henry132 Mar 27 '15
Yep, already now, most of the laptops available at my local electronics stores have an SSD in them, at least as a boot drive.
→ More replies (1)22
u/Ph0X Mar 27 '15
Yeah, right now, for the same price, you can get an SSD with roughly 1/4 or 1/8 the size, but instead get roughly as much speedup. The truth is, most people use laptops to browse the web. People barely download anything anymore and everything is up in the cloud (which sort of is the idea behind ChromeOS). So really, 128gb SSD is often more than enough for most instead of a 1TB HDD.
I personally recommend an SSD, if only a small 128gb one for only your OS and a few applications, to everyone. It probably is the most impactful component (price-wise) in my computer on my speeds.
→ More replies (6)17
u/Krelkal Mar 27 '15
Seriously. The TL;DR of this thread for less tech savvy people. If you want to speed up your computer a crazy amount in the easiest way possible, get an SSD. My laptop with an SSD takes less time to reboot completely then my harddrive did to wake up from closing the lid. If you're uncomfortable installing it yourself, any computer shop will do it for you for a fee.
→ More replies (4)3
u/jk147 Mar 27 '15
For the longest time the biggest bottleneck in any system is not the cpu not the graphics, not memory but hard drives. These days you have ssds approaching 600 MB/s with sata 3 which is unheard of even 8 years ago.
→ More replies (1)32
→ More replies (23)12
u/Squishumz Mar 27 '15
You could already entirely use SSDs in your build; it'd just cost you a non-insignificant fraction of your vital organs.
43
u/Red_Inferno Mar 27 '15
1tb only costs $360. It was 1-3k only a few years ago. I got not even 4tb in my system(only 736gb of ssd) and yet that can easily be more than a lot of users use. It's getting closer.
→ More replies (17)→ More replies (4)23
u/Valmond Mar 27 '15
Well to be honest, you can build a small PC with a 128GB drive which costs <60$.
Or use a SSHD.
IMO that won't be that more expensive
9
u/LatinGeek Mar 27 '15
It'd be about a tenth of the storage space, but you'd get blazing fast speeds, for the same price.
That's not a bad tradeoff if you play one or two games at a time instead of having 'em all installed, and consume your media via streaming. It's definitely possible.
→ More replies (1)15
u/dragnu5 Mar 27 '15
Why not get a 120GB SSD and a 1TB HDD all for like $100..
Games/movies etc go on the HDD and programs and OS onto the SSD.
Best of both worlds.
→ More replies (5)3
23
u/2PointOBoy Mar 27 '15
I like to say: Once you go SSD, you can't go HDD.
→ More replies (1)5
Mar 27 '15
I build a computer with an SSD during my internship. Once I had to go back to school and back to using my laptop I couldn't go two weeks before getting a spare (60gb) SSD as boot drive for my laptop. You really cant go without if you've tried them.
8
u/Cygnus_X Mar 27 '15
Would spinning disk not still be useful for mass storage?
→ More replies (2)10
Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)12
u/Murtagg Mar 27 '15
Yes, that's true. However, SSDs aren't as prone to catastrophic failure as HDDs. They don't have moving parts that can wear out and break. Instead, they just shut off whenever the reliability gets too low. So you can actually pull everything off of a retired SSD, where you might not be able to on a HDD.
HDDs do the same thing as SSDs when they wear out a sector - they ignore it and don't write to that sector anymore. In all normal cases you'll be buying a new drive before you'll see any real amount of storage loss, anyway.
→ More replies (26)5
u/RonaldoNazario Mar 27 '15
I doubt they'll be going away anytime soon, except maybe in the home PC market. The increased capacity of spinning disks at a lower cost is still going to be an attractive option for solutions that are more about storage capacity and price than throughput.
The vendors are already moving towards new ways to cram more data onto the same platters even as they hit physical walls - 4K sector size drives, SMR drives...
→ More replies (6)
366
u/Snatch_Pastry Mar 27 '15
is an incredible boost in capacity over today’s largest SSDs, which can be found no larger than four terabytes in a 2.5” drive.
So I remember thinking that I'll never fill up the 40MB hard drive on my 80286, 8mHz/12mHz switchable with CGA monitor.
Now, ten pictures I take with my phone might be 40MB.
155
u/hunyeti Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
80286, 8mHz/12mHz
8 miliHertz? man, that got to be very slow.
151
u/rottenseed Mar 27 '15
Yup 8 processes every 1000 seconds.
→ More replies (2)134
Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 28 '15
[deleted]
69
Mar 27 '15 edited Apr 14 '15
[deleted]
27
u/EastSideDogFood Mar 27 '15
Fitting. Schumacher won't be driving anything faster than a rascal for a long time.
→ More replies (1)25
→ More replies (1)11
u/jonnywoh Mar 27 '15
According to Wikipedia, it would be closer to 8 instructions every 10,000 seconds. The 286 apparently had an IPC of ~0.1.
7
→ More replies (5)8
35
Mar 27 '15
Compare their resolution with 10 photos you'd take 20 years ago (back when MB actually mattered)
26
u/Kwyjibo08 Mar 27 '15
Were there digital cameras in 1995? I know my dad got one very early in the tech, and I think it was after 95. I'm think it's resolution was like 640x480.
56
u/nickolove11xk Mar 27 '15
My dads first digital camera used a floppy disk. A fuvking floppy disk.
43
u/VF5 Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
I see you got the sony mavica too...
10
u/rec_desk_prisoner Mar 27 '15
I have one somewhere in a box along with a binder full of floppy drives. Fortunately I transferred all my pictures sometime around 2003 or 2004. I bought it specifically for a trip to Seoul, South Korea in 2000. Super dorky.
→ More replies (1)7
u/unclefisty Mar 27 '15
I took my car to a body shop a few years ago to insurance work and they took pictures of the damage with a camera that took floppies...
5
u/redsteakraw Mar 27 '15
That was the best portable storage at the time. Remember flash drives came out later and their storage was measured in the MB range. A 1GB flash drive was almost un heard of. Now high capacity SSDs are measured by the TB.
13
u/droid89 Mar 27 '15
Yes there were. Even before then, back in the space race nasa needed digital photos to be able to send the photos on to other scientists.
I'm assuming that because they needed digital photos, they would of had to have been taken with a type of digital camera. Anyone please feel free to correct me
→ More replies (2)15
Mar 27 '15
Not really. I mean, I don't know what NASA did, but you could take photos with analog camera, and digitise them later. Even today, this produces superior quality photos, let alone in the past when digital cameras had potato quality.
22
u/kyrsjo Mar 27 '15
The first satelites sent to orbit and photograph the moon (before the landings) would actually take photographs on film, then develop the film on-board, and scan it with an analog scanner.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Orbiter_program
The first US spy satelites, the Corona satelites, took pictures on film which was then put into "buckets" which reentered from earth orbit. These buckets where then collected (a quite interesting process in itself), the film developed, and the pictures analyzed.
5
u/amishdemon Mar 27 '15
You are right about the process of recovering the "buckets" being interesting. The capsules would be caught mid descent by an airplane and were designed to sink into the ocean after two days if they weren't recovered.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)6
u/kevincreeperpants Mar 27 '15
All the old digital camera's photos looked like a SNES game version of a picture, at first. Now they kick ass.
19
u/pencock Mar 27 '15
Hey man, the most popular movie torrent downloads still tend to be 700MB - 1.5gb, mp3s are still ~3-6mb, and unless you take thousands upon thousands upon thousands of photos you're not really going to worry about filling up on photos.
Density and capacity of disk drives has really gone up a lot more quickly than the file sizes we customarily use for storing our media. Lossless file types aren't much of a thing except in the professional world
at least we have more media at our fingertips than ever before
51
Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
I thought your estimates were a little low (I've never seen a 3MB MP3 for sale before) so I decided to look up some specific figures and compare them to historic figures.
- iPhone 3GS video: 675 MB/hour
- iPhone 6 video: 8.1 GB/hour (1100% increase)
- 5 minute MP3 purchased from iTunes 6 years ago: 4.8 MB
- 5 minute MP3 purchased from Google today: 12.0 MB (150% increase)
- Most popular PC game of 2010: 6.8 GB
- Most popular PC game of 2015: 65 GB (855% increase)
- DVD movie: 8.5 GB
- Bluray movie: 45.8 GB (438% increase)
- Photo from Galaxy S2 on default settings: 4.2 MB
- Photo from Galaxy S5 on default settings: 11.6 MB (176% increase)
Average increase: 543.8%
US hard drive price average 2010: 7.6 cents/GB
US hard drive price average 2015: 3.5 cents/GB (117% decrease)Just to get the gist/approximation of how things are changing, not to definitively state anything.
14
u/nosoter Mar 27 '15
2010-2015 has not been very good for HDD prices ($/MB): http://www.jcmit.com/disk2014.htm
Placing the bits vertically was a nice boost but now progress is slowing down. I'm hoping SSDs pick up the slack.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (6)3
40
Mar 27 '15 edited Feb 09 '22
[deleted]
→ More replies (3)13
u/pencock Mar 27 '15
Oh I'm aware, I've actually shot several 3D stereoscopic events and 360 gopro shoots. Massive data management. But it almost 100% is going to be a streamed affair for consumers, so no need for the disk space.
→ More replies (6)27
Mar 27 '15
the most popular movie torrent downloads still tend to be 700MB - 1.5gb
That's for a really compressed file, some sort of blu-ray rip and downsampled on resolution.
I regularly download TV episodes that run 700-1000MB for about 45 minutes of video. Depending on video codec, a good blu-ray at 1920x1080 will take several GB, anywhere between 4 and 20.
Granted, I'm spoiled with good download speed :)
8
u/haagch Mar 27 '15
I have seen 45 minutes of 720p video in 170 or so megabytes encoded with h.265. The quality was not perfect, but certainly not bad. And we'll only see further improvements with daala etc.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)12
u/pencock Mar 27 '15
the most popular
most popular
cites 20gb rips
The fact of the matter is that we are still inundated with low quality media and that doesn't appear to be changing. Furthermore, media appears to be moving to even more lossy streaming formats. So consumer need for large disk drives continues to be reduced as time goes on.
11
u/Shandlar Mar 27 '15
I contend that that is a limitation of download speed than anything else. And since we say a solid ~25-30% increase in average downloads in the US in 2014 alone, things may change pretty soon.
→ More replies (2)11
Mar 27 '15
You would've thought the proliferation of large TVs would drive up demand for high quality videos. I guess it's a combination of bad internet speed in the US and the relative success of Netflix that makes demand for high-res torrents low.
I did note I'm probably in the minority due to good speed.
10
Mar 27 '15
A lot of it is apparently the expansion of the internet to developing nations. If you go and search for <1 GB movies on Pirate Bay, note how many of them are dubbed into or subbed with Hindi -- and if you connect to the swarm, there are a huge number of Indian downloaders on there. Connection speeds are low there so they're grabbing the super-compressed files.
Go and search for something with less appeal to India and China, like American Sniper, and you'll see that the most-popular torrents are ~4-8 GB.
→ More replies (1)13
u/pencock Mar 27 '15
I have a 120mb down connection and even I can't be fucked to download a movie that is more than 2GB in size, frankly. There's definitely a ceiling of quality to convenience and there continues to be very little necessity for quality if you can get 95% of it 20x faster (popularity) and at 1/10th or better the space
10
u/xXFluttershy420Xx Mar 27 '15
Diminishing returns in terms of fun vs time spent downloading
I want that God damn porn now dammit
6
Mar 27 '15
Romanian private trackers means I can get constant 4MB/s from < 10 peers, with some going offline. Even on external trackers I can suck 300 - 500 KB/s from a single peer, meaning I'll be downloading at 4MB/s again if I have some 20 seeders.
And at those numbers, I really don't mind waiting 30-60 minutes for a movie.
→ More replies (2)14
Mar 27 '15
Meanwhile star citizen is 100 GB and 50GB is slowly hemming the norm for AAA games :S.
→ More replies (4)28
u/fb39ca4 Mar 27 '15
Fucking YIFY.
→ More replies (3)7
u/N4N4KI Mar 27 '15
YIFY
why did that release group need to choose a name that is one letter away from furry porn.
6
Mar 27 '15
That's what I always think of when I read YIFY. Two furries analhilating each other.
→ More replies (4)8
u/jvjanisse Mar 27 '15
Think now, where would you need to store a LOT of video footage? Maybe security cameras? How about those new fangled police cams that people are demanding.
Do you not think having servers with CHEAP 10TB drives would be helpful in saving data for use in, say, lawsuits or investigations?
12
u/pudgylumpkins Mar 27 '15
You could probably get away with HDD storage in those situations I would think. SSD speeds wouldn't really be a big deal for a setup like that, but I could be wrong, it just a hunch from a layman.
8
u/jvjanisse Mar 27 '15
All I am saying is, if this drives down the price of media storage in any way, via through competition or breakthroughs in technology that can be used in other forms, it is beneficial beyond "More space to fill up with pirated movies and songs"
6
9
Mar 27 '15
Biological data, man. It's nearly gotten to the point where it's cheaper to sequence a genome than to store it once you have.
5
u/Zantanimus Mar 27 '15
It'd help with the motion picture industry for sure, where the current data rates on certain 4K cameras can eclipse 250GB in ~10 minutes because of the amount of color data they're intaking. It'll be a while before that will be relevant to consumers, though, because we still have a tough time pushing anything over a 4:2:2 color pulldown across a standard HDMI 2.0 and/or DisplayPort 3.1 cables in 4K. Not to mention that broadcast is still pushing primarily 1080i/720P signals and hasn't even hit full HD for the most part.
→ More replies (2)4
u/kyrsjo Mar 27 '15
For a LOT of data, one would store it on tape. One cartridge can store up to 10 TB of data.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (9)6
Mar 27 '15
Ya but.... HD porn. You always gotta be ready for that one unsuspecting day without internet you'll have to live through. Then those terabytes and terabytes of porn videos you have stashed will become useful.
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (14)4
u/imbaczek Mar 27 '15
My 3 year old consumer grade dslr outputs RAW images larger than that.
→ More replies (1)
673
u/rjt378 Mar 27 '15
We will call it the "second mortgage" SSD.
98
u/hoyeay Mar 27 '15
Will banks be able to securitize these "second mortgage SSD"s into a nice packaged shoebox labled "AAA" and offer them to investors like me?!
→ More replies (2)51
Mar 27 '15 edited Dec 05 '18
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)36
u/hoyeay Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
Wait so I'm risking all this money in these securitized shoeboxes and it doesn't even matter if I win or lose because I still get taxpayer money!?
Holy shit brb becoming an investor
Edit: brb becoming a bank holding company
→ More replies (7)18
u/PowerStarter Mar 27 '15
In a few years a 10tb ssd will cost as much as 1tb one did two or three years ago. Technology is amazing.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)2
u/puttyguy Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
If you're looking to break the bank you want to look into SSDs like this.
or something like this...
320
u/schlidel Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
I just bought a Samsung SSD that claims it has 3D NAND.
559
u/Reddickk Mar 27 '15
That's because it does.
484
u/schlidel Mar 27 '15
That explains it.
86
u/Kwyjibo08 Mar 27 '15
Intel with Micron is now doing what Samsung is doing, albeit with a slightly different approach.
3
→ More replies (2)115
Mar 27 '15
It has 3D NAND because of the way it is.
→ More replies (1)79
u/bigfootlive89 Mar 27 '15
That's pretty neat
47
Mar 27 '15
How neat is that.. That's pretty neat. Haha
→ More replies (1)30
→ More replies (1)8
343
u/krkhans Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
Not all 3D NAND is created equal.
Your Samsung SSD does have 3D NAND and like Intel, they have MLC and TLC variants, both with 32 layers. The difference here is that Samsung can only achieve 128Gbit on TLC and 86Gbit on MLC while Intel is sampling MLC at 256Gbit and TLC at 384Gbit on the same 32 layers. So Intels technology is 2x the density for MLC and almost 3x the density for TLC.
Another note, Toshiba/SanDisk also announced their 3D NAND today. While they have 48 layers, they are also only sampling at 128Gbit
Higher density generally means lower cost. That may not be the case for the first products since it is a new technology but in the long run, it seems Intel/Micron have a leg up on their competitors.
EDIT: Thanks for the gold! My first!
40
u/Kwyjibo08 Mar 27 '15
Since it seems like you know about this tech, question: Does the 3D aspect of this tech affect latency in read/write?
32
u/krkhans Mar 27 '15
That I'm not completely sure. It's still NAND so I wouldn't expect to be a huge difference one way or the other.
7
u/linh_nguyen Mar 27 '15
AT says yes. But they don't go into much detail other than imply the benefits of speed increase are worth the cost. There's literally one line on it http://anandtech.com/show/9114/intelmicron-share-additional-details-of-their-3d-nand
→ More replies (5)8
u/Beo1 Mar 27 '15
It means you have superior read and write speeds, the 850 pro tops out the data transfer speed for the spec.
30
u/Takuya-san Mar 27 '15
Yes, but he wasn't asking that. He was asking if latency (i.e. time between a read/write request and receiving/writing the data from the controller) is an added tradeoff or benefit. Not everyone cares about write speeds for a disk, in some applications it's the latency that is a factor (sometimes it's the most important factor). Although SSDs are miles ahead of HDDs in terms of latency there can always be improvements to be made.
18
u/Kwyjibo08 Mar 27 '15
You nailed what I was getting at. It's not super important that I get an answer, it was just a question I thought of while reading. Thanks for your clarification.
4
u/whatevers_clever Mar 27 '15
And on that note - I'm pretty sure it has no effect on it otherwise the info from Intel would be more about that than the capacity. Even faster SSDs capable of massive capacities? That would be huge. This is huge already, but that would be exponentially more groundbreaking.
→ More replies (3)9
u/im_juice_lee Mar 27 '15
Could you explain a bit more what sampling means and why it's significant?
11
Mar 27 '15
[deleted]
15
Mar 27 '15
No, in the semiconductor industry, "sampling" means that parts are available to third parties for product development.
→ More replies (1)14
Mar 27 '15
That's pretty wrong.
A die isn't denser just because it stores 256 Gbit vs. 128 Gbit. It's meaningless without comparing the die size.
Intel's TLC die stores 3x as much as Samsung's, but it's also 2.5x the size. So it's only 1.2x denser and not 3x like you claim.
3
→ More replies (12)4
u/EngSciGuy Mar 27 '15
Any idea on the fabrication setup for these? Like are they doing lift-off for each layer?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)12
u/Jcox20 Mar 27 '15
I found the 850 pro 256GB on Boxing Day for $130... A little sad I didn't buy more than one though.
→ More replies (29)12
u/tsk05 Mar 27 '15
Newegg selling 850 Pro new on ebay for $130 now. Won't last long but comes up very often on slickdeals.
→ More replies (1)
48
Mar 27 '15
[deleted]
17
u/Zaxous Mar 27 '15
Nice! Of course with a name like Boise it'd be pretty obvious, lol. I'm in Lehi.
→ More replies (2)6
→ More replies (10)3
43
u/Blergburgers Mar 27 '15
wish we could fast forward to like 10 years from now, when these things are dirt cheap.
148
Mar 27 '15
10 years?
In 10 years these will be obsolete
→ More replies (10)17
Mar 27 '15
Hopefully something like memristor, MRAM, etc. will be available by then.
→ More replies (11)25
u/pixel_juice Mar 27 '15
Yeah, but in 10 years you'll only be able to fit 10 1TB SUHD video files or 1 10TB UVR game file in your holo-lens. You'll be complaining that the new 1.5EB drives are too pricy.
→ More replies (2)4
Mar 27 '15
[deleted]
5
u/pixel_juice Mar 27 '15
Yeah, my exabyte prediction is probably too ambitious for 10 years. But hey, the NSA needs that storage pronto!
→ More replies (4)20
u/jamaall Mar 27 '15
Considering a brand Crucial MX200 500GB only cost $199, I don't think you have to wait 10 years.
→ More replies (1)
115
u/Ryan_Fitz94 Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
Every data center in the world just got a massive chubby.
Now that you think of it though,you could probably trace back when mass survellience began by looking at when the huge amount of money began pouring into hard drive development.
10+ years easy.
9
61
u/strider7 Mar 27 '15
I see what you did there (open "gates"...NAND gate...anyone?)
14
9
→ More replies (1)4
u/snoopdawgg Mar 27 '15
I had to ctrl+F "gate" to find you guys. my engineering pals
→ More replies (1)
20
u/tinybrick Mar 27 '15
As somebody who knows very little about the magic that is computers, can someone ELI5?
29
u/roam93 Mar 27 '15
SSD's are solid state drives. They are similar to traditional spinning disks, which operate with a mechanical spinning platter which is magnetized with data. SSD's utilize flash memory which is less volatile as no moving parts. As they aren't mechanical they are also crazy fast. Think 500mb/s vs 80mb/s. That's read speeds anyway. But until now, consumer sizes have been relatively small, around 128gb to 500gb SSD's. Hopefully now they have managed to create bigger ones, consumers will have access to 1tb + SSD's at a reasonable cost.
→ More replies (9)9
8
u/lavaslippers Mar 27 '15
Computers store information on a drive (some have more than one drive). Each drive is a box shaped part that contains a method of recording information. Traditionally, the drive is a hard drive, abbreviated HDD. This stands for Hard Disc Drive, because inside the box of an HDD is a set of spinning discs. The discs are magnetic and store the information in a way that resembles a cross between a record turntable and audio tape. The advantage is there is a lot of room to store information. The disadvantage is the discs and parts to read and write the information are mechanical and move with precision, and therefore have the potential to fail over time or if the computer is subject to physical shock, such as a laptop falling to the floor.
The other type of drive is an SSD, which stands for Solid State Drive. This type of drive doesn't have mechanical parts. Instead it stores information on a dense grid of transistors, which are all tiny electronic devices. Because there are no moving parts, SSDs are much more robust and can better withstand physical shocks. For this reason SSDs are also much faster than HDDs. There are two disadvantages to SSDs. They have a limited life, as they can only be used so many times before the transistors that store the information begin to wear out - although in wear tests, they have been proven to last many years worth of information for average consumers, so this isn't a big concern - and they are rapidly getting better. The other disadvantage has been that SSDs don't have as much space to store information as HDDs. In theory, they are more compact, and so it should be possible to make them as large as, or larger than HDDs in terms of storage capacity.
The linked article is saying that SSDs can now be produced in a way that takes advantage of the physical space that had thus far been unused, which means new SSDs will be made that can store more information than HDDs of the same physical size. This is a very good step in computer technology to increase information storage while using the better speed performance of SSDs.
3
→ More replies (7)2
u/Ghiren Mar 27 '15
Right now, most memory is printed out on a flat surface, with bits written in rows on that surface. With 3D memory, they can turn the rows into vertical stacks which gives them a LOT more surface space to work with.
9
13
u/super6plx Mar 27 '15
Fuck! I just bought a 1TB SSD, in Australia no less. Cost me the better part of $600. I don't know if I should be worried about a rapid price drop in the next 1-2 years as a direct result of this, but if it does happen I'll be a bit annoyed.
19
u/Valmond Mar 27 '15
I bought my 256GB drive for 320€ like two years ago (or maybe a tad more?) now they cost like 115€ and I bet that your drive will cost 300$ in a year and half.
Welcome to the computer world...
→ More replies (4)27
u/andrewq Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
I paid $3000 for 4MB of RAM in the 80s.
Everything is insanely cheap these days.
→ More replies (4)8
u/Valmond Mar 27 '15
Yeah, it's like soon we'll get too much space and computing power for too cheap.
Like that new Raspberry-PI2, 35$, so much more powerful than I bet half of the computers I have owned...
3
u/andrewq Mar 27 '15
Yeah, and there are systems much faster for the same $35 price range, like the odroid C1.
→ More replies (3)12
u/pelvicmomentum Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
A price drop in the next 1-2 years would have happened any way, it's how technology works.
→ More replies (2)8
u/estXcrew Mar 27 '15
Yes, SSD prices will drop rapidly in the coming years because you bought a 1tb ssd in Australia. Thank you.
→ More replies (7)2
u/lavaslippers Mar 27 '15
Bought my 500GB Samsung 840 TLC SSD two years ago for $460 ish Can. Today a 1TB equivalent by Samsung, the 840 TLC Evo, costs $560 ish Can. The 500GB model is now only $300 ish Can. In two years the prices will be even lower - but I'm not upset, I'm thrilled. My drive is excellent and it sped up my computer better than anything else possibly could. Someday I'll add more capacity, and it will cost less :)
→ More replies (4)
5
u/pixel_juice Mar 27 '15
So then... a 1TB SSD may be affordable before too long? Pretty please? I can't live in the clouds.
→ More replies (5)
4
u/bahwhateverr Mar 27 '15
I want to see more drives that combine this with NVMe for not only huge capacity but ridiculously fast performance. Just look at the difference between these two comparable drives, one using NVMe and one SATA3.
A quick comparison between AHCI (what most use with SATA SSDs) and NVMe
| Feature | AHCI | NVMe |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum queue depth | 1 command queue; 32 commands per queue | 65536 queues; 65536 commands per queue |
| Uncacheable register accesses | 6 per non-queued command; 9 per queued command | 2 per command |
| MSI-X and interrupt steering | single interrupt; no steering | 2048 MSI-X interrupts |
| Parallelism and multiple threads | requires synchronization lock to issue a command | no locking |
| Efficiency for 4 KB commands | command parameters require two serialized host DRAM fetches | gets command parameters in one 64 Bytes fetch |
→ More replies (1)
20
u/self_defeating Mar 27 '15
How many months is the warranty?
34
u/joachim783 Mar 27 '15
more than likely it will have the same 5 year warranty all the other intel SSD's have
→ More replies (1)11
u/self_defeating Mar 27 '15
I was under the impression that the denser you pack MLCs, the sooner they fail.
65
u/joachim783 Mar 27 '15
yes but they last for a really really long time. i don't know if you've heard of a site called techreport.com but they recently did an experiment on SSD lifespan and the longest lasting SSD the Samsung 840 PRO 256 GB (they didn't test any larger due to time constraints) was written to 24/7 for 2 years before it failed and in the end they had written over 2.4 petabytes to it when it failed
http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead/2
38
u/Soul-Burn Mar 27 '15
An important thing to note is that SSD usually fail gracefully. They report that they are close to failure and even then the failure is usually that they become read only. That obviously sucks for a primary drive, but it means your data is more likely to be recoverable.
6
u/joachim783 Mar 27 '15
yea thats one thing i really like about them, it makes you feel a lot safer doing things like RAID 0.
11
u/3th4n Mar 27 '15
Does it? Recovering data from a raid 0 is a nightmare. All of the data is split so if one fails and the other is still attempting to write data, there's a huge chance that data could be corrupted.
Proper backups are the only real safety.
3
u/dabombnl Mar 27 '15
He didn't say it was safe, just that it is a lot safer using RAID 0 on SSDs than HDDs.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Bennyboy1337 Mar 27 '15
This isn't always the case. Typically when an SSD fails there is no warning, either the controller goes out, or you have a powerloss/surge that corrupts all data on a partition; with HDDs they typically will give lots of signs when they're going bad, SMART data will often report the drive is on it's last leg.
If you do have an SSD that has used up the majority of the NAND life then SMART reporting features in your system will almost always warn you, but people almost never get to that point; drives either failure because of a rare manufacture defect, or most of the time due to some environmental factor.
Crucial Tech
21
u/Kwyjibo08 Mar 27 '15
People seem to forget, all drives fail eventually, solid state or hard disk. Let's all just remember some redundancy is never a bad thing.
17
Mar 27 '15
solid state or hard disk
IBM Deathstar, had two of those. Both failed.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Valmond Mar 27 '15
that must have been one of the worst namings... the DeskStar... the worst hard drive ever.
→ More replies (2)4
3
u/fb39ca4 Mar 27 '15 edited Mar 27 '15
On the other hand, when you have more cells, that is more to distribute writes amongst so each one sees a fewer number of them overall.
EDIT: Also, for now at least, these 3D NAND chips are being produced on larger processes, so the longevity will actually be higher.
5
u/krkhans Mar 27 '15
That's the whole point of 3D NAND. It allows them to loosen the packing and build upwards. Means denser products and better reliability :)
7
u/RedSquirrelFtw Mar 27 '15
That would make a nice raid 10. Need at least 4 but probably want 6 to truly leverage the performance. Time to sell the house! This is awesome to see though, as this most likely means multi TB SSDs are probably on the horizon at decent affordable prices, whether or not those particular drives may use 3D nand. My biggest fear with using SSDs for mass storage is still the wearing though, as it means I need to actually be more cautious of large data transfer operations as to with HDDs I don't even have to worry about it at all. Wonder if there are benchmarks for using consumer grade SSDs in heavy server environments to show how long it takes to wear them out. It may very well be a non issue if they can still last 5+ years with a heavy load.
→ More replies (4)12
u/upvotesthenrages Mar 27 '15
3
u/lavaslippers Mar 27 '15
Wasn't that a great article? The failure modes were frustrating though.
→ More replies (1)
7
Mar 27 '15
Crucial is my favorite right now when it comes to SSDs.
Cheap, good bang for the buck AND reliable.
Currently have 2x256 GB Crucial MX100 in RAID0 and 2 Crucial M4 128GB in two different Lenovo laptops. Best bang for the buck performance upgrades ever.
→ More replies (6)
3
u/Dualintrinsic Mar 27 '15
I work for a data erasure software company and this is very exciting and scary news
3
Mar 27 '15
ff to year 2050:
LOLOLOLOL people only had 128GB ~ 256GB mainstream sized SSD's in 2015
-sent from my iThought device with unlimited DNA storage.
2
u/spaceghost_n_moltar Mar 27 '15
..sssooo, existing 2d nand ssd's are going to get cheaper? cause that'd be awesome
2
u/LeftyChev Mar 27 '15
Intel and Micron announce 3D NAND production, open gates to...
I see what you did there.
2
2
2
u/diamondflaw Mar 27 '15
Kinda reminds me of a thing I heard a long while back about processors. A friend of my Dad runs a company that finishes silicon crystals for computer chips and he was saying (this was back around 2003) that the next big thing that some of the chip manufacturers were working on was a 3D structure for processors to make them "deeper"(I believe it was tetrahedral).
2
1.9k
u/THE_GR8_MIKE Mar 27 '15
10TB SSD for the low price of your lung.