Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 70 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,387 Posts
Discussion Starter #1


http://www.enterprisestorageforum.co...-Next-Year.htm

Quote:
It's fairly evident that SSDs using today's technology and techniques are pretty much stuck at 20-25nm. Anything smaller and the data protection and data corruption issues become so great that either the performance is abysmal, the data retention period doesn't meet JEDEC standards, or the cost increases.

There are efforts underway to develop new technologies that improve SSD performance and density and decrease costs (a big goal). However, these are fairly new techniques and are not likely to make it into devices for quite some time. Be forewarned â€" SSD development could easily stagnate at 20-25nm mark.
Excellent article, although understanding it all takes a bit of patience

What a shame, and such great potential was there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,094 Posts
the cost increase ( greedy bastards XD)

nice read
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,965 Posts
Why don't they just make SSD's the same exact size as a mechanical hard drive? I'm sure it won't help all that much but it will make it physically bigger to allow for a bit more space, and it will actually be compatible with cases without an adapter or having to be taped somewhere awkward.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,850 Posts
Quote:
3-bit cells have a much smaller number of program/erase cycles than others - around 1,000 cycles (MLC is typically around 10,000 and SLC is around 100,000)
that is why i will never own a SSD in its current design. i write and erase atleast 30 4-12GB files of photo/video and audio data daily.

it just wouldnt last long enough for my usage and it is still extremely cost prohibitive.
i never did see our current NAND technology as a replacement for main storage in computers i own.
no matter how fast it is, its all about longevity and capacity in the end.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,000 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackHoleSon View Post
Why don't they just make SSD's the same exact size as a mechanical hard drive? I'm sure it won't help all that much but it will make it physically bigger to allow for a bit more space, and it will actually be compatible with cases without an adapter or having to be taped somewhere awkward.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,750 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackHoleSon View Post
Why don't they just make SSD's the same exact size as a mechanical hard drive? I'm sure it won't help all that much but it will make it physically bigger to allow for a bit more space, and it will actually be compatible with cases without an adapter or having to be taped somewhere awkward.
Exactly what I was thinking whilst reading the article. Or, even better still, using one of those open 5 1/4" full bays. Now that, could be populated w/ enough 20-25 nm wafers to be very much worth it. 5-10 Tb ssd's maybe?


Honestly though, I wonder if this is directly influencing the push for developement of graphene, which seems to be on a fast track for the marketplace?

I'd be willing to bet that SSD's are where we see the 1st practical app of graphene w/ this news breaking. We all know silicone's fast running out of potential. Only current manufacturing limitations for supply/demand of 28 nm tech is keeping it out of our hands here to fore.

The next decade is going to find us with some amazing technological leaps, methinks.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dracotonisamond View Post
that is why i will never own a SSD in its current design. i write and erase atleast 30 4-12GB files of photo/video and audio data daily.

it just wouldnt last long enough for my usage and it is still extremely cost prohibitive.
i never did see our current NAND technology as a replacement for main storage in computers i own.
no matter how fast it is, its all about longevity and capacity in the end.
That's because your considered usage is all wrong for them. SSD's are not noted for sequential read/write performance, that is what HDD's are still useful for. Anyone thats considering one for much more than 60 Gb of size is going to be using them in a non-optimal enviroment which is foolhardy.

I use my SSD strictly where it's best suited. O/S and other random read programs. Writes go only to HDD's for saving wear on the SSD. I'm replacing my HDD array now w/ shortstroked Spinpoint F3's, but for other sequential read programs...I'm also investing in hybrid drives. In the end, HDD's will be strictly for data storage and backups. The SSD, and hybrids will be for programs. Each used only for the optimal usage that the particular storage medium prefers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
615 Posts
You can already buy 1TB SSD's, yea they cost an arm and a leg but how much more storage space do you want on a 2.5" SSD?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,503 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tekgun View Post
You can already buy 1TB SSD's, yea they cost an arm and a leg but how much more storage space do you want on a 2.5" SSD?
The supply of pr0n in the world is endless


Well i have a 500 GB external and it'll take FOREVER for me to fill that thing (don't watch anime, series, movies, etc). So i'm not phased
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,750 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tekgun View Post
You can already buy 1TB SSD's, yea they cost an arm and a leg but how much more storage space do you want on a 2.5" SSD?
Qft.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,390 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by dracotonisamond View Post
that is why i will never own a SSD in its current design. i write and erase atleast 30 4-12GB files of photo/video and audio data daily.

it just wouldnt last long enough for my usage and it is still extremely cost prohibitive.
i never did see our current NAND technology as a replacement for main storage in computers i own.
no matter how fast it is, its all about longevity and capacity in the end.
That would last you 19.5 years at that rate. No way that'll cut your storage needs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,147 Posts
This is disappointing, but I'm sure by the time ssd technology has reached its pinnacle, there will be bigger and badder storage options available.
 

·
Z-80 > i9
Joined
·
17,244 Posts
Eh, it's easy..Let the 250GB/500GB/whatever drives come down in price, they're enough for everyone's (on here at least) even slightly HDD bottlenecked programs and most of their documents, Movies? Music? Downloads? Installer files? All would go on a platter based disc that you also have.

That is, assuming, they don't have some new tech then..Which I doubt, remember how back when we transitioned for 45nm Intel had to use the new HighK gates?
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
15,777 Posts
And nothing of value was lost because there is already 1TB SSD's in 3.5mm sizes.
And SSD is already that much faster than HDD's.

Kinda like saying cars won't be made in 500HP anymore and cars won't exceed 100MPH anymore.
It's not like most people have the need to fill TB after TB just as drivers don't need to hit 100MPH on legal roads.
And filling a 1TB drive legally takes a lot of time.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,992 Posts
Good. Maybe if we stop jumping to new processes every 6 weeks we can stick with one and fine tune it, reducing costs.

SSDs don't need to get any smaller. Even the 2.5" ones are mostly hollow shells. We need cheaper modules. I'd rather have a 1TB SSD that is 64x16gb than one that is 4x256gb because thats basically 64x RAID 0.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,584 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by cdolphin View Post
learn to justify testecull!
No. I can't justify the price of a new barebones on just 60 gigs of space. My Steam folder alone is 120 gigs, and that isn't the only game I would be launching from the SSD.

I need a 1TB SSD. My 1TB platter drive is about 85-90% full and it's all various games, mods for games, backups of games, etc etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by j0n3z3y View Post
That's because your considered usage is all wrong for them. SSD's are not noted for sequential read/write performance, that is what HDD's are still useful for. Anyone thats considering one for much more than 60 Gb of size is going to be using them in a non-optimal enviroment which is foolhardy.
Ever stop to think that maybe someone wants a large capacity SSD because they have a ton of games they want to run from said SSD? I need one that's at minimum 500 gigs because of all my games. Ideally I'd have a 1TB SSD. I wouldn't bother putting Windows on it because Windows runs just fine from platter drives and I don't care about the e-peen having a 5 second boot would generate.
 
1 - 20 of 70 Posts
Top