SSDs - State of the Product?

jtr1962

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
3,646
Location
Flushing, New York
Same thoughts here. My last remaining mechanical drive in daily use is a 2TB Samsung which is pushing 8 years old. I'd like to eventually replace it with an SSD of at least 2TB, but I'm waiting for prices to fall to something under $200 before I do that. $150 would be even better. It's probably only a matter of time. Once 64-layer, and eventually 96-layer, NAND are in the supply pipeline 2TB SSDs will probably be less than 1TB SSDs are now. We may even see major process improvements which make NAND way cheaper to produce regardless of the number of layers.

The most interesting part of all this is in the third article I linked to. It basically mentions that once prices per GB for enterprise SSDs are 5x or less that of HDDs then SSDs will take over. The enterprise market seems to be the last remaining stronghold for HDDs, or at least it's where most of the profit is for HDD manufacturers.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
2TB 3.5" drives are not economical compared to 8TB or higher in servers. The question is when 8+ TB SSDs will be economical.

If they can develop 4D memory with QLC and more layers it may be early 2020s.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
12,785
Location
USA
I'm not sure how exactly you made the conclusion that an 8+TB SSD is more economical in servers but that has not been true in my experience.

QLC NAND has already been announced by several key manufacturers. I don't believe entering the 4th dimension of space/time will happen in our lifetime with regards to NAND.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
The 8TB+ hard drives are cheaper per GB than the smaller sizes.

I believe having more dimensions will allow for more storage theoretically.
Accessing the 5th dimension isn't practical yet of course.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
12,785
Location
USA

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
Do you really need NVME? I've been doing well with the 860 in the i7-8650U notebook. For practical purposes it's a CPU bound system.
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,097
Location
Michigan
Do you really need NVME? I've been doing well with the 860 in the i7-8650U notebook. For practical purposes it's a CPU bound system.
Well, it came from Dell with a NVME M2 SSD. I was just looking to get a larger one. It's not like I can drop in a 2.5" SSD. I don't know if it's setup to run from a SATA M2 drive.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
Wow, drives are really getting cheap! The 8TB of SSDs I received 4-6 months ago are now 2/3 or 3/4 as much.
I think it is about time for a 2.5" 7mm 8TB SSD. :D
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,610
Location
Left Coast
I was looking for some used 60GB SATA SSDs to use as boot drives in servers, but it turns out that new, low-end 120GB TLC drives are cheaper. Picked up two for less than $40.

Used drives under 250GB are heading towards zero sale value. With QLC now in the mix, high capacity (but not necessarily high-performance) drives are on the way.

Once 2TB SSDs fall below $100, I can upgrade my server ;)
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
The problem is that QLC is slower in writes than the MLC was ten years ago. :(
I hope we are not left with slow, crappy and cheap vs. very expensive, high performance SSDs in a few years with no middle ground.
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,097
Location
Michigan
The problem is that QLC is slower in writes than the MLC was ten years ago. :(
I hope we are not left with slow, crappy and cheap vs. very expensive, high performance SSDs in a few years with no middle ground.
Don't buy QLC drives and manufacturers will get the message (hopefully). Regular consumers will figure it out when they spend money on one and find they're slow and they'll get a bad reputation in short order.
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,097
Location
Michigan
Not to mention I'm concerned about their ability to retain data over long periods when unpowered.
I'm not entirely sure how valid of a concern that is. The story is that QLC was originally going to be for cold storage. Apparently it's more robust than they expected so they're making consumer drives from it. Eventually they're going to push too far, but I guess we're not there yet.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
12,785
Location
USA
I'm sure those environmental factors are listed somewhere in their NAND specs. Do you have specific needs for temperature and humidity?
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
12,785
Location
USA
My understanding of the phrase SD used of "cold storage" simply means: not powered on. I would expect the drive to be stored at a room-temperature value anywhere in a reasonable 50F-80F range.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
I'm not entirely sure how valid of a concern that is. The story is that QLC was originally going to be for cold storage. Apparently it's more robust than they expected so they're making consumer drives from it. Eventually they're going to push too far, but I guess we're not there yet.
Unfortunately consumers are generally cheap and products containing the QLC flasm will be worse off. I can hardly get to the internets now so I may not care at that point.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
Of course I don't use Wi-Fi.
I had to look up that "cantenna" deal. I think the Santilli does something like that. ;)
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,610
Location
Left Coast
Don't buy QLC drives and manufacturers will get the message (hopefully). Regular consumers will figure it out when they spend money on one and find they're slow and they'll get a bad reputation in short order.
I really doubt that QLC will be slow enough for the general consumer to notice. They'll still be whiz-bang fast compared to spinning disks.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
The vast majority of consumers don't create anything requiring sustained writes and can live in the buffer. They just suck off the internet and occasionally send short video clips to the f*c*b**k, etc.
The only thing they will care about is corrupted or lost data and they are already used to that with cheap USB drives, which will not become more reliable with QLC. :LOL:
 

Stereodude

Not really a
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
10,097
Location
Michigan
The vast majority of consumers don't create anything requiring sustained writes and can live in the buffer. They just suck off the internet and occasionally send short video clips to the f*c*b**k, etc.
The only thing they will care about is corrupted or lost data and they are already used to that with cheap USB drives, which will not become more reliable with QLC. :LOL:
And those people aren't out buying retail SSDs.
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,610
Location
Left Coast
QLC will be great for write-once, read-many data. That's good for file servers and for desktop application [read: game] disks.

Instead of getting a couple terabytes of spinning rust for their fat-ass applications, I can see people getting a QLC SSD to complement their faster OS SSD. If it's cheap enough, it'll be a no-brainer.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
A 10TB drive is $300. Maybe they can make a 10TB SSD for 4x that eventually, but performance needs to improve beyond 80MB/sec.
 

LunarMist

I can't believe I'm a
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
14,696
Location
USA
Is it worth getting the P4610 3.2TB over the P4510 4TB? The R/W transfer rates and read IOPs are about the same, but the write IO Pops are better for the P4610 with 200K than the P4510 with 114K.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
12,785
Location
USA
Looks like the IronWolf 110 is TLC NAND and supports 1 drive write per day for 5 years across all sizes. That's pretty low so it might come down to pricing, of which I couldn't find any.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
12,785
Location
USA
When we're talking about an enterprise storage server, how many drive writes per day is expected?
Enterprise drives that are classified as mixed-use are typically 5 writes per day and write-intensive drives are 10 writes per day. I do know that these numbers are being reclassified by some of the vendors we use to a lower number of writes per day. These vendors are moving away from write-intensive drives and focusing on selling mixed-use drives with the 5 writes per day rating.

There is also a read-intensive drive and they are typically 3 writes per day. These Seagate drives fall below that typical rating so hopefully their price reflects that or they have more faith in the durability of their TLC NAND.
 
Last edited:
Top