3.5 SSD's

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,719
2
Laptops......

S-
Yup. :)
There's also some 1.8" models as well. ;)

The 3.5" units will primarily be aimed at the enterprise market, with the home/consumer market to follow once the cost per GB comes down to levels they'd buy. Might be awhile though.
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,719
2
Still, anything over $500 for 1TB has a no go with me. $400, I can think and make a decision while for $300 I'll just semi think.

Sweet spot $200 range.
Understandable. ;)

It's too high right how except for the enthusiast group, and workstations that really do need that much throughput for either random access or with the a small SATA port availablility (i.e. those on the board only). But even then, there's limits (namely the ICH10R throughput limit of ~660MB/s with the Nehalem systems). Other models, this isn't the case (not at that low a throughput at least, as everything has a limit).

But at $3.5k per unit, it's too expensive for the mainstream enterprise market as well. Cost is always the first priority when looking for some sort of hardware solution for them as well. Speed, capacity and redundancy take a second seat (or less, depending on the specific needs). :p
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,719
2
I prefer the 2.5" form factor and I would like to see a continuous transition from 3.5 to 2.5".
For the most part it will happen IMO, once SSD is cheap enough to overtake HDD for the majority of systems (when is the real question though).

But with current Flash chips, even 1TB (and larger) will have to use the 3.5" form factor. A significant die shrink would be needed to get 1TB small enough to fit the 2.5" form factor. And keep in mind, the Samsung chips used in the Colossus are only 30nm. Not big by any means. :p
 

300D

macrumors 65816
May 2, 2009
1,284
0
Tulsa
Why were they all following the "were only manufacturing only 2.5" trend.
Because its pointless. An SSD doesn't need all the space of a 3.5" form, 2.5" drives can be sold to laptops and desktops (thanks to SATA) and using one in a desktop is as simple as adding a $5 bracket.

By building a 3.5" drive, they are limiting installation to desktops and eliminating potential laptop sales.
 

gotzero

macrumors 68040
Jan 6, 2007
3,224
0
Mid-Atlantic, US
$3.6K(no tax) for a 1TB SSD? Way to insane of a price.
Considering that making one out of four decent 256GB SSDs would be about ~$3K, I do not see how it is unreasonable at all.

Good for them for doing it. I already made an array out of 2.5"s and I am perfectly happy with it, but this is a great option if it give you the space without taking up the SATA ports.
 

JesterJJZ

macrumors 68020
Jul 21, 2004
2,422
761
With a 3.5" form factor you have more space for increasing speeds by doing something like having two SDDs and a built in raid controller all in the space of one drive. That, plus SATAIII could lead to some interesting things.
 

lssmit02

macrumors 6502
Mar 25, 2004
395
34
Does anyone know if the OCZ Colossus is Mac compatible? I couldn't see anything on their site.
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,719
2
Does anyone know if the OCZ Colossus is Mac compatible? I couldn't see anything on their site.
SATA = SATA, so any drive should work. Issues do come up from time to time, and is usually drive firmware related. As it's just released, that would be more probable than if you wait say 6 months. Prices may come down as well, as the supply should improve.
 

GoCubsGo

macrumors Nehalem
Feb 19, 2005
35,741
146
about time a company comes up with a 3.5" one. Why were they all following the "were only manufacturing only 2.5" trend.
Because the theory is portable + no moving parts = less chance of failure.
However, people have found them to be so incredibly fast that they want them in their desktops as well. For me, I'd be pleased with a 10k RPM drive in my MP and the SSD in my notebooks.
 

GoCubsGo

macrumors Nehalem
Feb 19, 2005
35,741
146
I wouldn't be pleased with 10x the latency and less throughput.
That's you, I'm me, case closed. The Intel SSD I have is fine but price per GB is not quite where I want it to be. And it's not about me being able to afford it, it's about me finding value and now that I own an SSD I can say that without hesitation. For a portable, hands down this is the way to go.
 

gotzero

macrumors 68040
Jan 6, 2007
3,224
0
Mid-Atlantic, US
I wouldn't be pleased with 10x the latency and less throughput.
HDDs are going to have their place for a long time to come. Not only sequential datawrites, but overwriting files millions of times over. All of my insanely repetitive writes go to HDDs, at least until the SSD price flies down.

I would have been all over the 3.5" SSD to save SATA ports.
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,719
2
That's you, I'm me, case closed. The Intel SSD I have is fine but price per GB is not quite where I want it to be. And it's not about me being able to afford it, it's about me finding value and now that I own an SSD I can say that without hesitation. For a portable, hands down this is the way to go.
Cost per GB is definitely an issue with SSD's, and the current pricing means it's unattainble for many. Especially if 500GB+ is needed.

HDDs are going to have their place for a long time to come. Not only sequential datawrites, but overwriting files millions of times over. All of my insanely repetitive writes go to HDDs, at least until the SSD price flies down.

I would have been all over the 3.5" SSD to save SATA ports.
Mechanical isn't going anywhere in the near future, as it's cheap and reliable. SSD's got a hurdle in terms of price/GB, but also to refine the issues. The OS's need to be optimized for them as well, to help reduce the uneccessary wear related issues. The newer drives do fare better due to improved firmware and additional hidden capacity for wear leveling techniques, but it's a good idea to keep more available (10 - 20% of the total capacity).
 

DoFoT9

macrumors P6
Jun 11, 2007
17,512
33
Singapore
im confused. why are these still so expensive? the components are bigger then the 1.8"/2.5" SSD brothers, i thought it would therefore be cheaper to make? i guess its the first 3.5" so that would explain the price of them.

cant wait for these suckers to come down! :D
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,719
2
im confused. why are these still so expensive? the components are bigger then the 1.8"/2.5" SSD brothers, i thought it would therefore be cheaper to make? i guess its the first 3.5" so that would explain the price of them.

cant wait for these suckers to come down! :D
They're using 30nm Samsung Flash (lots of it in the 1TB model) and a decent controller. Though newer via the smaller die, it's cheaper to make than the larger die parts it's replacing (higher yields per wafer). Besides, if you used larger die chips, you couldn't squeeze it in the form factor I'd expect, and it would cost more.

Right now though, the supply is really limited, as it just released. As the supply stabilizes, and if it's in enough quantity, the prices will fall a bit. MSRP showed $2200USD for the 1TB model, so the street prices are quite high (~63% additional markup). It's been going on for some time with the Intel Postville's too (Gen 2 models). Supply is being manipulated.
 

DoFoT9

macrumors P6
Jun 11, 2007
17,512
33
Singapore
They're using 30nm Samsung Flash (lots of it in the 1TB model) and a decent controller. Though newer via the smaller die, it's cheaper to make than the larger die parts it's replacing (higher yields per wafer). Besides, if you used larger die chips, you couldn't squeeze it in the form factor I'd expect, and it would cost more.

Right now though, the supply is really limited, as it just released. As the supply stabilizes, and if it's in enough quantity, the prices will fall a bit. MSRP showed $2200USD for the 1TB model, so the street prices are quite high (~63% additional markup). It's been going on for some time with the Intel Postville's too (Gen 2 models). Supply is being manipulated.
see i need you around to tell me all these things! i presumed limited supply was a contributor but wasnt aware of the new Flash chips.

how long until these come down to $100? :rolleyes:
 

nanofrog

macrumors G4
May 6, 2008
11,719
2
see i need you around to tell me all these things! i presumed limited supply was a contributor but wasnt aware of the new Flash chips.
The chips themselves are actually cheaper/capacity than their larger die counterparts. The controllers I don't think are inexpensive (not the Samsung or Indilinx parts anyway).

But in the case of the 1TB Colossus, it's essentially multiple drives running as a stripe, with control in the drive's controller chip/s. You need multiple controllers I would think, as well as a lot of Flash chips. But as the MSRP is $2200, there's plenty of profit margin in that price. What we're seeing on the street ATM, is gouging.

how long until these come down to $100? :rolleyes:
Get real. :eek: :p

Seriously, no idea. I think it's going to be awhile, as gouging will slow the progress down, as the current enthusiast market won't be able to pay for the R&D that quickly at current pricing, and the enterprise market is going to continue to wait for the most part IMO.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.