How long until SSD Time Capsules?

Discussion in 'Mac Accessories' started by Puevlo, Jul 15, 2012.

  1. Puevlo macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2011
    #1
    It seems Apple is moving more towards SSDs over conventional HDDs. So how long until we see a Time Capsule loaded up with a multi-terabyte storage capability? Eventually networks speeds will saturate the speed of the internal disk so this will be needed very soon.
     
  2. calderone macrumors 68040

    calderone

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle
    #2
    Prices are still too high, we have to see at least a 50% reduction in prices to maintain the cost and size available today.
     
  3. M0esmac macrumors 6502a

    M0esmac

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2012
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    I don't think that they will do that in less than 5 year time... Just because to get those SSD speeds, they need to create new wireless technology which transfers in something like 400-500mb/s...
     
  4. Lance-AR macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    #4
    I think the problem is the storage needed is a moving target. This year you need SSD of 2TB. Next year it will be 4TB. 802.11ac will handle the wireless speeds. It really depends yon when the 3D NAND scales into production. I believe next year's time capsule will see Gb wireless but still HDDs.
     
  5. calderone macrumors 68040

    calderone

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2009
    Location:
    Seattle
    #5
    Are you trying to say megabytes or megabits? Extremes are already doing 450Mb (megabits) per second.
     
  6. rgarjr macrumors 603

    rgarjr

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Location:
    Southern Calif
    #6
    Flash is way too expensive to get even get close to 1TB, unless u want a small drive for your storage.
     
  7. flynz4 macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2009
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #7
    HDD and SDD capacities are both continuing to rise at approximately the same rate. Hence... for the foreseeable future, HDDs will continue win when it comes to capacity.

    OTOH, SSD performance is continuing to rise at an extremely fast pace... and over the next 5+ years will skyrocket as NAND is replaced by replacement technologies. HDD performance is pretty flat. Hence, SSDs, which already greatly outperform HDDs will dramatically widen the performance gap.

    My conclusions:
    • Capacity: HDDs will be the leading choice for a long time... a decade+
    • Performance: SSDs will increasingly become the predominate media

    /Jim
     
  8. traumuhhtize macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2012
  9. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #9
    As soon as 10 GbE becomes mainstream for home use.
     
  10. Macman45 macrumors demi-god

    Macman45

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Location:
    Somewhere Back In The Long Ago
    #10
    This. It's pointless to have an SSD in anything wireless at the present time...You are not going to realise the potential of the drive. MAybe in the future that bottleneck will be removed, but for now, even a 7200 HDD which is what I have in my TC is just ticking over on wifi.
     
  11. jcpb macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2012
    #11
    1. Too expensive
    2. Too few storage space
    3. Not gonna happen

    Why a SSD for mass storage when hard drives do more for less money? Speed isn't the reason hard drives are used for cloud storage, $/GB is.
     
  12. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
  13. paul-n macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2012
    #13
    SSD are perfect for quick and fast access for a system drive, but hdds are better for big storage, also prices per gigabyte show this:
    WD30EFRX = $210 = 7c/GB
    Samsung 830 256 GB = $250 = 98c/GB
    This makes ssd storage nearly 14x more expensive than hdd. As long as there is no fundamental change in capacity growing, hdd will be the cheap storage.
     
  14. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #14
    A mechanical 3.5" 7200 RPM can do sequential reads and writes at around 1
    50-180 MB/s. Wireless N can achieve around 12-15 MB/s. Gigabit Ethernet can do around 95-100 MB/s (unless you're using port aggregation) so the bottleneck is the network transfer protocol, not the internal storage on the Time Capsule. Adding an SSD would be a pointless exercise.
     

Share This Page