Seagate joining SSD market next year

Yblad

New member
Sep 15, 2007
702
0
perhaps seagate will be able to push the prices down once they enter the market, but i personally don't see SSDs taking over for atleast 5-6years yet.
 

grumpydaddy

Folding Team Leader
Jan 20, 2008
3,166
0
What price do you think is right for say the majority of the members to consider using SSDs and for that matter do you see it like me transfer rates need to be >100 for these to "count"
 

Yblad

New member
Sep 15, 2007
702
0
yes, i think they need to be over 100 or i don't see the point in moving on from HDD. I think once you can pick an SSD up for around £150-£200 of decent speed and size (instead of 32gb 100MB/s costing £300) they will begin to take over int he high end market. once they fall further than that in price, they'll start to take over the main market.

however, this is presuming they ever do fall to a reasonable price...we'v been waiting a while already.

the main problem i see with SSDs is that many people may not be prepared to take the hit in term of storage space, with modern HDD having up to a terabyte of space, and SSDs currently limited to around 64gb (in general) many people won't want to make the move. If this happens the main market could stay with HDD for a very long time, and as the producers wont be experiencing economies of scale the prices will remain high for those of us who would want them.
 
Last edited:

smith

New member
Dec 29, 2006
991
0
i think once the prices comes down about 50% or so that high end users will start useing them just because of how fast they are. my guese is 09 with x58.
 

El Chorizo

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 14, 2005
2,386
1
Personaly i think they need to be hitting a tad over double the price of a given HDD for half the capacity to be of any interest to me. That would be a 250GB drive for about £150.

Why? Because they don't offer much extra performance in normal home usage (from what i've seen). The only real benefits are that they are quite, last longer (no moving parts) and use less power. If any of those matter to you, then i'd imagine you would be more happy than i to spend more on one.

But i think within a 12 to 18 months we'll see the above surfacing.

having said that i'll probably buy one by the end of the week :prod:
 

grumpydaddy

Folding Team Leader
Jan 20, 2008
3,166
0
Since this story I've been searching for a particular review with mitron ssd's in raid on a dedicated card.

obviously ran stupid high speed!!

Thats what the National Lottery is for isn't it?...paying for the latest tech
 

El Chorizo

Administrator
Staff member
Dec 14, 2005
2,386
1
The Windows XP Start time:
The difference is really noticeable - of course, at work. One the other hand, is a Raptor Nothing!
This I simply beautiful packed XP on the Samsung Hama cloned, as a fresh OS little anfordernd.

Samsung = 69sek.
SSD = 46sek.

Difference of 50%

Copy / move of large files:
I have a beautiful large selbstgenerierte file of exactly 5GB taken and copying at the click abgestoppt exactly.

Copy within a SDD 36MB/sek approx.
Copying the other SSD SSD 81MB/sek approx.

2.25 times faster ...

HL2 - Lost Coast:
This time I have the time from the double click until the appearance of the menus stopped. More specifically, until the ink on the background image appears. It was always only ONCE HL2 started and abgestoppt since the 2nd Load times already a lot of data in RAM or Videoram. There were each stopped 5 times (also 5-boot), a precise value funds.

Samsung HD501LJ = 27.6 sec.
Hama SSD = 19.5 sec.

Difference nearly 42%

The repeated time after loading end of HL2 showed little difference (basic stands above). Since it is just 0.1 sec. (If any). It is important but the first after loading Windows Start.

Crysis:
This I Crysis on c: \ XP installed (such as HL2). I assumed that the loading time also depends on the settings - so that high resolution + AA / AF / details more data in RAM or Videoram land than with moderate attitude. Therefore, I have the highest setting (1920x1200 + + 16xAA high). I then a batch file for the GPU bench, as the intros, and the menu is being circumvented.
Stopped Auführen was from the batch file to the disappearance of the loading screen. Re with 5 passes (each after a restart).
The drives were (like HL2 also) first with Perfect Disk defragt the game installed and the same again defragt. So all very clean.

Samsung HD501LJ = 44.2 sec.
Hama SSD = 30.2 sec.

Difference approximately 46%

WinRar 3.70:
Here I simply the folder "dllcache" c: \ windows \ system32 \. It is about 450MB in size and includes 2460 files of a few hundred bytes of up to 13MB. Only small files would be naturally better for testing, but here is the Hama very strongly on the Samsung. The result would be even more dramatic with only small files.
Thus, the CPU is not the whole limited WinRar I have the option to "save".

Samsung = 28.5 sec.
Hama = 18.3 sec.

Approximately 56% difference! *OMG*

THese are the ones that i'm most interested in, as they are real applications. Though Anandtech did a preview the other day of some SSD's from Samsung and they didn't really impress me with there performance: http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=3311&p=8

Really sitting on the fence with SSD's, but we'll see how it pans out as they get cheaper, bigger, and with higher transfer rates.
 

grumpydaddy

Folding Team Leader
Jan 20, 2008
3,166
0
See what you mean about the samsungs almost as if they were older generation. I'd love to play with the mitrons especially in raid but that is just stupid money (for me anyway) like i said lottery money could be a rosy future though
 

grumpydaddy

Folding Team Leader
Jan 20, 2008
3,166
0
I noticed supertalent (who?) are coming into this too. lower end specs seem to be the order of the day here

The notice I found reads:
Super Talent is now bringing its reduced-cost SSDs to devices in the 1.8" form-factor. The new Micro-SATA MasterDrive KX SSDs are just 5mm thick and are available in capacities of 30GB, 60GB, and 120GB. The SSDs are priced at $299, $449, and $679 respectively.

Like the 2.5" MasterDrive MX SSDs that were introduced last month, the 1.8" counterparts feature read speeds of 120MB/sec and write speeds of less impressive 40MB/sec. The meager write speeds are a result of the lower-performing multi-level cell (MLC) NAND memory chips used in the SSDs.

"In terms of performance, power consumption, and shock and vibration resistance the MasterDrive KX is substantially better than hard drives.......... will be available shortly after for purchase from such online retailers as Newegg and NewBiiz.
 
ARCTIC

Latest posts

Top