Samsung Promises High-Performance Storage with new Fifth-generation V-NAND
Click here to post a comment for Samsung Promises High-Performance Storage with new Fifth-generation V-NAND on our message forum
DeskStar
Soooooooooooo what you're saying is..........? That I am going to wait for them SSD's to replace my mechanical ones until these things drop to reduce the cost on the old ones?!? Was just looking at the abysmal read and write speeds of my HDD's trying to maintain speeds/performance while reading from and being written to at the same time. Just sad TBH....
Costs to replace all mechanical, but one 3th drive would be just over $500 and that is replacing four 500gb Seagate that are 7200rpm.... Thinking of going with two 1tb Samsung Evo's..
Anyone gots that proverbial input for me on my approach??
fry178
Most ssds would give better performance, even if its a value/mainstream one.
Looked at the crucial mx500?
schmidtbag
Either I don't understand where you're thinking mainstream SSDs would offer better performance, or you don't understand that what Samsung is doing here is the performance of a single chip, without the controller. Remember, a single chip doesn't really offer impressive specs. What makes an SSD so good is the controller, since it's basically a processor that figures out how to maximize the throughput of each chip available. I personally like to think of it as a specialized RAID0 controller (I understand it's a bit more complex than that). I figure this is also why lower-capacity SSDs have a tendency to perform worse than their higher-capacity equivalents, since they often have fewer chips to read/write to.
All that being said, if Samsung created a single chip that can (by itself) nearly match a the performance of value SSD (with a controller), they created something pretty fast.
slyphnier
if me, i will keep using hdd for non-critical things (performance related)
until SSD have similar capacity and price
current avg HDD storage (most people pick) is 4TB.... with max 10TB
SSD avg storage still 512GB~1TB, been catching up really well... and there is 10TB+ ssd if you willing to pay it with your organ
icedman
^I would argue the average for probably 90% of users is actually around 240 or 256gb but i agree use the hdd's for things like video/music and files u dont use often like old game's u dont play often.
fry178
@schmidtbag
My post was a reply to deskstar, not the news.
@slyphnier
Want and need are not the same thing.
Love when ppl (not you) whine about the price of 1tb ssd, when in reality they dont even have more than 2-300gb of data.
But since most ssds (200gb and bigger) die within 2 to 3y from age (of the chip), and NOT nand writes/completely filling the drive,
i don't normally have them long enough to fill them up.
I usually upgrade the os drive, then all previous drives move one place down (game/data/backup/garbage drive), and the oldest one gets retired or upgrade for olderlaptops etc from friends.
All drives in my rig are ssds for a few years now (even 2 of the 3 backup drives), and i wont go back to hdd, even if its about capacity, as i prefer no sound/transfer speeds..
DeskStar
I'm thinking I'll go with a few 1th 850 evo's in a raid 0 for OS (replacing the vertex 4's 120GB in raid) and then slam down a couple in place of my 500GB HDD's. I personally can not stand the sound of drives crunching data over my 46 cougar fans in my case!!!
Sad to say that I can clearly hear it all and not to mention if downloading anything and writing to said HDD just stinks when trying to read from said same drive at the same time.
I've been on the SSD bandwagon since OCZ was the first kid on the block swinging them Vertex Turbo's for $500+ . And that was for a measly 100-120gb I can't really remember. And I bought two to raid them in vista/7 when raid wasn't even really supported then.
Money isn't really an object when considering throughput and performance being over ten times that of what I am getting now for how I do it. And that NOISE of them drives......EW!
Agent-A01
lol where did you pull that fud from?
Denial
I think you quoted the wrong person - but yeah I don't where he heard that. My work laptop currently has a Vertex 4 that I bought on launch day and has been in use ever since (April 2012). I also have a Vertex 1 from 2010 that still runs but it went for a long period with no use. Both work great.
https://i.imgur.com/YKtqqmZ.png
Agent-A01
Yeah accidental misquote.
I've had plenty of drives,I still have a working intel 160GB G2 laying around and that one is a decade old or more.
My first SSD I believe.
I've only had one drive die and that was a vector that died from interrupted power. I've owned at least a dozen SSDs with no issues
tsunami231
yep all my games are still sitting on my 500gb seagate barracuda, its speeds are horrid compared to SSD but it speed are amazing compared to most HDD in consoles, I would love to replace that 500gb with a SSD but less prices drop dramatically, I will be just getting 2 TB toshiba P300 or some equivalent drive.
Maybe I in 10 more years I will see this SSD price drop to HDD prices.... or maybe HDD people will have another FLood and jack up prices on them so they match hahaha
wait I might be thinking about OLED actually becoming mainstream replacing LED like it was thought to happen so long ago
fry178
How about data center collection info on hundreds of drives?!
Might have been backblaze or similar, dont remember, as once i have the info, i don't really care "who" it actually was..
-Tj-
From what I saw @gsmarena it also will be used for mobile phones, or tuned more for mobiles., Not just for normal ssd's.
https://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_starts_the_mass_production_of_its_5thgen_vnand_flash_memory-news-32159.php
Edit: ah it's mentioned at the very end 🙂
wavetrex
False.
Some die, yes, and also some HDD's die. Certainly not "most"
In my case I still have an old Intel 60GB SSD from 2012, it worked 24/7 since then in my mediaserver/PLEX machine, still operational now.
Total written on it so far - 27000 GB, that's 450 full drive writes. (So much because of plex, reindexing the database every 12 hours ... for 6 years, as well as saving chunks of encodes every time somebody is watching something)
To be fair, it is a bit slower now than it used to be, but still perfectly usable!
fry178
never stated anything different, just saying ssds usually die because of chip age, rather than write cycles/because the drive wasn't over-provisioned.
and when a datacenter with ssds in couple hundreds, i believe that information (~20-25%) more, than a few ppl saying "but it still works...".
how likely is the chance that you get to be in 2 different plane "accidents"? yet there are more than a handful of ppl, and im not talking about ceo from xy flying 10 times a month.
yasamoka
Well, provide us with your source?
fry178
again: i dont remember, was more than a year ago, not sure where it was posted, but with them running hundreds of ssd's/info coming from a large datacenter,
and a big spike for drives failing after 2-3y of use, even with very low TBW, it showed that "age" (chips) has more of an impact than endurance.
DeskStar
double.post
DeskStar
fry178
might wanna read my post again.
i said i dont care to remember (where the info is from) once i know its correct/relevant in numbers.
its not from a guy running 5 HDDs in his home server, but from a data center, so what difference does it make to know what/who company actually operates them, as someone that runs +10 000 drives usually knows what their doing.
i never had a asus motherboard go bad on me since i build my rigs (2001), does that now mean no asus board has ever failed, right.
"personal experience" and the low amount of drives "one person" will ever have, vs a data center with thousands hdd's/ssd's?
i know what numbers will statistically be more relevant, to show what drives fail, and which dont.
