Quick Look: Intel's SSD DC S3700 200 And 800 GB Drives

Status
Not open for further replies.

deksman

Distinguished
Aug 29, 2011
214
11
18,685
0
They can make far larger capacities than that (orders of magnitude larger - and in abundance seeing how we have ample resources and technology to do it)...
Its just that it would be 'cost prohibitive' from a money point of view (in terms of manufacturing, and of course no one would be able to buy it).
 

jn77

Distinguished
Feb 14, 2007
587
0
18,990
2
Considering how "cheap" it is to manufacture memory these days I don't get the idea behind SSD's still being over priced...... (With the understanding that higher volume cuts prices down). They will more than make their R&D back if more people can afford them in capacities people want..... I would honestly say 1TB is the "happy medium" between people that don't do anything with their computer but want room to grow, and power users that could use 2 x 1TB....... and right now 1TB SSD's are at least $1500 or more.
 
G

Guest

Guest
It's cheap to manufacture on a small scale--8, 16 GB is no big deal. But the more capacity you need, the more modules you need and it's not as simple as just slapping a few more flash RAM chips onto the board. Larger capacity storage requires changes in architecture and manufacturing, so they are understandably more expensive to make. And then there's the economic factor. They're likely artificially inflating the price somewhat so that it has someplace to go as the market embraces SSD's more. I'm no economist, so I can't really explain it, but I do know that there are some very good reasons why the price curve is what it is.
 

LukeCWM

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2011
146
0
18,680
0
Why are we talking about the size? The truly amazing thing about the S3700 is the consistent performance. No SSD has ever achieved this before.

Second to that, the combination of reduced price (HP quoted me on an enterprise SSD a few months ago for only $18.72/GB) and endurance. The S3700 is rated for five full drive writes per day for five years under worst-case scenario data. This means the 200 GB model has an expected write endurance of greater than 3.5 PB.
 

Marcus52

Distinguished
Jun 11, 2008
619
0
19,010
9
[citation][nom]jn77[/nom]Considering how "cheap" it is to manufacture memory these days I don't get the idea behind SSD's still being over priced...... (With the understanding that higher volume cuts prices down). They will more than make their R&D back if more people can afford them in capacities people want..... I would honestly say 1TB is the "happy medium" between people that don't do anything with their computer but want room to grow, and power users that could use 2 x 1TB....... and right now 1TB SSD's are at least $1500 or more.[/citation]


Yeah, right, because $4/GB for RAM is cheaper than $1/GB for NAND.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Nice vid!

Impressive looking drives, but I don't know when I'll be in the market for a new SSD. I've been pretty happy with my Vertex2. It's like less than half the speed as these newer SSDs, but it still boots up Win7 in a few seconds. I might get another SSD sometime down the road and install Win8 on it, but I don't feel rich enough at the moment.
 

phate1337

Honorable
Dec 10, 2012
333
0
10,860
32
well, the 800 gb model is currently rated at around the $1800 price mark, but look at what it gives you for the price! incredible. just plain awesome. but that said, the seagate Pulsar drives come in a little cheaper, and are rated for 10 full writes per day, not just the 5 that intel are. i'd still shell out the extra for the intel personally, just because their previous 700 series are so good.
 
Sorry to get a mainly content free video rather than the same lack of information in text. The total script of the video couldn't be more than a paragraph or two. There are many places I can read an article where I can't watch video.

Looking forward to a typcially great article "...As you'll see in the upcoming piece,..." to replace this video.
 

hakesterman

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2008
563
0
18,980
0
They are Raping you on SSD, a $ 200 drive probably costs them $ 35.00 to make in mass production. Their eating stake an Lobster and your eating Fish sticks.......
 
G

Guest

Guest
Dont understand why you don't look at OCZ's Revodrive X2 series instead. 2-3 times faster and the 960GB version costs around $1300. I mean if you are thinking of spending that kind of money why not get the best and fastest?
 

LukeCWM

Distinguished
Oct 5, 2011
146
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]echondo[/nom]Much rather get a 960GB Crucial for $600.[/citation]

Maybe I'm on the wrong website, because I feel all of you have got it wrong.

The Intel DC S3700 is absolutely not about being the biggest SSD around, or the fastest, or the cheapest. It's primarily about the being the first SSD we've ever seen to provide /consistent/ write IOPS over lengthy periods of use. And secondarily, it is about lowering the price of /enterprise/ SSDs to be within reach for small business, and to financially be an option for large data centers.

The Crucial m500 is a pretty cool drive, undoubtedly. I could see video editing suites making great use of them, or gamers with lots of cash to put into their favorite hobby. But the m500 would fall apart if you put it into a database server receiving continuous reads and writes until it fails. Its speed would be abysmal, and it would fail within months of heavy use from reaching its maximum write-endurance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS