[citation][nom]pocketdrummer[/nom]Once you can get 512gb for under $200 and
have a life span that gets close to a decent HDD, then you can expect an award. [/citation]
Well, it seams samsung is doing a decent job on getting there. heck, In this article they even mentioned about there personal experiences with the 470
We run Samsung 470s in all of our test beds in Tom's Hardware labs around the world, and not one of them has suffered any sort of failure.
and the first ones launched about 2 years ago. So I'm just a few of those test beds has those early models.
[citation][nom]pocketdrummer[/nom]They keep increasing the speed, but they do nothing to reduce the COST. [/citation]
Oh really? For the samsung 830 128GB I have, (if I bought it) it would of cost $200 to $250 when it first came out. (got my SSD through the samsung giveaway many months back, so I dont remember exact price of it at the time, other than it was above $200.)
From the samsung 830 review
We're told that the 128 GB 830-series drive should sell for $250. That’s a little under $2 per GB (right in line with OCZ's 120 GB Vertex 3).
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/samsung-830-ssd-toggle-mode,3034.html
So with the info from above, a samsung 830 128GB cost about $140 now and when it launched a year ago, i cost over $200.... They haven't reduced the cost at all?
Lets rethink that about that.
(and thats just from samsung, I haven't looked at the other guys. Although knowing how companies react to each other that's in the same market, I'm pretty darn sure that i'll see the exact same trend.)
[citation][nom]pocketdrummer[/nom] It's still pointless for someone like me who has over 1.5TB of space used. I can't load Windows and all of
my critical programs on a 256GB SSD, and the 512GB wouldn't give me much wiggle room. Not to mention my sample libraries that would benefit from the speed... that are hundreds of GB each.[/citation]
Something fishy with your thinking or something
No matter what kind of job you can do with a computer, I've never heard of someone that would need 512GB of storage just for their critical programs or if they did, it wasn't critical enough to need the speed of an SSD (and with all the people i've hanged out with on the forums, I know there plenty of guys in there that really do use there storage systems to the limit (both speed and storage) by there jobs/activites).
Now if your combining progams
WITH anything you save. Then that's a different story.
Although if that's your thinking then as Freggo and willard pointed out, For how long you been here, you should of know by now that you need would need to pick the right things for the job and truly figure out what needs the speed benefit of an SSD. (not every "critical program" needs the speed boost of an SSD. )
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram