News Samsung Announces 256TB SSDs and Unveils Peta-Byte Scale PBSSDs

[Admin]

Samsung is at the Flash Memory Summit and has announced 256TB SSDs, as well as unveiling its peta-byte scale PBSSDs.

Samsung Announces 256TB SSDs and Unveils Peta-Byte Scale PBSSDs : Read more

 

[Firestone]

256TB SSD? I'll take two, please.

 

[Greg7579]

I wonder how long it will take to have 15 TB consumer PCIe 5 M.2 SSDs at under 1000 dollars for desktop builds? That will end the days of RAID and will help photographers like me who want to put it all on 1 SSD and back it up to another one just like it. These 8TB SSDs are much cheaper now but I need it to be 12 to 15....

 

[NeoMorpheus]

I need either2 or 4 TB one for my SteamDeck.

 

[TheOtherOne]

256TB SSD? I'll take two, please.

If I had 3 kidneys, I will take three! I guess two it is for me too.

 

[DavidLejdar]

I wonder how long it will take to have 15 TB consumer PCIe 5 M.2 SSDs at under 1000 dollars for desktop builds? That will end the days of RAID and will help photographers like me who want to put it all on 1 SSD and back it up to another one just like it. These 8TB SSDs are much cheaper now but I need it to be 12 to 15....

That will probably take some time, as there doesn't seem to be much of such specific demand (and mass production is quite a factor in bringing down the price of something).

There is general demand for storage. In 2022, the SSD market was some $29 billion, with around 300 million client SSDs having been shipped. But an average price of $82.39 per unit, that was around the price of 1TB (for the cheaper ones). In particular, the Steam survey of last month says that 51.41% of users had a total hard drive space of above 1 TB - which means about half of millions of Steam users, have 1 TB storage capacity at most, and of the other ones, likely many are having HDDs.

And meanwhile, the market for MicroSDs was nearly $6 billion, despite them having even less storage capacity than most laptops.

Also, the cloud storage market was some $90 billion in 2022.

So, I wouldn't expect "15 TB consumer PCIe 5 M.2 SSDs at under $1000 for desktop builds" soon, as this particular trend doesn't seem to be there. That may change of course - such as when game devs start utilizing NVMe SSDs more, and users upgrade their systems, switching to any NVMe to begin with, and so on. But as is, it may be worth considering a different approach, depending on whether your need for speedy high storage has to do with loading a lot of files all at once, and/or with the backup part.

 

[vehekos]

Oh no. The next windows will require 16 Tb just to be installed.

 

[vehekos]

I wonder how long it will take to have 15 TB consumer PCIe 5 M.2 SSDs at under 1000 dollars for desktop builds? That will end the days of RAID and will help photographers like me who want to put it all on 1 SSD and back it up to another one just like it. These 8TB SSDs are much cheaper now but I need it to be 12 to 15....

The cheapest 4 Tb M.2 in Amazon cost around 160, so if you can plug 4, you get 16Tb for around 600/700

 

[usertests]

Oh no. The next windows will require 16 Tb just to be installed.

From what I've seen, Windows requirements have plateaued over the last decade or so. 4 GB of RAM (8 GB preferred) and a 128 GB SSD (64 GB can cause problems) is all that's needed. Most 5-10 year old CPUs with iGPUs will be fine. These specs cost $100 or less on the used market, and you can get to 32 GB of RAM and 512 GB - 1 TB SSD for about another $100 if you want. Although the RAM prices will rise and fall cyclically.

Windows 11 artificially requires newer CPUs for the TPM but it can be bypassed. Or you can play ball and buy an old Intel 8th gen system. There are a new batch of Intel and AMD vulnerabilities but you can take some easy steps to reduce your risk.

 

[Greg7579]

The cheapest 4 Tb M.2 in Amazon cost around 160, so if you can plug 4, you get 16Tb for around 600/700

I know that but I want my current 6TB of image data (raw files) all on one SSD and I do not want an array and I want it backed up to 3 more single drives. So I want 8TB SSDs now and I want 15TB SSDs 3 to 5 years from now.

 

[Firestone]

I know that but I want my current 6TB of image data (raw files) all on one SSD and I do not want an array and I want it backed up to 3 more single drives. So I want 8TB SSDs now and I want 15TB SSDs 3 to 5 years from now.

8TB SSD is already here, you can get the Samsung 870 Evo 8TB SATA drive for $380. You can also find data center grade U.2 PCIe 3 Intel P4150 8TB for about $400 on eBay. There's also already consumer 16TB SATA SSD for able $1200 iirc

But you don't need this for 6TB of images. You can get a quality 10TB HDD for $190; get two for $380 and put them in RAID1. Done.

Going to such lengths to store all you images on flash with replication is not just inefficient but also doesn't offer any benefits. Even on a single spinning 7200rpm drive I doubt you'll ever experience slow down; SATA HDD speeds are normally 200MB/s, and standard raw photography files are on the order of 24-50MB, so you're looking at data loading speeds of a fraction of the second.

You're free to do what you like but the stipulations you present don't make any actual sense. You should be separating your "hot" fast working storage volume (NVMe SSD) from your "cold" mass storage volume (large HDD). Trying to combine high performance working volume with high storage capacity and data protection (replication, redundancy), all in a single storage system, is something that exists only in enterprise grade solutions ($$$$)

I'm also a photographer and this is the exact approach I take. Local laptop / desktop have only 1-2TB SSD storage, only for the photos I'm currently working with, all the rest get archived on a plain old RAID1 with 20TBx2 HDD's attached to a dedicated file server and accessed over the network as needed. Which is almost never because you don't actually ever need your entire photo library locally at once. Also utilize Adobe Lightroom CC (cloud edition) to maintain a library of all the work that I've edited, so even if you need an old file you can just dig it out of Lightroom easier than you could find it in mass storage archive.

 

[Greg7579]

8TB SSD is already here, you can get the Samsung 870 Evo 8TB SATA drive for $380. You can also find data center grade U.2 PCIe 3 Intel P4150 8TB for about $400 on eBay. There's also already consumer 16TB SATA SSD for able $1200 iirc

But you don't need this for 6TB of images. You can get a quality 10TB HDD for $190; get two for $380 and put them in RAID1. Done.

Going to such lengths to store all you images on flash with replication is not just inefficient but also doesn't offer any benefits. Even on a single spinning 7200rpm drive I doubt you'll ever experience slow down; SATA HDD speeds are normally 200MB/s, and standard raw photography files are on the order of 24-50MB, so you're looking at data loading speeds of a fraction of the second.

You're free to do what you like but the stipulations you present don't make any actual sense. You should be separating your "hot" fast working storage volume (NVMe SSD) from your "cold" mass storage volume (large HDD). Trying to combine high performance working volume with high storage capacity and data protection (replication, redundancy), all in a single storage system, is something that exists only in enterprise grade solutions ($$$$)

I'm also a photographer and this is the exact approach I take. Local laptop / desktop have only 1-2TB SSD storage, only for the photos I'm currently working with, all the rest get archived on a plain old RAID1 with 20TBx2 HDD's attached to a dedicated file server and accessed over the network as needed. Which is almost never because you don't actually ever need your entire photo library locally at once. Also utilize Adobe Lightroom CC (cloud edition) to maintain a library of all the work that I've edited, so even if you need an old file you can just dig it out of Lightroom easier than you could find it in mass storage archive.

I know all of that, except I don't agree with everything you said. I have two external 10 TB spinners for 2x backup. I have two internal 8TB Samsung Q 870s for my main image data and the other one for a synced SSD backup. One of them I bought back when it was introduced for 900 bucks. The second one I bought for 320 bucks two months ago. I'm about to build and my primary data drive will Sabrent's 8TB Rocket 4 Plus M.2 PCIe Gen 4 SSD . It originally listed at $1,999.99, is now $900. My goal is no spinning rust and I am very familiar with RAID - so familiar that I know enough not to use it for primary data and certainly not backup. The stipulations I made make perfect sense, and you too will someday escape the clutches of spinners and RAID.