SSD Does 130MB/s Write on Single Channel

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow, great news! hopefully they can get this rolling quick. I have SSD so far and am very happy with the performance so far, but this will take things to the next level 😀.

 
Question. What is the advantage of using one channel? Less cost and/or higher performance? The footprint is larger.
 
[citation][nom]tmax[/nom]I want a SSD. Just waiting for the prices to drop a little more.[/citation]

Have a chair, sit with me, this is going to take a looooooooong time. Want some gum?
 
HLDIMM!!! Now this is a great improvement over existing SSDs. Imagine instead of having to purchase an entire new SSD paying for the enclosure, controller and new PCB/NAND just buying expandable HLNAND modules. Pop the old out and the new in.
I know it does not say this is possible in the article but if you look at the specimen provided it clearly has DIMM slots.
 
hmmm .. it will be interesting to see how this twist on the memory chips used stacks up over time. As for the single channel vs multiple channel -- if there is any data failure it will be detected sooner or less of a pain in the butt -- plus this makes scalability extremely flexible and low CPU utilization through put/over utilization.. bring it on!!!
 
[citation][nom]renniz[/nom]Question. What is the advantage of using one channel? Less cost and/or higher performance? The footprint is larger.[/citation]
Yes what is the advantage? Wouldn't it make more sense to take this technology and use mutlichannel to beat current SSD speeds?
 
The way I see the advantage is instead of 8 channels at 128gigs all together you can ( if they will develop such drive ) 128gigs per channel working as one unit with astronomically high throughput ... plus if this technology takes off then the multichannel ssd will HAVE TO come down in price... its a win win situation.
 
WOW! It only makes me glad I've waited so long. When they release SATA3 SSDs in mass quantities it will be because of this! I'm going to be way excited for this! I'm already excited!
 
[citation][nom]buzznut[/nom]Yes what is the advantage? Wouldn't it make more sense to take this technology and use mutlichannel to beat current SSD speeds?[/citation]

I think the point is that this is getting this kind of performance using only 1 channel, if you put it into a typical ssd setup using multiple channels your gonna (very) quickly max out what sata itself can do..

8 channels on a typical ssd vs 1, maybe 2 channels on this setup should be a lot less complex to develop and manufacture
 
[citation][nom]the_krasno[/nom]Have a chair, sit with me, this is going to take a looooooooong time. Want some gum?[/citation]
LOL, here have a cookie, you'll be right as rain...
 
[citation][nom]the_krasno[/nom]Have a chair, sit with me, this is going to take a looooooooong time. Want some gum?[/citation]

Stay a while, and listen.
 
[citation][nom]the_krasno[/nom]Have a chair, sit with me, this is going to take a looooooooong time. Want some gum?[/citation]

Observe the sound from the corner of the room, your hard drive indexing away for Vista search.. it almost drowns out the pitter patter of rain
 
I have a feeling rather than bring prices down, a drive using this may end up being priced above existing premium SSDs, for enthusiasts and enterprise useage. Very few components have margin anymore and I'm sure companies making SSDs don't want to turn the SSD market into the high volume low margin market that Seagate and WD created. SSDs should be cheap now, but they are obviously not.

Too bad prices are so high on these things. My single Patriot Inferno 100GB is faster than my 3 WD 500GB Blacks striped together and I'd buy more but they are over $300 CAN each.
 
I don't see this taking off. It is "single-channel" only in name. Notice there's still 16 flash chips on there? They're just daisy-chained together in a ring, as the article states, but half the people commenting don't RTFA.

It still takes just as many flash modules to reach this performance level as with the existing "multi-channel" controllers, so there's absolutely no gain here. It also requires their proprietary flash modules instead of the standard ONFI NAND flash that everybody else is using right now. It's like Rambus DRAM all over again.
 
[citation][nom]cdillon[/nom]I don't see this taking off. It is "single-channel" only in name. Notice there's still 16 flash chips on there? They're just daisy-chained together in a ring, as the article states, but half the people commenting don't RTFA.It still takes just as many flash modules to reach this performance level as with the existing "multi-channel" controllers, so there's absolutely no gain here. It also requires their proprietary flash modules instead of the standard ONFI NAND flash that everybody else is using right now. It's like Rambus DRAM all over again.[/citation]

Sounds like the difference between Token-ring networking and Ethernet networking.
Are each of the 8 MCPs in a Token-ring in each module, or do the 2 modules (pack of 8 MCPs) make up the token ring? Cool stuff.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom