Super Talent 2 TB SSDs Coming Next Month

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

mikepaul

Distinguished
Jan 17, 2006
87
0
18,630
0
That 2TB model sounds better for a DB2 server than it does for a gamer, but one thing's for sure: if I ever bought one for THAT kind of money, it'd have to come with a guarantee that they'd port it over to whatever motherboard interface comes down the pike until either it or I die of old age...
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111
V8VENOM, with an Areca card and just a few SATAs one can easily get more than 1GB/sec.
I work a lot with HD (currently speccing out a 50TB array for a movie company);
there's no need for an OTT solution like the 2TB SSD for HD. The real power of SSDs
is access time and random read/write, thus their incredible potential for transaction
processing and other database apps. For HD one merely needs good sequential I/O and
that's easily achievable with SAS/SATA/SCSI/FC. Plus, for storing HD, 2TB is not
really that much space.

I currently use an old SGI Tezro for HD tasks (quad-R16K/1GHz, 16MB L2 per CPU,
8GB RAM, 3 x QLA12160/66, DM3/DM5/VBOB, etc.). Not yet sorted out a SATA RAID (only
just received some 8-port SAS cards) so atm it's still running with a large SCSI
RAID (36 x 146GB 15K = 5TB) for which I get 700MB/sec. With a modern PC, speeds 2X
to 4X this should not be a problem, with much fewer drives using SAS/SATA. No need
for SSDs for uncompressed HD.

Ian.

 

foody

Distinguished
May 7, 2009
128
0
18,690
1
One SSD or an absolutely insane PC setup. You could even buy a Mac with all that money! Not that I would though.
 

x_2fast4u_x

Distinguished
Nov 22, 2007
286
0
18,780
0
"Sequential read speeds of up to 1.4 GB/sec and sequential write speeds up to 1.2 GB/sec." Not the new bottle neck will be how fast you can click your mouse. $5000.00 is not much considering the speed. It would take at least 12 Velioceraptors in RAID0 to get this performance, not to mention your CPU usage would go to 50% minimum even on an i7, Plus with all those moving parts Failure% goes though the roof, you need a $2000 PSU to support that many Disk Drives, You still need a 12 port raid controller that can handle this much, not to mention one with 10gig's of buffer...

All in all

$2000 PSU
$1000 Raid card
$2000 MoBo+CPU+ram combo to handle the workload

Or

$5000 SSD that will stay top of the line for a few years, and after its no longer "top o ta line" its still getting 1.2gb/s writes...


 

zads

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2008
20
0
18,510
0
For a 2TB PCIE "gamer" SSD...

Even at a hefty 10GB per game (exaggerated),
What "gamer" would have 200 high-end games on their computer?

Or even 100 for the 1TB?

SuperTalent's marketing guys needs to find some common sense.

 

zads

Distinguished
Nov 4, 2008
20
0
18,510
0
For a 2TB PCIE "gamer" SSD...

Even at a hefty 10GB per game (exaggerated),
What "gamer" would have 200 very high-end games on their computer?

Or even 100 very high-end games for the 1TB?

SuperTalent's marketing guys needs to find some common sense.
 

mlopinto2k1

Distinguished
Apr 25, 2006
1,433
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]foody[/nom]One SSD or an absolutely insane PC setup. You could even buy a Mac with all that money! Not that I would though.[/citation]
I would buy a Mac, a MacPro! I happen to think the dual quad-core they have looks pretty damn sweet! I love PC's too! I love em' all :eek:)
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111
If only they'd use something other than Flash. There are many better technologies
which could be used, as reported in New Scientist and Scientific American over the
years. Heck, there was a pseudo solid state device developed 15 years ago (the
"Trillion Bit Cube", ie. 116GB; New Scientist, 13/Aug/1994, Issue 1938, pp. 23-23)
which offered more than 10X faster sequential I/O than ST's 2TB unit, though the
access time was not as good. Made from an alcohol-based polymer, one laser
illuminated a slice through the block, another illuminated a point on the slice.
No moving parts for the recording medium, but of course some moving parts were
required to control the lasers, thus the lesser access time to find the required
X/Y/Z, but once at the right location the read/write rate was very fast. At the
time, the test device was said to be about the size of a VHS tape.

Spintronics, memristors, quantum devices, all sorts of things in the pipeline.
Remember folks, the current products using Flash RAM are just the beginning, and
compared to what ought to be possible they're actually very slow (presumably the
fastest ever possible speed would be 10^34 bits/sec, ie. the limit of quantum
events). Alas, as always it's about commercial realities, getting products to the
market, earning revenue, developing the next gen product, making a profit to
satisfy shareholders, weathering economic ups & downs in the meantime, and the
individual staff involved just trying to survive, etc. Just wish for once IBM or
whoever would go for one giant leap all in a single step instead of drip-fed
small-fry improvements.

Ian.

 
G

Guest

Guest
256 GB Intel SSDs are going for 800 right now, so 800 x 4 = $3200. The pricing seems about right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS