Super Talent Also Releasing Dual Interface SSD

Status
Not open for further replies.

mp562

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2009
81
0
18,630
It might make it a little more expensive, but it's kinda cool to have the option when you need it in a bind.
 

snotling

Distinguished
Oct 10, 2002
532
0
18,980
[citation][nom]husker[/nom]Wouldn't having 2 interfaces make the unit more expensive? Seems like that is moving in the wrong direction.[/citation]
USB is dirt cheap, you know about USB flash drives right?
 

phatboe

Distinguished
Sep 2, 2006
239
3
18,685
It's also a good way to shift a system from HDD to SSD, allowing the user to move the disk image from the HDD to the SSD via a USB port, and then remove the HDD and boot up the rig via SSD, system intact.
I am confused here, can't you do that over a SATA interface? How does this change anything?
 

jamoise

Distinguished
Mar 30, 2010
43
0
18,530
[citation][nom]phatboe[/nom]I am confused here, can't you do that over a SATA interface? How does this change anything?[/citation]

say if you have a laptop, and you want to change it to an SSD, and it only has one bay for a hdd inside the laptop, it makes it more convenient to just plug the ssd into your usb and ghost your data to the ssd, then remove the old hdd and install the SSD, especially if said person only has the laptop.
 

teodoreh

Distinguished
Sep 23, 2007
315
13
18,785
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]USB 3.0 I assume? If not then why?[/citation]

100% agree, why spending hundreds of $/€ for a 250MB/s capable device that will get a huge bottleneck around 38MB/s??
 

huron

Distinguished
Jun 4, 2007
2,420
0
19,860
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]USB 3.0 I assume? If not then why?[/citation]

I am confused as well.

I understand the want for USB2, but isn't USB3 backwards compatible. I keep thinking if I was going to spend this much, it would be awesome to have both of those.
 

back_by_demand

Splendid
BANNED
Jul 16, 2009
4,821
0
22,780
[citation][nom]huron[/nom]I am confused as well.I understand the want for USB2, but isn't USB3 backwards compatible. I keep thinking if I was going to spend this much, it would be awesome to have both of those.[/citation]
Not very difficult to understand really is it?
If you have a drive that can bosh out 250Mb/s transfer rate, then if you have USB 2.0 it will have a severe bottleneck, USB 3.0 will at least allow transfer at speeds not far away from SATA.

It doesn't state anywhere above, or on the press release if it is USB 2.0 or USB 3.0 so a perfectly valid question...
 

Dkz

Distinguished
Oct 16, 2009
207
0
18,680
That's bullsh!t. The ones who didn't change to SDD is because the cost in it.. Plus the technology is still too fresh to jump right into it. Give me a reasonable price and then we will see some change.
And if you tell me that the price is all about performance, then I tell you this, "call me when you get 320Gb SSD for $50"
 

zaznet

Distinguished
May 10, 2010
387
0
18,780
[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]pricing will be way overpriced, I wait until price/size ratio can compare to today'shard drives.[/citation]

I'm wanting price to capacity in line with the flash drives. The cost to produce the device isn't significantly higher. We are paying a premium for Sata or making it internal.

Competition is increasing rapidly and prices are dropping.
 

zaznet

Distinguished
May 10, 2010
387
0
18,780
[citation][nom]halcyon[/nom]...any why is this news?[/citation]

Because Tom's Hardware reports a lot of SSD releases. It's a topic many of the readers are interested in, even if the news isn't anything too much more innovative than the last bit.
 
[citation][nom]drwho1[/nom]pricing will be way overpriced, I wait until price/size ratio can compare to today'shard drives.[/citation]

I am waiting for Intels 25nm SSDs. They say its supposed to increase the drive size, performance while reducing price and power consumption.

That I am all for.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.