Super Talent Debuts UltraDrive SSDs

Status
Not open for further replies.

Area51

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2008
95
0
18,630
0
How about MTBF. I understand that the Intel SLC has 2BP random write life with their 64GB SLC and 200TB random write on their 160GB MLC. How about these guys?
 

Area51

Distinguished
Jul 16, 2008
95
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]Area51[/nom]How about MTBF. I understand that the Intel SLC has 2BP random write life with their 64GB SLC and 200TB random write on their 160GB MLC. How about these guys?[/citation]

Correction. The MLC has 40TB random write life
 
G

Guest

Guest
"Compare that to a 300 GB Velociraptor from Western Digital that goes for $230, and which would you choose for your desktop?"

What an ignorant comment, read the anadtech SSD article and learn why you can't compare a velociraptor to an SSD. Its annoying enough when people say I can just raid 37 or these together and get the same performance for less cost, but tech writers should know better.
 

tayb

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2009
1,143
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]gjfgykj[/nom]"Compare that to a 300 GB Velociraptor from Western Digital that goes for $230, and which would you choose for your desktop?"What an ignorant comment, read the anadtech SSD article and learn why you can't compare a velociraptor to an SSD. Its annoying enough when people say I can just raid 37 or these together and get the same performance for less cost, but tech writers should know better.[/citation]

Show me someone who would rather have a 128GB Solid State Drive instead of a 400GB WD Hard Drive and I'll show you someone with more money than brains.
 

jaragon13

Distinguished
Jun 30, 2008
396
0
18,780
0
Instead of buying a 300Gb Western Digital Velociraptor, I'll stick with a RAID-0 Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB setup. Thank you.
 

bin1127

Distinguished
Dec 5, 2008
736
0
18,980
0
i think they say size and speed cause price is relative to those aspects. we say it's expensive only cause the capacity is still too small. but speed wise there is no comparison with technology of the yesterold.
 

thomasxstewart

Distinguished
Jan 16, 2006
221
0
18,680
0
One Prob: Using SSD on Defective Controllers for SSD today, Means that when Mains finally appear that can do 200/Mb/s from low v. SSD, Your SSD will be 50% worn out(Known thru Standardized Testing of SSDs').


Signed:pHYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART von DRASHEK M.D.
 
G

Guest

Guest
"Show me someone who would rather have a 128GB Solid State Drive instead of a 400GB WD Hard Drive and I'll show you someone with more money than brains."

Maybe someone who wants to have the SSD as their primary boot drive with windows and applications, and then have a 1TB WD caviar black for everything else? I'm guessing you've never booted a computer that has windows on a good SSD.
 
I would love to have an SSD but I won't buy one until I can get a 60GB for $100. It is comming close though. Just yesterday I saw an ad for a high preformance OCZ (Vertex) 32GB drive for $109!! Just a bit lower prices and I'm gonna buy one. But I will of couse keep my current spinning disk RAID 0 setup. For additional storage and of course booting ability.
 

P_haze420

Distinguished
Mar 20, 2009
62
0
18,630
0
60gb sdd is nothing compare to 1tb harddrve. I could buy 100 dollars for 1tb hdd. I would choose that over ssd anyday till the price is drop and more memory. The only thing I'm afraid of is that it acts like flash drive, so you could lose your memory for no reason at all. I had a flash drive and all my work was in there, brought to work and it suddenly dissapear. All hard work went nothing, what a bad day for me.
 

subaqua

Distinguished
Mar 24, 2009
2
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]tayb[/nom]Show me someone who would rather have a 128GB Solid State Drive instead of a 400GB WD Hard Drive and I'll show you someone with more money than brains.[/citation]

Sure, if all you want is capacity, then it's actually better to buy a 1.5TB for $139.00 (9.2cents/GB). But, if I want value and low power for my IOPS, I'd rather buy an SSD. The 256GB version of this drive has a price of $645.00. That's a painful $2.50 / GB but only .05 to .10 cents per IOP (seq. vs. random write). Not bad at all. It would take many WD drives and lots of power to get these kinds of IOPS .... and most importantly, all those drives will not fit in my laptop :)



$2.50 / GB (ouch!)

but:

$0.50 / IOP (not too shabby)

 

dneonu

Distinguished
Jun 22, 2009
5
0
18,510
0
hdd or ssd? it's as simple as this. if maximum storage and bang for your
buck is priority 1 go with hdd. if maximum computer performance is
priority 1 then go with ssd. by going with the latter, is the only way
your computer parts will ever be able to trully flex it's muscles
because hdd's are too much of a bottleneck. when it comes to speed and
performance hdd's with it's spinning mechanical platter will never be
able to match sdd's all electronic design and the already big perform-
ance advantage ssd's have over hdd's will only grow greater and
greater and with ssd's prices dropping someday all computers will have
ssd's with adequate storage. unfortunately that's still a few years
away. a few years after that hdd's should become obsolete.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I have an intel ssd it smokes it flys it makes a scorpio black drive look like a snail. It costs a lot. It is small. You need an external. I have a seagate 1.5tb freeagent. super quiet mac mini setup. It is the best speed up mod possible for notebooks and many other computers. It is not good if you want a large capacity 1 piece notebook. The scorpio black 320gb 7200 hdd is best for a speed + storage 1 piece setup.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY