• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Consumer class ssd capacities in 2016

B

bend

n00b
Joined
Apr 20, 2016
Messages
10
Are consumer ssd sizes going to increase dramatically this year? Should I wait a while before getting a 500-1Tb ssd?
 
Not dramatically but when the new Crucial MX300 drops here shortly it has been rumored there will be a drop in prices.
I picked up a Samsung 850 EVO 500GB for only $118 recently.

HDD prices were that for the same capacity only a few years ago.
 
HDD prices were that for the same capacity only a few years ago.
Click to expand...

Seems high for recent prices unless we are talking enterprise. Although maybe just after the 2011 flood. Before the flood I paid $55 each for a few 2 TB Hitachi 5k2000s brand new.
 
Last edited:
I'm holding off on buying any new storage (and video cards for that matter) until at least this fall / winter. I can see prices only going down at the same capacities - and in the case of video, new cards coming out so no point in sinking cash into old tech.
 
3D nand from Intel/Micron and Toshiba should increase competition dropping prices however I don't expect these to happen soon.
 
ep0x73 said:
Not dramatically but when the new Crucial MX300 drops here shortly it has been rumored there will be a drop in prices.
I picked up a Samsung 850 EVO 500GB for only $118 recently.

HDD prices were that for the same capacity only a few years ago.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the MX300 needs to massive improve capacity per dollar or to improve performance massively over the bX200 to make Micron's TLC drives palatable. I'll take either one there.

The bX200 just sacrifices too much performance for the small $30 reduction you get in price. But if they can get it closer to HALF the price of MLC drives, then we'd have a winner :D
 
Last edited:
drescherjm said:
Seems high for recent prices unless we are talking enterprise. Although maybe just after the 2011 flood. Before the flood I paid $55 each for a few 2 TB Hitachi 5k2000s brand new.
Click to expand...

You are right, Just did a history check and I paid $60 for a 500GB WD black in 2010

It will be awhile before any 500GB SSD goes for 60 bucks.
 
Maybe late 2017 early 2018. If that happens 256GB and 128GB sizes will no longer exist.
 
I use a SSD for boot and spinner for games/movies works well PC boots in 8 seconds and windows is very snappy
 
ep0x73 said:
Not dramatically but when the new Crucial MX300 drops here shortly it has been rumored there will be a drop in prices.
I picked up a Samsung 850 EVO 500GB for only $118 recently.

HDD prices were that for the same capacity only a few years ago.
Click to expand...
Thanks. I looked up the MX300 and it does look promising.
 
Not quite $60, but I'm fine with the Samsung 500GB 850 EVO m.2 I got for $69.95 from B&H. Sure, it was "used," but with total host writes at 0, power on count at 9 (including my powering on to check), and power on hours at 0, it's effectively new.

Even when 500/512GB SSDs regularly go for $60, I don't see why 240/256GB will be phased out. I mean, "we" see retail 1TB HDDs selling for $35-40 (at least that's what a 1TB WD Blue or Seagate has been regularly on sale for at Microcenter for the past year), yet we see 500GB HDDs selling right beside them for the same price (or more). With 1TB at that price, what's the point of 500GB, especially for the same price? Or, a closer comparison would be that we're seeing some of the 240/256GB SSDs sitting right around that $60 point (that used to be around the same price 500GB SSDs are at now), yet you can still readily get the 120/128GB ones for about $40. I figure when 500GB starts hitting $60-70, we'll still be seeing 250GB drives sitting around $40-45.

Wasn't there supposed to be that Mushkin 4TB SSD coming out at some point relatively "soon" that was being targeted at the $500 price point?
 
Even when 500/512GB SSDs regularly go for $60, I don't see why 240/256GB will be phased out.
Click to expand...

With the price of the controller there is little profit left to be made at these prices.


With that said these still may exist for OEMs that charge 5x to 10x the price to add these to an upgrade over the base system.
 
Then I have to ask, why do they still manufacture/sell new 250GB, 320GB, and 500GB desktop HDDs when the 1TB drives sell for $35-50 and 2TB drives are near $60? The margins on those smaller ones must be just as small, yet they're still around. I don't really know anything about the base cost of an SSD controller, but I'd have to guess it's similar to the relative base cost for a desktop drive (circuit board, spindle/motor, heads, etc.) limiting how cheaply a HDD can me made.
 
Hard drives are cheaper to manufacturer. Also I believe anything smaller than 512 GB is a 512GB drive that is factory short stroked (or just old stock) since everyone is now using 1TB platters and you can't have less than 1 head..
 
Last edited:
What I am thinking is if a 512GB SSD is $60 what would the market be for a 256GB SSD that has 1/2 the read / wite performance but costs $45.
 
What's the market for a 120GB SSD now at $45, when you can get a 250GB for $60 with 50% faster write speeds?
 
It does make you wonder why anybody would buy a 120 when for 10-15$ more they can get a 240/250, double capacity and better writes and TBW.
I would not be shocked if the smaller drives start to be phased out soon.
 
Instead of comparing SSD's to the cheapest bulk devices possible, like a 5400rpm 'Green' drive, maybe our bechmark should be comparing them to VelociRaptors. How would that change people's perspective?
 
CombatChrisNC said:
Instead of comparing SSD's to the cheapest bulk devices possible, like a 5400rpm 'Green' drive, maybe our bechmark should be comparing them to VelociRaptors. How would that change people's perspective?
Click to expand...

Just did it myself.

WD Velociraptor WD1000DHTZ 1TB 3.5" SATA Hard Drive (B007VPGJIY)

WD VelociRaptor 500 GB Workstation Hard Drive: 3.5 Inch, 10000 RPM, SATA III, 64 MB Cache - WD5000HHTZ (B007VPGK42)

When speed is the concern, they're already beating HDD in that area. When they can beat slow-as-all-get-out kind of storage, that will be the final accomplishment.
 
CombatChrisNC said:
Instead of comparing SSD's to the cheapest bulk devices possible, like a 5400rpm 'Green' drive, maybe our bechmark should be comparing them to VelociRaptors. How would that change people's perspective?
Click to expand...
A fair point but mainstream appeal counts too.
Once you have a boot SSD that is large enough for your games too, there isnt a great need for more SSDs, hard drives are fine for video, storage and backups.
 
CombatChrisNC said:
Instead of comparing SSD's to the cheapest bulk devices possible, like a 5400rpm 'Green' drive, maybe our bechmark should be comparing them to VelociRaptors. How would that change people's perspective?
Click to expand...
Because it absolutely does not change a thing? A raptor at 10k RPM has an access time that's twice as fast as the 5k RPM green drive, and the two drives may have close to the same sustained read speeds if the green drive is 3.5" due to the higher angular velocity of 3.5" drives vs the 2.5" raptor and likely higher platter count on a 3.5" drive. At best the raptor will, again, be twice as fast as a 2.5" green drive assuming same platter count. Compare that to an SSD which is literally hundreds of times faster access time than either drive, two full orders of magnitude, and will be anywhere from 3-5x faster sustained speed of either drive. Compared to SSDs green drives are garbage, but so are raptors because when you're talking several orders of magnitude faster, doubling the speed of the base you're comparing to doesn't mean shit.
 
I know.

What I mean is that before SSDs your only 'fast' option was a Raptor or something like it. SSDs have made hugs gains against spinning disk, but it wasn't always the clear cut choice it is now. 60GB for $200+ back in the day? No thanks, I might still go with a spinner. Now with SSDs actually being cheaper, it's already won the day for that braket. The bracket where speed is a goal.

Your basic option of 7200rpm is still you basic option of 7200rpm. When that's beaten, what need will anyone ever have for a spinner at that point?

If that's the original question, no, I don't think that well be seeing 2TB SSDs for less than $100 this year. Maybe not even next year.
 
Still have a pair or 500GB raptors in raid1 and they are snappy, not SSD snappy but pretty fast.
The reason their price is really stupid now [bought mine for $80 each on sale] is that WD has discontinued them, sign of the times.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top