Will lower capacity SSD drives go the way of the dinosaur?

Comixbooks

Comixbooks

Fully [H]
Joined
Jun 7, 2008
Messages
22,000
I say this because Gears of War 4 is 125 gigs I can fit one copy on a 250 gig SSD if I had two copies they wouldn't fit because the drive is like 232 GB total so this has got me thinking I need to upgrade to something with higher capacity.

The thing with SSD drives they are still expensive as hell unless you go the route of 250-500 gig the one TB drives can be had for lik 280.00 on ebay the cheapest I can find them.

btw: Gears of War is on my 3TB HDD drive loads times not important the reasoning.
 
Last edited:
Yes.
In 1995 the biggest hard drives that were available were 1GB. Now we have 8TB drives. That's an 8000% increase. I expect SSDs will expand just as exponentially over the next 20 years.

Technology goes one way. Bigger. Faster. Cheaper. Storage technology is rapidly changing. And it will be interesting to see what comes after m.2 and pcie.
 
SSD pricing seems to be scaling poorly to how much space people use. With luck, this will change over the next few years. I'm running a 750GB and 500GB drive and I am running out of space on both between programs, OS and games. Every time I remove something, I install a new game that I play, download some mods or receive a nice big 5GB update negating the saved space.
 
No, small SSDs will always have a place as dedicated OS disks. But for gaming it was only ever a compromise. I purchased small because it was expensive not because I thought 30 or 64 or 250 would be enough for all my gaming needs.
 
I hope so. Newer laptops seem like the have a 128gb or 256gb stock. And yes I know I can add one easily
 



Found this video on boot times and game loading speeds seems like there is no difference between Sata and M.2 SSD cards for the most part.
Even though write times are like x4 times faster with almost any M.2 card.
 
Comixbooks said:



Found this video on boot times and game loading speeds seems like there is no difference between Sata and M.2 SSD cards for the most part.
Even though write times are like x4 times faster with almost any M.2 card.
Click to expand...

Because the key is not raw throughput, but access time. That's why even the worst SSDs are a huge leap over HDDs even the ones that doesn't really beat them much by sequential speed. But the actual real world performance difference between SSDs is very little, unless you're doing something that needs huge sequential writes.

When a game requests data that is a few MB sequential speed doesn't matter much. What matters is how fast the drive can access the data.
 
Of course they will. It's a bit of a daft question isn't it?

We already have 1TB and 2TB SSDs. Sure they're expensive, c.1200GBP for a 2TB NVME, but they'll come down in price, as these things always do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Liver
like this
Yes, for sure. I have a 500GB drive hooked up to my Xbox 1 and I can only install 4 or 5 games at a time, it's a joke. Anything under 2TB now is borderline unusable when dealing with games or media files now.
 
128GB SSDs will still have life as a dedicated OS drive for quite sometime in the future. My current OS & programs 70GB or so and I have been liberal in installing all OS programs onto the said drive, though I moved my Documents folder to a spinner.

However as the SOLE drive in the system, I wouldn't feel comfortable with anything less than 256GB, 128GB is going to require file juggling. 512GB is currently the ideal spot but the best price to capacity ratio is in 256GB, so a fairly big catch 22. 1TB is still too expensive for what it does. I am talking laptops and windows tablet devices here, as I would NEVER use a single drive in a custome built PC if I can help it.
 
I just picked up a 500 gig Samsung Evo I would of went crucial 1TB but worried about some of the reviews. Now I have a X1 500 gig drive and X2 250 gig drives which should be good for 8 or more games combined if I don't want to load up my primary drive with games which would be lost in a C:// format. Most of my Steam games are on a HDD drive cause it alot of them don't get played at all I just load games like Dragon Age and Prey which have pretty long load times.
 
Eventually SSD's will be so large and cheap that HDD's will only be used in datacenters.
 
Simple answer; yes. Even the common perception of what is considered a "low" capacity SSD is going to drastically change as time goes on, just like it has in reference to HDD capacity and memory capacity.
 
Last edited:
My HTPC uses a 120gb SSD, more than enough just for the OS and various media programs along side a 1tb HDD for media, Then my laptop which used to have a 1TB HDD, I replaced it with a 250GB SSD which is more than enough since the laptop cant play major games, and thats with a 30GB recovery partition.

Small SSD will most likely stay around for a long time until you can buy a 1TB SSD for the same price as a 250GB SSD is today(around $100)
 
I've got a 60Gb SSD just sitting on a shelf. I might throw it in just to run a couple of games with now that I remember it's there.
 
that's why I still use mechanical drives (WD Caviar Black) in addition to SSD...I only put games which I know will benefit the most from an SSD on it...otherwise mechanical drives are still fine for the majority of games
 
  • Like
Reactions: chenw
like this
Tough to beat spinners for a nas at current prices, but ssds have come along way in price and performance. I would hope as it keeps getting cheaper then 128 go away.
 
I just wish SSD prices would come back down... The Samsung EVO 850 costs more now than when I bought it back in 2015
 
AltTabbins said:
I think it will catch up with data centers pretty quickly too. Our new SAN at work is entirely flash.
Click to expand...
AFA's are great, but for massive data centers (like Google, or other archiving) I still think disk will still have a use for a long time.
 
bigdogchris said:
AFA's are great, but for massive data centers (like Google, or other archiving) I still think disk will still have a use for a long time.
Click to expand...

It's an interesting thought. Will magnetic media continue to be able to expand or are we nearing the theoretical maximum that can be stored on a platter? Eventually it may get to a place where SSD capacity outstrips traditional media.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
It's an interesting thought. Will magnetic media continue to be able to expand or are we nearing the theoretical maximum that can be stored on a platter? Eventually it may get to a place where SSD capacity outstrips traditional media.
Click to expand...

maybe in 3-4 years but cost wise i think it'll take another 3-4 years after that before the cost is worth it over high capacity platter drives. at 1400+ dollars for a 4TB SSD it's no where close to worth it over 10TB drives that cost under 600 dollars.

Libertad said:
I just wish SSD prices would come back down... The Samsung EVO 850 costs more now than when I bought it back in 2015
Click to expand...

yeah the 850 price is all over the place, i missed a sale last week where the 850 evo 512gb was selling for 102 dollars after rebate :(
 
bigdogchris said:
HAMR
Click to expand...

I had to Google that. Interesting, but it's definitely having maturity problems. Which means....


sirmonkey1985 said:
maybe in 3-4 years but cost wise i think it'll take another 3-4 years after that before the cost is worth it over high capacity platter drives. at 1400+ dollars for a 4TB SSD it's no where close to worth it over 10TB drives that cost under 600 dollars.
Click to expand...

we'll have to see which competing technology develops more quickly. SSD's are getting cheaper and larger constantly as yields get better, manufacturing increases, and of course technology improves (die shrinks being the most basic, new ways of creating flash memory being more complex). 3-4 years is still relatively short.

Still, for the foreseeable future both storage technologies will be used.
 
I bought a new drive a few months ago, and was shocked to see the prices were pretty much the same as they were 3 years ago. I bought a small drive originally , thinking they'd be cheap now.
 
Wrecked Em said:
I bought a new drive a few months ago, and was shocked to see the prices were pretty much the same as they were 3 years ago. I bought a small drive originally , thinking they'd be cheap now.
Click to expand...

Black Friday seems to be the only time the drives really go on sale I think people buy them at that time and sell them year around at maybe a 45.00 hike.
 
M76 said:
No, small SSDs will always have a place as dedicated OS disks. But for gaming it was only ever a compromise. I purchased small because it was expensive not because I thought 30 or 64 or 250 would be enough for all my gaming needs.
Click to expand...

Doubtful. My first USB thumb drive was 64MB, those aren't around anymore. The same thing will happen with the small SSDs.

SSD's have come down in price, but they still need more work. 2-3 years ago I paid $500 for a 1TB SSD, today they can be had for around $300. Still SIGNIFICANLY more than their mechanical counterpart, but going in the right direction.
 
RamonGTP said:
Doubtful. My first USB thumb drive was 64MB, those aren't around anymore. The same thing will happen with the small SSDs.

SSD's have come down in price, but they still need more work. 2-3 years ago I paid $500 for a 1TB SSD, today they can be had for around $300. Still SIGNIFICANLY more than their mechanical counterpart, but going in the right direction.
Click to expand...

That's because you have no use for a 64MB drive. You had a 64MB drive then because there was no larger, or you couldn't afford a larger one. And the purpose of a thumbdrive and a SSD couldn't be different. A 128GB SSD is still usable as a system drive. And will be for a long time.

Yeah and I got a 2TB SSD over a year ago for $600 and now the same drive would cost $750

I don't think SSD and HDD prices will ever be in parity. You couldn't sell HDDs if that were the case. And you can bet as long as HDDs are around they'll keep SSD prices artificially high. Remember you're not paying what it costs. You're paying what supply and demand dictates. That's capitalism for you. Just because something is cheaper to make, and better in every way, doesn't mean it will flood the market as affordable high quality products.
 
Last edited:
I still keep all my games on spinners, I've noticed no difference really in load times when gaming, especially in a multiplayer game where you may just get to the "wait 30 seconds" screen faster. OS, Steam, browsers, etc are on SSD, games on WD Blacks, media on a combo of Blacks in the machine and Seagates in the NAS
 
M76 said:
That's because you have no use for a 64MB drive. You had a 64MB drive then because there was no larger, or you couldn't afford a larger one. And the purpose of a thumbdrive and a SSD couldn't be different. A 128GB SSD is still usable as a system drive. And will be for a long time.

Yeah and I got a 2TB SSD over a year ago for $600 and now the same drive would cost $750

I don't think SSD and HDD prices will ever be in parity. You couldn't sell HDDs if that were the case. And you can bet as long as HDDs are around they'll keep SSD prices artificially high. Remember you're not paying what it costs. You're paying what supply and demand dictates. That's capitalism for you. Just because something is cheaper to make, and better in every way, doesn't mean it will flood the market as affordable high quality products.
Click to expand...

Your crystal ball is malfunctioning. There were larger and I could afford one, but it was on sale and met my needs at the time so I got it. I think there's a major disconnect between how people shop and how you think people shop. While there may be people who buy something because it's the only one available, or buy something because it's the best they can afford, most people buy a product that does what they want it to do for a price they are willing to pay. They could pay less and get something that doesn't perform to their standards, or could pay more but receiving diminishing ROI for their uses.

Not to mention, there are also SSDs of smaller capacity than 128GB like 64 and 32, 16 and even 8. Then of course there's the hybrid drives which have varying small capacity SSDs. Just as that 64gb thumb drive became useless so will the smaller capacity SSDs.

I do agree that SSD prices are artificially high, but I think at some point HDD's will get phased out, at least in the consumer market.
 
Just purchased a brand new system

M.2 pci express 1 tb....no cables for sata or power...plugs right into the motherboard...I will NEVER purchase a HDD ever again...technology moves forward..embrace it because its wonderful

the HDD will go the same way as the 5 1/4 inch floppy, eventually and so will small size sdd's...its simply the nature of technological progress...don't fight it
 
RamonGTP said:
most people buy a product that does what they want it to do for a price they are willing to pay.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what I'm talking about. When people shop for a system drive they're specifically looking for a drive that does that. Why would they buy an 1TB SSD when a 128 or sometimes even 64Gb one can fulfil their needs for an eighth of the price? That's why I don't see smaller SSDs going away any time soon.

64MB thumb drives might be nowhere to be found, but 4GB thumb drives are still around because they still have an use. And as long as a 128GB SSD is enough as a system drive they'll stilll be around. As there are still 500GB HDDs around. You might don't find an use for them, but that doesn't mean nobody does.

It has become common practice to have a separate system drive, and use another drive for storage. Even if you can afford a 2TB SSD, you won't just slap it in your computer and be done with it. But you'll use a smaller drive for use as a system drive. Almost everyone does that. Even you as it seems.
 
M76 said:
That's exactly what I'm talking about. When people shop for a system drive they're specifically looking for a drive that does that. Why would they buy an 1TB SSD when a 128 or sometimes even 64Gb one can fulfil their needs for an eighth of the price? That's why I don't see smaller SSDs going away any time soon.

64MB thumb drives might be nowhere to be found, but 4GB thumb drives are still around because they still have an use. And as long as a 128GB SSD is enough as a system drive they'll stilll be around. As there are still 500GB HDDs around. You might don't find an use for them, but that doesn't mean nobody does.

It has become common practice to have a separate system drive, and use another drive for storage. Even if you can afford a 2TB SSD, you won't just slap it in your computer and be done with it. But you'll use a smaller drive for use as a system drive. Almost everyone does that. Even you as it seems.
Click to expand...

LOL. Nope. Newer drives from the leading brands might not even come in 120/128GB capacity (MX300, 860 Evo/Pro, WD Black). Intel stuck with it for the 600 series, but I doubt they'll continue it next year.

If anything, the low end non-volatile storage niche is being overtaken by SD cards. 120GB UHS cards can be had for $50. There's a lot of hobby hoards out there with SD slots.
 
Last edited:
STR said:
LOL. Nope. Newer drives from the leading brands might not even come in 120/128GB capacity (MX300, 860 Evo/Pro, WD Black). Intel stuck with it for the 600 series, but I doubt they'll continue it next year.

If anything, the low end non-volatile storage niche is being overtaken by SD cards. 120GB UHS cards can be had for $50. There's a lot of hobby hoards out there with SD slots.
Click to expand...
LOL Nope - that kind of attitude won't make your argument any more convincing. So you're saying that just because the S class of SSDs are not available in lower capacity lower capacity SSDs are dead? That's not how it works.
 
M76 said:
LOL Nope - that kind of attitude won't make your argument any more convincing. So you're saying that just because the S class of SSDs are not available in lower capacity lower capacity SSDs are dead? That's not how it works.
Click to expand...

That's exactly how it works. These trends start with the premium drives and work their way down. In 2-3 years, the 120GB SSD will be dead, just like how the 64GB SSD and 250GB spinning rust is all but gone. By your theory, they'd still sell those because you can fit an OS and some files on them. But that's not how it works.

Manufacturers have finite capacity, and there are several economic factors that make it cheaper to build all drives with the same newer denser storage mediums. Manufacturers aren't making 128GB SSD grade NAND chips or 40GB HD platters. They're switching to 256 or 512GB packages, which means those become the smallest SSD you will be able to buy.

Even commodity grade NAND used in cheap thumb drives follows this thread. Remember USB drives with capacity measured in MB?
 
STR said:
That's exactly how it works. These trends start with the premium drives and work their way down. In 2-3 years, the 120GB SSD will be dead, just like how the 64GB SSD and 250GB spinning rust is all but gone. By your theory, they'd still sell those because you can fit an OS and some files on them. But that's not how it works.

Manufacturers have finite capacity, and there are several economic factors that make it cheaper to build all drives with the same newer denser storage mediums. Manufacturers aren't making 128GB SSD grade NAND chips or 40GB HD platters. They're switching to 256 or 512GB packages, which means those become the smallest SSD you will be able to buy.

Even commodity grade NAND used in cheap thumb drives follows this thread. Remember USB drives with capacity measured in MB?
Click to expand...

I used the USB drives as an example too, but he had an excuse for it so I just gave up on trying to argue with the guy. History has proven him wrong already, time will prove him wrong again.
 
I think the problem with this thread and question is the ambiguity in terminology and thought.

This is a discussion that has boiled down to "small drives" in relative terms versus absolute terms.

In relative terms, yes, there will be "relatively" small SSDs that will continue to exist. A 128GB SSD is currently a "relatively small" drive versus when SSD's started at 32/64GB which have phased out. So there will always be small drives relative to whatever becomes the highest capacity drives. 256GB will eventually be considered 'relatively small' then 512GB and so on.

In absolute terms, what is "small" has already gone away. And 128GB drives will not last long. If 128GB is what is considered in absolute terms to be "small" then there is no question that small drives will cease to exist. As 128GB drives will eventually be phased out.
 
As a lot of users have mentioned already, with time, demand, and technological advances, SSD drive capacities will grow, become more readily available to meet that increasing demand, and manufacturing will likely become more refined and cost-effective as well. I still remember when a 64GB flash stick was the coolest thing on the market. Ultimately, necessity is the mother of invention. In the meantime, one way of potentially getting more bang for your buck and getting around this is a SSHD, or Solid-State Hybrid Drive. These drives combine the flash storage appeal for quicker loading times that a lot of people love about SSD tech, with traditional spinning disk tech so that you get increased performance plus large storage capacity while keeping the costs from going through the roof. May be something worth checking out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top