OCZ rolls out 1TB 3.5" SSD

#1

I just posted the article OCZ rolls out 1TB 3.5" SSD.

OCZ recently released the 3.5" Colossus solid state drive product line designed for desktop users, with the company continuing its expansion into flash-based storage technology.

``````Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/ocz-rolls-out-1tb-3-5-ssd-22421/](http://www.myce.com/news/ocz-rolls-out-1tb-3-5-ssd-22421/)

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.``````

#2

“Pricing remains a serious hamper to consumer adoption” is one of the finest examples of understatement seen in modern news reports. \$3,572 vs \$85 for a conventional 1tb drive at Newegg.

#3

The price is certainly high for a consumer grade PC. However, in an enterprise environment, when you start to look at the cost of matching this drives performance and throughput, then the price starts to look like very good value.

For example, if it takes 17 hours for a RAID array of 15K SAS HDD to complete a task, and it takes the Colossus 2.5 hours to complete the same task, then things start to look very different regarding cost.

#4

You have a point there Dee. Hehe, let’s see… so if company wanted to replace their 15k SCSI RAID5 or 6 of say 10x HDDs, ops:

10 x \$3,572 = \$35720.

#5

[QUOTE=Truman;2466825]You have a point there Dee. Hehe, let’s see… so if company wanted to replace their 15k SCSI RAID5 or 6 of say 10x HDDs, ops:

10 x \$3,572 = \$35720.
:)[/QUOTE]Let me explain it another way.

10x 15K Cheetah RAID 5 with IOMeter Workstation test pattern with a queue depth of 64 manages about [B]600 IOPS[/B]
10x 15K Cheetah RAID 0 with IOMeter Workstation test pattern with a queue depth of 64 manages about [B]2850 IOPS[/B]
Source Toms hardware

Now lets look at the same IOMeter Workstation test pattern (queue depth 64) run on some single SSD. These SSD’s are consumer grade and not suited to enterprise use, the Colossus is, and more powerful than any of these single SSD in my chart. I only test at 64 queue depth.

#6

I hope other vendors follow suit and adopt the 3.5" form factor.

#7

True true Dee, I agree, for companies time is definitely money. Nice chart, man, my poor Samsung HDD is at bottom of chart.

#8

My 3 500G Seagates Barracudas aren’t far behind:sad:

#9

Another option is more efficient coding in software development to reduce the number of IOPS.

The best example I can think of is Google. Hard to believe, they use consumer grade hard disks in their servers, yet are well capable of keeping up with the billions of search requests across the vast database it indexes.

On the other hand, for large businesses that use inefficient disk intensive software, it generally would be quicker and cheaper to replace the HDDs in their servers with these SSDs than spend months improving and testing software to achieve similar results with their existing hard disks.

This is why making shortcuts in software development can come at a cost later on, either in more intensive RAM usage and disk usage. Some examples include Windows Vista and Norton Internet Security suites leading up to 2008.

#10

LOL!!! for that kind of money I could buy 23 HITACHI Deskstar 0F10311 2TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive
for a total of 46TB’s or 42.826TB after formatting instead of 931GB on the SSD after formatting. Yeah they might not be as
fast as a single 1TB SSD but look at all the storage space I’d have.

#11

haha, too funny.

I don’t even want to see the size of the case you would need to house that monstrosity, to say nothing about the noise. I’m thinking of a Cessna on the runway just before takeoff or is that being optimistic?

But yeah, what one could do with all that storage.