Great deal on a great drive.
Alan, should I be holding my breath, waiting for you to send me a baker’s dozen of these? That would be soooo kind of you!
I’ll set up a couple of 6-disk RAIDs and I’ll use that 13th one to spoof a failure and measure rebuilding times.
What a deal - you send me $7800 worth of equipment like this, and I’ll definitely let you know if they work great or not!
[QUOTE=ChristineBCW;2702172]Alan, should I be holding my breath, waiting for you to send me a baker’s dozen of these? That would be soooo kind of you!
I’ll set up a couple of 6-disk RAIDs and I’ll use that 13th one to spoof a failure and measure rebuilding times.
What a deal - you send me $7800 worth of equipment like this, and I’ll definitely let you know if they work great or not!
[/QUOTE]
I already have the 750gb flavor, so the 1TB wont do much for me, but its a great deal for those who want it.
It’s strange that there’s nothing to succeed 840 Pro yet. There are 843 and 843T, but they are 840 Pro tuned for web servers. Perhaps Samsung has been working to bypass Intel’s SATA 600 limitations and raise V-NAND yield rates.
I guess Samsung can lower 1TB 840 EVO price to US$300 right now without making loss. That doesn’t necessarily mean that Samsung makes US$300 profit on every 1TB 840 EVO drive it sells.
Great, the ssd variety has finally come down to 10x the price of a similar HDD…
Maybe in another 10 years a 1tb SSD will be $250, in 20 years $125 and so on…
I’m not sure if anybody noticed, but when the HDD had 10% of it’s product wiped out by floods, the SSD industry took that as a chance to push SSD products higher in price too… albeit not as high as HDD price spikes, since their prices were ALREADY sky-high to being with.
[QUOTE=tmc8080;2702244]Great, the ssd variety has finally come down to 10x the price of a similar HDD…
Maybe in another 10 years a 1tb SSD will be $250, in 20 years $125 and so on…[/quote]
There’s no HDD that is similar to SSD. Even 50 15,000-RPM SCSI/SAS drives working at once cannot ever be made as fast as a consumer SSD. Those who need speeds most try harder to compare the most expensive HDD with the most advanced SSD: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1232604
I’m not sure if anybody noticed, but when the HDD had 10% of it’s product wiped out by floods, the SSD industry took that as a chance to push SSD products higher in price too… albeit not as high as HDD price spikes, since their prices were ALREADY sky-high to being with.
NAND and SSD prices did not go up. HDD industry was affected. Consumers were affected. But the overall HDD industry was little affected. For those who wanted to buy at least one unit of 3TB HDD every month, that must have been a tragedy. For most consumers, there was simply no problem, no price increase. Most consumers do not go to newegg.com and choose the most cost-effective HDDs. The average PC users simply order pre-configured PC. A small percentage of PC users order HDDs from Bestbuy, Amazon, small shops, etc. Most of those “home builders” or “DIY-ers” choose US$50 HDD. They don’t need 2TB or 3TB HDD if they can buy a 500GB HDD for US$50.
It’s true Seagate and Western Digital earned more thanks to the disaster in Thailand, but the widespread perception HDD prices were raised was largely based on nothing. The overall impact was far smaller than perceived. Just like bank runs of Hong Kong decades ago, and the ongoing DRAM prices.
There must have been some retail stores trying at some moments to raise their SSD prices, but nobody really needed to buy from them. What happened to the unlucky Western Digital HDD factories in Thailand were not serious enough to affect SSD prices. Contract prices and retail prices did not go up. I usually check prices on both retail and OEM sides of markets in the US, Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan, and several Western European countries.
SSD prices were already low enough compared to SSD before the flood. It was just that some people realized the potential of SSD too late. Looking back, I wrote SSD was going to replace and how it would restructure the world’s storage industry around 2005. Replacing HDD with SSD made sense even before 2005. Most of it was experimental for some years between around 2000 and 2005 because making SSD inside every computing device would require tens of billions of dollars to invest and shareholders and executives needed years of concentrated efforts for such experiments before making group-wide decisions.
To make 1TB at US$125 will not require 25 years, but 25 months.
Hey Kenny, maybe I will live to see it then. LOL. 71 and counting.
And something tells me that, my lifelong hopes and dreams of Alan sending me a baker’s dozen of these SSDs might push ME into the 71-year bracket. At least he didn’t ask me if I looked good “blue”. Signed, Not Holding My Breath
wink wink, nudge nudge
say n’more…
[QUOTE=Kenshin;2702255]There’s no HDD that is similar to SSD. Even 50 15,000-RPM SCSI/SAS drives working at once cannot ever be made as fast as a consumer SSD. Those who need speeds most try harder to compare the most expensive HDD with the most advanced SSD: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1232604
NAND and SSD prices did not go up. HDD industry was affected. Consumers were affected. But the overall HDD industry was little affected. For those who wanted to buy at least one unit of 3TB HDD every month, that must have been a tragedy. For most consumers, there was simply no problem, no price increase. Most consumers do not go to newegg.com and choose the most cost-effective HDDs. The average PC users simply order pre-configured PC. A small percentage of PC users order HDDs from Bestbuy, Amazon, small shops, etc. Most of those “home builders” or “DIY-ers” choose US$50 HDD. They don’t need 2TB or 3TB HDD if they can buy a 500GB HDD for US$50.
It’s true Seagate and Western Digital earned more thanks to the disaster in Thailand, but the widespread perception HDD prices were raised was largely based on nothing. The overall impact was far smaller than perceived. Just like bank runs of Hong Kong decades ago, and the ongoing DRAM prices.
There must have been some retail stores trying at some moments to raise their SSD prices, but nobody really needed to buy from them. What happened to the unlucky Western Digital HDD factories in Thailand were not serious enough to affect SSD prices. Contract prices and retail prices did not go up. I usually check prices on both retail and OEM sides of markets in the US, Japan, China, South Korea, Taiwan, and several Western European countries.
SSD prices were already low enough compared to SSD before the flood. It was just that some people realized the potential of SSD too late. Looking back, I wrote SSD was going to replace and how it would restructure the world’s storage industry around 2005. Replacing HDD with SSD made sense even before 2005. Most of it was experimental for some years between around 2000 and 2005 because making SSD inside every computing device would require tens of billions of dollars to invest and shareholders and executives needed years of concentrated efforts for such experiments before making group-wide decisions.
To make 1TB at US$125 will not require 25 years, but 25 months.[/QUOTE]
There was evidence that wholesalers were gouging resellers due to the Thailand shortage. What was predicted to be a 5-10% price spike turned out to be a 30 - 75% price spike spread out over 14+ months.
It remains to be seen whether SSD makers ever plan to make their products main stream or not. Their track record on this is not good. The boost in flash capacity is giving tablets a chance to steal PC market share.
I compare the stumbling block a commercial marketplace failure similar to replacing CFL bulbs with LED bulbs… the technology is in place and the prices to manufacture have come down, but the price thresholds do not yield a mainstream crossover just yet when a CFL can be bought for $1 a bulb and LED bulbs of comparable capacity are $10, $15, $20 (or more). Quite a challenge for the consumer to be thrilled about.
Compared with the 80s, 90s and for a few years after technology was advancing with products circulating into the mainstream which were unaffordable before. This is not so much the case these days due in part to the domestic and international economies.
[QUOTE=tmc8080;2702945]There was evidence that wholesalers were gouging resellers due to the Thailand shortage. What was predicted to be a 5-10% price spike turned out to be a 30 - 75% price spike spread out over 14+ months.[/QUOTE]
There was evidence, just not enough. Those wholesalers account for very small percentage of overall HDD sales. Whether unit drive price actually rose 30% or 75% depends on what you look at. MOST consumers choose 500GB instead of 750GB and 1TB instead of 2TB. MOST users buy complete computers instead of buying parts and building themselves and it’s Dell and HP that choose those parts in most cases and they choose simply the cheapest units, not the most cost-effective or the most capacity for money. For those who need to buy several 2TB HDDs every year, the flood could have been disastrous. Prices are vastly relative.
It remains to be seen whether SSD makers ever plan to make their products main stream or not. Their track record on this is not good. The boost in flash capacity is giving tablets a chance to steal PC market share.
So far, their track record on that has been millions of times better than anyone else. Better than Ford, better than HP, better than Intel, better than Seagate.
Compared with the 80s, 90s and for a few years after technology was advancing with products circulating into the mainstream which were unaffordable before. This is not so much the case these days due in part to the domestic and international economies.
40GB SDD is much faster than 15K RPM 600GB HDD. The former can be found for US$20 in used markets and even used 40GB SSD can still perform very nicely. Used SSDs are thousands of times more reliable than used HDDs. 40GB SSD’s also cheaper than 4GB RAM. SSD has become mainstream in less than 10 years. HDD was first commercialized by IBM a few decades ago. Nobody was really satisfied with HDD because it was mechanically unrealiable and never could be made fast enough to be used in computers. In other words, HDD never was mainstream. People used HDD only because it was better than FDD and RAM was too expensive.
What you meant by “circulating into the mainstream” was actually marketshare. HDD has more than two thirds of PC storage marketshare. It will take a few more years for SSD to have at least two thirds. That does not mean SSD is not mainstream. Many of the newest Mac computers are preinstalled with Mac OS 10.9, but popular statistics says it has only less than 1% marketshare. Windows 8.1 also has less than 1% marketshare. CD is used by far more people than Blu-ray.
I compare the stumbling block a commercial marketplace failure similar to replacing CFL bulbs with LED bulbs… the technology is in place and the prices to manufacture have come down, but the price thresholds do not yield a mainstream crossover just yet when a CFL can be bought for $1 a bulb and LED bulbs of comparable capacity are $10, $15, $20 (or more). Quite a challenge for the consumer to be thrilled about.
LED is hardly more expensive than CFL.