Samsung announces 1TB 840 EVO mSATA SSD – world’s first

We’ve just posted the following news: Samsung announces 1TB 840 EVO mSATA SSD – world’s first[newsimage][/newsimage]
Read the full article here:

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

I was just looking at mSATA availabilities, and was disappointed to see so few vendors were represented, and capacities were less than standard SSDs, AND for a super-premium price.

(I also discovered there were few mSATA ‘hubs’ for external use, as in a test-table setup, or for data-migration purposes. I was thinking I’d see a ‘peacock fan’ version.)

Weighing 0.0085 kg for 1,000,000,000,000 bytes. That’s 8.5 kilograms for 1 petabyte. 2014 will be the year we can store PB data on handhelds. :bow::bow::bow:

I am wondering the price of these, they have to be competitive with the 7mm EVOs , so I would guess 500USD or less.

[QUOTE=Kenshin;2712437]…we can store PB data on handhelds…[/QUOTE]
How is this going to impact Cloud Services? If we idiotic & criminal consumers are allowed to store data in such magnitude, how can the per-transaction-fee (per click, per drag, per transfer, per-whatever) make fortunes for the puppet masters?

Per-transaction fees are important. Those are still garnering the big credit-card companies their biggest revenues - not interest payments but those per-swipe fees.

The phone companies always used First Minute Of Calls to be their per-transaction fee, too.

If we’re allowed to maintain stored data in the Pb’s (YAY!!) then my per-use fees drop. Revenues then are tidal - flowing in and out - based on only popularity, instead of a smooth revenue stream based on constant-access.

Maybe they’ll go back to measuring per-Kb. I know they’ll get us, somehow.

Ideas like Cloud and Netbook are usually products of random and faulty minds, I believe. It’s like outsourcing toilets and kitchens that require US$2,000 combined investment or TCO to places separated a few kilometers away from home in the name of streamlining and saving cost. Somehow some people don’t take into account the fact it’s far more cost-effective to store and concentrate in one place, once and permanently, than to travel over long distance every time. The more important, but often neglected, factor is people are less likely to eat and wash themselves when such facilities are located inconveniently as best as they can. The most often-encountered remark from people asking what to buy and how to assemble is: “I just want to use the Internet.” What they actually mean is they want the cheapest computer since they are not power users. That’s a clear contradiction as novices and people who pay less attention to technical details and do-it-themselves on things like swapping storage media have to pay more in order to gain ease of use and long years of peace of mind. Such people complain on speed. They also complain on size. And brand name. And service. Simplest solution is to offer a configuration made of parts like 1.6TB PCIe SSD, quad-core Haswell, two 8GB 20nm DDR 3 modules, etc. all built and serviced by names like IBM, Hitachi, Siemens, and Samsung. To expect children in Third-World countries to succeed in studying to become respected scholars and engineers by making use of US$100 Netbooks made of parts like 512MB (not a typo of 512GB) SSD, 128MB RAM, single-core outdated-generation processor, and 800 x 480 or 1366 x 768 resolution LCD of poorest quality was wrong from any aspect. Manufacturing cost of 4GB RAM was nearly negligible even when the first-generation OLPC was conceived and RAM-based SSD in those years had more than 512MB.

Though I think even 16GB SLC SSD that now costs like US$10 can be sufficient to run Windows 7 or Windows XP (depending on the size of RAM as well), every computer and handheld device including smartphone and wearable smartwatch should now include at least 1TB SSD made of the fastest chips. That should be a shocking proposal to someone who pays US$20,000 for a TV with 8GB built-in storage.

One of the other nice things bout this release, is Samsung have updated the Magician software, which now supports the 840 Pro in RAPID mode.

I hope it’ll be extended to other product lines including 840, 830, and 470 and to more-than-one-drive configuration as well.

[QUOTE=Kenshin;2712637]I hope it’ll be extended to other product lines including 840, 830, and 470 and to more-than-one-drive configuration as well.[/QUOTE]
Its totally awesome on the 840 Pro and the 840 1TB EVO, love the Magician Software.:wink:

[QUOTE=alan1476;2712638]Its totally awesome on the 840 Pro and the 840 1TB EVO, love the Magician Software.;)[/QUOTE]

It’s a shame there’s no 840 Pro 1TB (yet), but I guess we’ll soon see 840 Pro’s true successor. Has the introduction of 840 EVO cannibalized 840 Pro? At least, many of the potential 840 Pro purchasers are now ordering 840 EVO instead.

Meanwhile, I’ll wait for the arrival of cheap NVMe SSDs. Hopefully, NVMe PCIe SSDs need not cost more than conventional AHCI SATA SSDs. Apple charges US$500 for an ungrade from 500GB internal PCIe SSD to 1TB for some of its MacBook Pro with Retina Display models. The cost from 256GB to 1TB is $800. Compare that with the case of conventional (non-Retina) MacBook Pro. The stock drive is a 5,400-RPM 500GB SATA HDD. Upgrade cost to SSD is $200 for 128GB SSD, $400 for 256GB SSD, and $700 for 512GB SSD. That means $1,899 for non-Retina MacBook Pro with 512GB non-PCIe SSD vs. $2,299 for Retina MacBook Pro (13-inch) with 1TB PCIe SSD. In case anyone is wondering, the 2.6GHz Haswell-based Retina MBP includes Intel’s Iris graphics and 8GB RAM while non-Retina MBP has Intel HD Graphics 4000 and 4GB RAM. From that, I estimate the present cost of getting a 1TB PCIe SSD is around US$300 - chips for about $150 to $200 and the rest for about $5 to $20 plus cost of development, profits, shipping and inventory, etc. It’s not strange for Apple to charge $1,000 for a $300 product and it’s very cheap considering it’s Apple, it’s upgrade, and it’s one of the earliest PCIe implementation in consumer products.