Why not a 3.5" SSD

[konic40]

Why has no manufacturer ever done this? I know this will apply only to desktops but it seems to me that they'd have way more space the pack more memory easier without having to the actually make the memory more dense..

[Levent]

there is no point of making bigger memory chips unless you plan on having few terabytes of memory

[Liam-McShane]

Space really isn't a constraint for SSD's at the minute.

[hammerslap1]

hhahaha gimme one for my 5.25 bays lol

[Zeke]

OCZ done that, but there is little to no point of doing that.

[Enderman]

There used to be:

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227590

 

Not any more because there is no need to increase the space when increasing the chip density is cheaper and easier.

[Rorgash]

have you seen the PCi ssds? take a look and you will understand that this question is stupid a 512gb ssd takes as much space as a thumb drive  (heat would probably be an issue aswell as controller and such sure, but the memory itself

[hammerslap1]

plus one of the bonuses of SSDs is the small size that makes it so much nicer for being able to stash it pretty much anywhere you have an extra space and some velcro lol

[konic40]

some people are real mean but others are pretty cool, I had no idea there was actually a 3.5", cool. I never actually looked up what its like inside an SSD so I did :
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6554/phison-s10-quad-core-performance-ssd-controller-preview/index3.html


looks fairly filled up...about 3/4 way, its new but I didnt see any smaller PCBs in a quick google search "inside an SDD"
i have 3.5 bays empty and dont care much for hiding drives...I have empty 5.25s too ( really dont care where it goes if I can get hugh capacity, speed and cheap). My argument is based on the idea that the older less dense chips would be cheaper but if not then I guess whatever.
if it is cheaper and easier to make chips memory chips more dense the only other thing I can ask is does it have with the same reliability?

[hojnikb]

if it is cheaper and easier to make chips memory chips more dense the only other thing I can ask is does it have with the same reliability?

 

 

Density doesn't really have a role on reliability. Pretty much all of the faulires come down to controller crapping out.

 

As for 3.5" SSD; they are pointless (as discuessed in a previous thread asking the same quiestion). 2.5" space is plenty for SSDs nowdays and bigger capacities are not limited by physical space but rather becuase consumer controllers can't adress more than 1TB.

[konic40]

I heard Linus say that newer manufacturing processes lowering their lifespans, except maybe samsung's new nand flash

[RASQ]

Size is not the issue. Here is a picture of a 1TB mSATA SSD with a 2.5" drive for scale.

 

 

Edit: Here's the inside of the 2.5" drive.

[hojnikb]

I heard Linus say that newer manufacturing processes lowering their lifespans, except maybe samsung's new nand flash

 

Not their lifespan, but their endurance (although with V-NAND it actually went up). Endurance is something you'll never ever exhaust, so even if its lowering, there is still plenty for pretty much everyone.

Have a read http://techreport.com/review/26523/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-casualties-on-the-way-to-a-petabyte

[konic40]

thats awesome
looks like that Corsair GTX neutron will never die