HDDs On The Ropes, Samsung Predicts SSD Price Collisions As NVMe Takes Over

[patrickjp93]

1 hour ago, Deli said:

Agree. For using as system/OS drive, oh yes SSD makes sense for its price/performance. But if someone needs a large media storage, like 6-10 TB. HDD is still the way to go for quite some time.

Nope. Samsung's 15TB drive is just as cheap per GB as Seagate's He10 drives. Mind you, it's not available to consumers, but unless you need massive endurance in addition to volume, storage in datacenters is now an SSD game.

[patrickjp93]

24 minutes ago, Zeeee said:

Everyone is saying bullshit but i bet everyone saying that has absolute fuck all idea of what an NVME ssd is. All of you saying "omgerd theres no difference".... have you compared the specs of the two?! Sata ones max rated at 5xxmbps read and write, NVME's are like 2xxx-3xxx read and write thats literally 4-6x faster than ssds on read and writes alone that alone is enough for most tech people to buy an NVME

In real life I cannot tell the difference in W10 boot time between my 840 EVO and a 950 Pro. If you really can saturate the IOPS of a SATA SSD, I question the optimality of the algorithm you're using

[patrickjp93]

1 hour ago, Atmos said:

I completely understand the argument being made. What I'm saying is that until such a point that the prices actually are comparable in stores and online  then hard drives are not dead. And that's still years away.

They are in their death throes. The end is coming and is likely in the next 3-4 years. That's all that's being claimed.

[Curufinwe_wins]

3 hours ago, Zeeee said:

Everyone is saying bullshit but i bet everyone saying that has absolute fuck all idea of what an NVME ssd is. All of you saying "omgerd theres no difference".... have you compared the specs of the two?! Sata ones max rated at 5xxmbps read and write, NVME's are like 2xxx-3xxx read and write thats literally 4-6x faster than ssds on read and writes alone that alone is enough for most tech people to buy an NVME

Even heavy professional media useage has shown a MAXIMUM of 3% real world performance improvements as shown by Tom's. General usage shows 0 scaling whatsoever.

 

There isn't a single good reason for consumers to buy nvme at literally any price premium. 

[It's me!]

HDDs are destined to be used only for high capacity storage in the enterprise. Anyone who thinks they will be around for another five years in consumer computers is delusional. 

[ManIkWeet]

NVMe is not the same as SATA!

SATA is a connector, NVMe is a protocol!

 

SATA SSDs use AHCI as protocol!

NVMe SSDs use M.2/PCIe/SAS as connector!

 

Goddamnit  internet ¬¬

[porina]

1 hour ago, ManIkWeet said:

NVMe is not the same as SATA!

SATA is a connector, NVMe is a protocol!

 

SATA SSDs use AHCI as protocol!

NVMe SSDs use M.2/PCIe/SAS as connector!

 

Goddamnit  internet ¬¬

It doesn't work that way either. I have 3x M.2 2280 form factor SSDs in different systems.

Samsung SM951 - PCIe AHCI - great sequential, good random

Samsung PM951 - PCIe NVMe - good sequential, great random

Toshiba something or other - SATA - limited sequential, good random

 

Outside of benchmarks, I can't notice the performance difference between them...

[patrickjp93]

1 hour ago, ManIkWeet said:

NVMe is not the same as SATA!

SATA is a connector, NVMe is a protocol!

 

SATA SSDs use AHCI as protocol!

NVMe SSDs use M.2/PCIe/SAS as connector!

 

Goddamnit  internet ¬¬

SATA is also a protocol, just at the networking layer only, where it handles packets giving AHCI commands.

 

2 hours ago, It's me! said:

HDDs are destined to be used only for high capacity storage in the enterprise. Anyone who thinks they will be around for another five years in consumer computers is delusional. 

Eh, they may not even be used for that soon enough between Samsung's already selling 15TB 2.5" drive and Seagate and Toshiba getting ready to sell 60 and 100TB 3.5" drives. I'd say hard drives will only be useful for being cheap in datacenter.

[System Error Message]

SSDs have replaced HDDs for running software, OS but they never truely replace HDDs. This is because SSDs havent yet beaten HDDs in every spot, mainly capacity and price.

 

So the NVME will not replace sata if the price is high.

 

So until nvme SSDs beat sata SSDs in price/capacity sata SSDs will never be replaced not to mention older systems will need sata SSDs for upgrade. HDDs will still be a thing from a price/capacity point of view and if you have lots of data to write without wearing out SSDs. SSDs are great for reading which has been great for OS and software. Infact SSD is better than HDDs for archiving but the cost/GB prevents this.

[patrickjp93]

2 minutes ago, System Error Message said:

SSDs have replaced HDDs for running software, OS but they never truely replace HDDs. This is because SSDs havent yet beaten HDDs in every spot, mainly capacity and price.

 

So the NVME will not replace sata if the price is high.

 

So until nvme SSDs beat sata SSDs in price/capacity sata SSDs will never be replaced not to mention older systems will need sata SSDs for upgrade. HDDs will still be a thing from a price/capacity point of view and if you have lots of data to write without wearing out SSDs. SSDs are great for reading which has been great for OS and software. Infact SSD is better than HDDs for archiving but the cost/GB prevents this.

In capacity SSDs have won. Samsung is already selling a 15TB 2.5" drive to enterprise customers. As for price, NAND prices are falling at a rate nearly triple what HDDs are managing. By the end of the decade, I think the only thing HDDs will be better at is endurance.

[System Error Message]

well HDD manufacturers are responsible for their own price hikes too. At one point the destruction of a factory causing supply shortages, they never reduced their prices after that.

 

Still price is a major thing. GPUs for instance used to release single GPU flagships at $300 than started raising prices.

 

In terms of whether HDDs get replaced has nothing to do with market share or profits, its more to do with whether or not the lowest common denominator can afford it. This means using in controllers like arduino to low end PCs and laptops all the way up. Its the same thing about AMD vs intel or AMD vs nvidia, its because people can afford it and that it offers reasonable function for the lower price is what allows it to stay around even though we've heard all sorts of stories about AMD money issues.

 

If every new release is priced higher than the release of the last gen or product than we arent really going to be getting anywhere.

[Mark77]

NVMe is basically just like IDE, in that, they shoved all the controller stuff on the HDD, and just directly wired it to the expansion bus interface on the PC.  Since the infrastructure for PCI-E is well known, and switch fabric chips are available from the likes of PLX, it makes perfect sense to phase out SATA.

 

Considering that basically everyone has PCI-E these days, its pretty much a no-brainer.  For those without the M.2 slots, you can spend $10 and get a Chinese-built PCB adapter.  And there are 1 PCI-E to 4 M.2 adapters with PLX chip available for not much money. 

[TheSaint]

1 hour ago, System Error Message said:

If every new release is priced higher than the release of the last gen or product than we arent really going to be getting anywhere.

That's because it isn't just manufacturers raising prices, although that is certainly part of it. The fact of the matter is that after years of successive Presidents who have printed money left and right in the United States, we're seeing massive consumer inflation that isn't keeping pace with wages. Prices aren't just going up, the buying power the average citizen has is less than it used to be.

[patrickjp93]

10 minutes ago, TheSaint said:

That's because it isn't just manufacturers raising prices, although that is certainly part of it. The fact of the matter is that after years of successive Presidents who have printed money left and right in the United States, we're seeing massive consumer inflation that isn't keeping pace with wages. Prices aren't just going up, the buying power the average citizen has is less than it used to be.

1% is hardly massive inflation.

[System Error Message]

when intel releases a new CPU the mainstream has always been around $300 and enthusiast up to $1000. So theres really no reason why other technological manufacturers cant do the same. Some motherboard manufacturers are looking to make cheaper motherboards so you get the same thing or more for less.

 

The other weird paradoxical thing with boards is that mini ITX isnt cheap compared to micro ATX even though it ought to be.

[patrickjp93]

5 minutes ago, System Error Message said:

when intel releases a new CPU the mainstream has always been around $300 and enthusiast up to $1000. So theres really no reason why other technological manufacturers cant do the same. Some motherboard manufacturers are looking to make cheaper motherboards so you get the same thing or more for less.

 

The other weird paradoxical thing with boards is that mini ITX isnt cheap compared to micro ATX even though it ought to be.

It's comparatively easy to bring down the price of silicon ICs compared to shrinking the costs of PCBs and other tech. We can pack more data onto platters than ever, but it requires more advanced magnetic heads that will soon require lasers (HAMR), and that will definitely force part costs up.

 

As for NVMe, the R&D on it is still ongoing. It's not like ancient SATA/AHCI where work has been done for a decade already.

[System Error Message]

1 minute ago, patrickjp93 said:

It's comparatively easy to bring down the price of silicon ICs compared to shrinking the costs of PCBs and other tech. We can pack more data onto platters than ever, but it requires more advanced magnetic heads that will soon require lasers (HAMR), and that will definitely force part costs up.

 

As for NVMe, the R&D on it is still ongoing. It's not like ancient SATA/AHCI where work has been done for a decade already.

thats not the issue, new technology is always more expensive but the question is if the price will come down?

[patrickjp93]

1 minute ago, System Error Message said:

thats not the issue, new technology is always more expensive but the question is if the price will come down?

Up to a certain point, yes. NAND is cheaper than ever too, but controller research is ongoing for now. By the end of the decade I predict the prices of SATA HDDs and SSDs will collide for consumers.

[TheSaint]

1 hour ago, patrickjp93 said:

1% is hardly massive inflation.

Yes, the 1% isn't massive by itself, but wages and hours have stayed flat or decreased for the vast majority of workers. That's not counting the record number of people subsisting off government programs and are unable or unwilling to find work. Most computer and technology purchases at the end of the day (if not for a business) are discretionary purchases, meaning that if the Average Joe isn't doing so well in this economy, he can't exactly spend mega bucks on the latest storage format. The actual number of people that are unemployed or underemployed is vastly underreported. That is a problem that extends well before even when Obama took office.

[PurpleDido]

This definitely has been posted before, a few days ago at least

[patrickjp93]

4 hours ago, TheSaint said:

Yes, the 1% isn't massive by itself, but wages and hours have stayed flat or decreased for the vast majority of workers. That's not counting the record number of people subsisting off government programs and are unable or unwilling to find work. Most computer and technology purchases at the end of the day (if not for a business) are discretionary purchases, meaning that if the Average Joe isn't doing so well in this economy, he can't exactly spend mega bucks on the latest storage format. The actual number of people that are unemployed or underemployed is vastly underreported. That is a problem that extends well before even when Obama took office.

Median per capita wages are up in the U.S.. Family incomes are only down because families have gotten smaller.

 

And no, it's not underreported. Conservative media is trying to claim retirees as the unemployed and underemployed.

[Miguel Batista]

On 29/09/2016 at 10:41 PM, Deli said:

Agree. For using as system/OS drive, oh yes SSD makes sense for its price/performance. But if someone needs a large media storage, like 6-10 TB. HDD is still the way to go for quite some time.

Exactly. I use an ssd for my system boot and then have a 3TB hdd for my stuff. Even at 2x the cost I would still go for a HDD to store stuff. There is no noticeable difference between both for what I need it to do. Price parity, it would be a different topic but for the foreseeable future, HDDs make sense for bulk storage.

 

[Deli]

1 hour ago, Miguel Batista said:

Exactly. I use an ssd for my system boot and then have a 3TB hdd for my stuff. Even at 2x the cost I would still go for a HDD to store stuff. There is no noticeable difference between both for what I need it to do. Price parity, it would be a different topic but for the foreseeable future, HDDs make sense for bulk storage.

 

Sure there will be a point SSD price will make sense even for mass storage for general consumers. Some people think it's going to happen very soon. I personally think may be 4-5 years.

 

Another point is when will NVMe through PCIe with M.2 and U.2 or SAS for the most part replaces SATA, like SATA replaced IDE. That is harder to foresee. Although I do like the idea a small PC with two or three M.2 drives mounted on the mobo without any cable will provide enough storage, like 10 TB..

[Miguel Batista]

15 minutes ago, Deli said:

Sure there will be a point SSD price will make sense even for mass storage for general consumers. Some people think it's going to happen very soon. I personally think may be 4-5 years.

 

Another point is when will NVMe through PCIe with M.2 and U.2 or SAS for the most part replaces SATA, like SATA replaced IDE. That is harder to foresee. Although I do like the idea a small PC with two or three M.2 drives mounted on the mobo without any cable will provide enough storage, like 10 TB..

Yeah m.2 ssd is the way forward. Either sata or pcie.

 

Regarding performance difference, I used to use an Intel 1.2 TB PCIe SSD for work to deal with data handling and it was great. But it is not a big difference in day to day applications (like booting, doing normal stuff, etc) compared to a data SSD. And the cost is way higher. Hence for my home PC, I have an m.2 and a 2.5 inch SSD (used to have only the 2.5 inch but the m.2 was cheap and now I have a 250 GB SSD for games :D) and they are more than enough.

 

The jump from a HDD to an SSD is huge. The jump from an SSD to a PCIe SSD is nowhere near as large.

[porina]

Seen the latest WAN Show? Luke was saying he had, I think, 4TB of SSD in his own rig, with Linus asking why?... I think that is not dissimilar to my situation. I have over 2TB of SSD in my main system, of which over 1TB are game installs. I decided that while SSDs are still more expensive than HDs, they're cheap enough for the performance benefit. Cost/capacity has also gone down since I got mine, so it would be less pain to do that today. Linus was like why not NAS/cloud it, but personally both affordable ethernet and internet connections need an order of magnitude speed upgrade before I consider that truly viable for performance users.

 

Now, I haven't binned my HDs, as I have about 6TB of historic photo, video and other data. There's no performance need for that to be on SSD, so it's on HD arrays still.

 

If we assume SSDs will follow something like Moore's Law, whereas HDs are on a shallower growth curve, then SSDs will at some point in future overtake HDs in price/capacity, short of some radical idea. Like, why not make 5.25" HDs? Am I insane? Maybe... but put more of the cost on the platters, less on the support structure. Still, this is a future decision, and some way off. Not close enough for me to decide if it is a consideration today.