wd Western Digital goes SSD, again

[Notional]

46 minutes ago, SpaceGhostC2C said:

1. Apparently, you haven't even read the first post you quoted: whether you have free SATA ports or not, having the option to use the M.2 gives you more options to manage the space inside your case. I can perfectly wee why someone would want to build an ITX system with little or no 2.5'' drives at all.

Also, now you are moving from waste of slots to waste of resources due to manufacturing costs. I'm not surprised because the whole waste of slots was nonsense. Unfortunately, the "nobody buys them" argument isn't better without backing it with numbers.

3. No. Future-proofness amounts to correctly guess what you would need in the future - and unless you believe in fortune-telling, that's just not possible. Sure people thought having firewire  ports were "futureproofing"? You can buy some present technology that you will use for sure in some months, but that's "present-proofing", if anything.

 

But really, it all boils down to you understanding the difference between products you won't buy and products that nobody will buy or can find useful in certain situations.

Sure if you only want 1 drive, and want it to be hidden, a Sata m.2 makes sense. Also in laptops. But if you already use sata ports, it doesn't. If you have filled them all up, maybe, but since you would need a sata port + an adapter the next time you buy an M.2 drive, what's the point? You'd be better off with a PCI sata add on card.

So yes wasting the m.2 port on slow sata ssd's is a waste, unless you are out of options. And still at that point, the Intel 600 series makes more sense, being faster than SATA at a small price premium.

No one talked about manufacturing costs or resources. 

 

Nonsense. I specifically bought a 290 GPU instead of a 780 due to the added 1GB of vram. That has served me VERY well over the years. If people knows enough about tech, they can analyze it well and estimate what they need. They can pick the right technology and right products based on the way the industry is moving. That means their tech takes longer to be obsolete. Buying a DDR3 based system just before DDR4 becomes mainstream (or right after) is not being futureproof. Waiting or paying a little more for the newest standard support usually is future proofing.

 

Nah it's about buying a product for a different slot that is very limited in numbers, for no performance difference, which makes the product more difficult to use in the long run. Not only does SATA m.2 drives tend to cost a little more than the 2,5" version, but you have to shell out an additional 20+$ for an adapter (might not include shipping). That is an insane price premium and hassle for no performance difference. Especially since you can spend that on a 600 series Intel drive that is much faster and cheaper than m.2 sata + adapter.

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

5 hours ago, potoooooooo said:

Pricing is really high for such low end SSDs, they're scraping 850 EVO heels at 80 for 256. They should be at around 60. And it's not about performance, it's about quality. These are low quality drives, and they're asking a high price.

 

Also you're delusional if you think they all look the same.

It's just a grey or black rectangle with stickers. How am I delusional to say that they are all the same, are all SSDs ugly then?

[vanished]

1 minute ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

It's just a grey or black rectangle with stickers. How am I delusional to say that they are all the same, are all SSDs ugly then?

Spoiler

 

sexy: 

 

 

Spoiler

ugly:

 

Spoiler

super ugly:

 

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

sexy: 

 

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

ugly:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

super ugly:

 

Spoiler

lol are they even trying?

[zMeul]

Just now, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

  Reveal hidden contents

lol are they even trying?

[Energycore]

With my luck if I buy one of these it will fail, then the replacement will fail

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

1 minute ago, zMeul said:

 

Spoiler

 

[SirRoderick]

12 hours ago, potoooooooo said:

Mediocre pricing, mediocre performance, and ugly.

 

PASS

Your avatar pretty much sums it up on this one. Ugh.

[bobhays]

12 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Finally!  Why does this stuff always take so long... we first heard about WD planning to buy SanDisk how long ago?  Meh, at least we finally have the fruits of that.  Good to see WD on their way to continued existence  

 

But one thing does strike me as odd - well, two I suppose.  @zMeul, you said the WD Greens are designed for more power efficiency, but to be honest I can't remember anyone ever talking about power consumption as a selling point, grounds for comparison, or anything when it comes to SSDs; they're all just pretty light on power.  How can they really think this is going to be a big deal?  Second, I noticed the table of WD Blue specs that list power consumption, but nothing on the WD Greens for comparison... what's with that?  

 

The WD Greens aren't actually a more power focused SSD, they're just the entry level low performance SSD's that are branded as green because thats the lowest performing branding that WD has. The only power saving are from being a DRAM-less SSD which is not a feature but a lack thereof.

[malon]

cant wait for a black/red ssd(if they ever make one) it will more than likely be nvme/pcie based

[Captain_WD]

Hey guys

 

I'm glad you liked and comment on the launch of our SSDs. I'd be happy to answer any questions and provide any information I can.

 

@Ryan_Vickers SSDs in general consume far less energy compared to other storage drive options. However, when it comes to laptops, let's say, any difference in the power consumption results in changes in the battery life in the laptop. Moreover, you can use the SSD with portable or low-power gadgets such as Raspberry Pi and there the power consumption matters even more. WD Green consumes much less compared to WD Blue and it's great for cases where every mA matters. 

 

SATA does offer some advantages over PCIe in some cases so I wouldn't rule out M.2 SATA SSDs just yet.

 

Let me know if you have any questions! I'd be happy to answer everything I can! 

 

Captain_WD. 

[mrchow19910319]

21 hours ago, Bouzoo said:

While I would buy their HDDs any time of day, they will need to do a lot of convincing that they are more worth it than Intel or Samsung for instance. 

All if my SSDs are Samsung. 

[mrchow19910319]

20 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Well maybe he can explain the thought process behind the Greens then  

@Captain_WD Why?  Just, why?  SSDs of any kind already use so little power...

Marketing gimmick. What else? 2 product. One's faster , one's slower. Faster one: cutting edge technology! Slower one: save the mother planet earth! 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

10 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

  Reveal hidden contents

 

sexy: 

 

 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

ugly:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

super ugly:

 

They do look the same to me  

[mrchow19910319]

20 hours ago, Prysin said:

 

 

The issue arises when the controller tries to deal with data both on SSD and HDD. You end up with immense stuttering as the controller will wait for the HDD rather then keep feeding data from the SSD until the HDD is ready. This means gaming can be, extremely uncomfortable to say the least as you can have 1-2 second stutters or outright crashes.

 

 

Holy molly that doesn't sound good... I remember that drive. Saw an ad online about it. 

[Captain_WD]

17 hours ago, mrchow19910319 said:

~snip~

 

I've been using WD Black2 in one of my laptops for about two years now and I haven't had issues with it so far and it performs pretty good. It was a drive designed mostly for systems with a single bay that could make use if a drive that provides a rather big pure SSD and a separate massive storage HDD in the same enclosure without the limits of a hybrid drive. 

 

Captain_WD

[Thony]

More players in the game, more affordable SSDs for consumers ! 

[snes]

On 11.10.2016 at 7:44 PM, potoooooooo said:

... and ugly.

 

PASS

Would you like it better, if it had RGB lighting? 

[Senzelian]

WD seems to sell their name instad of the product itself.

 

Everyone knows that the hardware itself isn't worth as much as they're advertising it to be, but WD is a big player in the storage department. That alone will make people buy their products. 

 

Their biggest competitor is Samsung. Everyone else is either owned by them (SanDisk) or is just not known as well as WD.

 

Honestly, the MSRP doesn't surprise me.

[Jovidah]

Add 2 more completely unexciting options to an already oversaturated market filled with indistinguishable products. We already have too many of these middle-of-the-road drives that really do not excel in anything (speed, price or reliability).

 

What I would like to see is a company producing a drive that combines ridiculously cheap price/GB with a good reliability, completely sacrificing performance / speed if they have to. Essentially the 5400/5900 RPM version of SSD's, for all your bulk storage, to replace the HDD's most of us are still using to that end.

All of us want to get rid of our HDD's but it's just not within reach of the average budget. As of right now all the budget options are way too close in price to all the mainstream options, and still too far removed from HDD's in cost/GB.

[VerticalDiscussions]

This is such an uninspiring improvement i honestly dont understand why Western Digital and Toshiba havent been introducing high performance SSD's onto the market already :(, since OCZ and Sandisk were both great manufacturers, where one even innovated big in the memory world.

[Captain_WD]

Just my two cents: mind that the average user won't really push an ordinary SSD that far and they won't really notice a performance difference of 10MB/s-20MB/s during their daily usage. SATA SSDs are nearing the SATAIII limit and the average TBW seems enough for an average user. Setting aside power users which can get PCIe-based SSDs or enterprise-grade hardware, the current market seems to have its needs covered on the performance side.

SSD being a relatively new addition to the mass market (speaking globally for an average user) I'd say that we are yet to see improvements and the general need for them (setting $/GB aside). 

 

Captain_WD. 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

1 hour ago, Jovidah said:

Add 2 more completely unexciting options to an already oversaturated market filled with indistinguishable products. We already have too many of these middle-of-the-road drives that really do not excel in anything (speed, price or reliability).

There is no such thing as too much competition - at least from a consumer point of view.

A saturated market of indistinguishable products is what we call "perfect competition". You know, the opposite "look at my logo and patent trolling, pay twice as much" or "pulling a comcast"  

[GSTARR]

On ‎10‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 0:58 PM, zMeul said:

why aren't you reading? the Green ones are 120GB and 240GB models

smh he wants 128 gb tho

[Jovidah]

17 minutes ago, Captain_WD said:

Just my two cents: mind that the average user won't really push an ordinary SSD that far and they won't really notice a performance difference of 10MB/s-20MB/s during their daily usage. SATA SSDs are nearing the SATAIII limit and the average TBW seems enough for an average user. Setting aside power users which can get PCIe-based SSDs or enterprise-grade hardware, the current market seems to have its needs covered on the performance side.

SSD being a relatively new addition to the mass market (speaking globally for an average user) I'd say that we are yet to see improvements and the general need for them (setting $/GB aside). 

 

Captain_WD. 

I suppose to clarify my remark. I am in full agreement here; the differences between SSD's are negligible. But that's exactly the problem. Why should I buy this disk instead of one of the other tens of equally generic options. It's not that it's necessarily a bad product; the problem is that it's no better than all of the other products that aren't bad either.

Hence my lack of excitement. 

All the high-end sequential speed stuff on the newer stuff is indeed meaningless for all home users; for home users it's all pretty much at a stand-still as long as things like 4k-at-low-queue-depths isn't improving.

 

Therefore my request for a 'cheap dump storage SSD'... since performance isn't improving anytime soon (where it would make a difference at least) that would at least be something to spike my interest.