Saturday, January 10th 2009

pureSilicon Debuts World's First 1TB 2.5-Inch SSD

pureSilicon is demonstrating the highest-density SSD available today: the 1TB Nitro Series. This represents a major advance for the storage industry since it combines maximum density with high performance and low power demand. Four of these drives deliver 4TB in the same space as a standard 3.5-inch HDD, so server footprint requirements and energy consumption in data-intensive applications can be considerably reduced.


The 1TB Nitro SSD is the most compact SSD per gigabyte: 15.40GB per cubic centimeter in a 2.5-inch form-factor - at least three times greater than any other SSD on the market. This high density in a small form factor has been achieved through innovative engineering techniques coupled with advanced industrial design that yields an exceptionally thin enclosure.

This Nitro line of high-performance solid-state drives is designed for applications where data throughput and power consumption are paramount: server, networking, datacenter, supercomputing, and professional media. These applications require fast transfer speeds and involve the storage of massive amounts of data. pureSilicon has benchmarked these drives at speeds approaching the maximum bus speed of SATA II (300 MB/s).


Feature summary
- 1TB SSD in 2.5-inch form-factor (highest density ever at 2.5-inch)
- 300MB/s SATA II interface
- Industry-leading performance
- State-of-the-art industrial design
Specifications
- Capacities: 32GB, 64GB, 128GB, 256GB, 512GB, 1024GB
Performance
- Transfer rate: 300MB/sec
- Sustained read: 240MB/sec
- Sustained write: 215MB/sec
- Random read (IOPS 4K): 50,000
- Random write (IOPS 4K): 10,000
- Latency < 100 µsec
Reliability
- MTTF: 2.0 million hours
Environmental
- Temperature (operating): 0°C to +70°C
- Temperature (non-operating): -45°C to +85°C
- Shock (operating): 1500G, duration 0.5ms, half sine wave
- Vibration (operating): 20G peak, 10~2,000Hz, x3 axis
Power
- Active: 4.8W typical
- Idle: 0.1W typical
Physical
- 2.5in form factor: 100.2mm x 69.85mm x 9.5mm

pureSilicon has begun sampling its Renegade SSD units on a limited basis to select customers, with shipments expected to commence in the first quarter of 2009. The Nitro Series SSDs will be available in Q3 2009, pricing TBD.Source: MarketWire
Add your own comment

41 Comments on pureSilicon Debuts World's First 1TB 2.5-Inch SSD

#4
a111087
I bet this would bring prices down even faster
Posted on Reply
#5
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
Sweet, so now I can lose TerraBytes of data when the drive dies in two years.
Posted on Reply
#6
REVHEAD
by: newtekie1
Sweet, so now I can lose TerraBytes of data when the drive dies in two years.
Very optimistic there, more like 12 months .
Posted on Reply
#7
Nick89
by: newtekie1
Sweet, so now I can lose TerraBytes of data when the drive dies in two years.
by: REVHEAD
Very optimistic there, more like 12 months .
I lol'ed :roll: I'll stick with a 2tb mag drive
Posted on Reply
#9

how quickly has this technology been developed? 2 or so months after the initial baby ones (36GB and so) were released, 1TB flavours are released . . . not bad, cant wait for prices to come down and reliability to go up!
Posted on Edit | Reply
#10

You can lose 1TB of data with a regular HDD also if it goes bad after 2year's! :D

But if you wish buy a 1GB HDD beside of the SDD to store your precious Data! (All your Porn and pirated films!) And for the system you can use the ultra fast SDD :D:D:D

SDD is the future! :slap:
Posted on Edit | Reply
#11
PCpraiser100
Call now to get this SSD for only $10,000!!!!!!! :D
Posted on Reply
#12
DrPepper
The Doctor is in the house
Now that they have caught up with mechanical, They should focus on them not deleting your stuff after being used for a year.
Posted on Reply
#13
Jizzler
One year? Shoot, I'll be upgrading to the SSD that maxes SATA 6Gb/s :D
Posted on Reply
#14
tofu
by: malware

- Random read (IOPS 4K): 50,000
- Random write (IOPS 4K): 10,000
Not bad for a large capacity ssd. MFT partitions can achieve about 15000 IOPS @ 4K write. There definitely will not be stuttering on this drive. Good luck on the price :slap:
Posted on Reply
#15

The point is that if they make ever bigger SSDs the price goes down for the smaler ones! And I think that a 64 or 128GB SSD for the OS is more then enough! So in a year or so I sure that a 128GB SSD with Sata3 6Gb/s would be affordeble for us normal mortals!
Posted on Edit | Reply
#18
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: moto666
You can lose 1TB of data with a regular HDD also if it goes bad after 2year's! :D
With an HDD, it is an if, with an SSD it is when.

by: moto666
SDD is the future! :slap:
It is the future, but not in its current form. It won't replace HDDs until the write count is at close to that of an HDD.

by: moto666
The point is that if they make ever bigger SSDs the price goes down for the smaler ones!
Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. As they make bigger SSDs, they just raise the price bar even higher. The smaller ones don't get cheaper, the bigger ones just get more expensive.

by: moto666
And I think that a 64 or 128GB SSD for the OS is more then enough! So in a year or so I sure that a 128GB SSD with Sata3 6Gb/s would be affordeble for us normal mortals!
The problem is that just putting the OS on the drive doesn't help performance in applications. The applications need to be on the SSD also, and right now my OS/App drive isat 200GB and growing with each new game that comes out.
Posted on Reply
#19
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
"Reliability
- MTTF: 2.0 million hours"

so the mean time to a failure is 2 million hours, (across all units made the same)

1 year is shy of 9000 hours.

they post MTTF because this unit is non repairable, but 2 million hours!

how many times would you guys write and rewrite data anyway?

personally im still waiting to hear the FIRST horror story of an expensive SSD dying.

by: newtekie1
With an HDD, it is an if, with an SSD it is when.
i was under the impression that using any electronics is in effect shortening its life, thus wouldn't everything be a matter of when not if? just a different time frame.
Posted on Reply
#20
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: wolf
"Reliability
- MTTF: 2.0 million hours"

so the mean time to a failure is 2 million hours, (across all units made the same)

1 year is shy of 9000 hours.

they post MTTF because this unit is non repairable, but 2 million hours!

how many times would you guys write and rewrite data anyway?

personally im still waiting to hear the FIRST horror story of an expensive SSD dying.
2 Million hours is a made up BS number. They do the same with HDDs. I got tricked into that by WD with their 2 Million Hour MTTF "RAID Edition" drive. Only to have two of the three I owned fail well before the 2 Million hour mark(both failed within a year).

SSDs are still new to the consumer market, give it about 2 more years and we will start to see people's drives dying.

by: wolf
i was under the impression that using any electronics is in effect shortening its life, thus wouldn't everything be a matter of when not if? just a different time frame.
We are talking about roughly the 2 year timeline and the drives failing within that. With an HDD we are talking about if they die within 2 years. With an SSD we are talking about when they die in 2 years.

Yes, using an electronic device shortens its lifespan, however with an HDD its life span is a random length and using it just randomly changes that to something else. With an SSD, you are working with a time bomb, the counter starts the moment you plug it in, and every write decreases the timer by one.

Some say that the usable life of the current SSDs are relatively long(5-10 years), but others say they will start to fail and show signs of the flash memory failing after just 2-3 years.

Personally, I would rather take my chances with an HDD that might never die, than buy a drive I know will die eventually. SSDs might be fast, but IMO they aren't worth it. Prices are still too high, and reliability is still too low. Especially with large drives like this which are meant to store data. I expect SSDs need about another 2 years before they will be an acceptable replacement for desktop drives.
Posted on Reply
#21
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
thanks newtekie nice reply, and i definitely understand that point of view.

for myself hardware is on a very short lifespan, as are windows rebuilds.

i would only buy an SSD for a windows/games drive (maybe raid) so if one or both lasted only say 1-2 years i could warrant replacing them, under 1 condition.

THE PRICE COMES DOWN!!! gahhh theyre so expensive :ohwell:
Posted on Reply
#22
DaedalusHelios
Sadly, I don't think I could afford it. :(

Anybody got an idea on projected price?
Posted on Reply
#23
R-T-B
"It won't replace HDDs until the write count is at close to that of an HDD."

SLC drives already post acceptable numbers. It's these MLC drives that are the trouble, and even they are rapidly improving. At any rate, I'd still trust an SSD over an HD anyday, your more likely to wear out an HDs mechanics than an SSDs burn in with decent wear leveling.
Posted on Reply
#24
PVTCaboose1337
Graphical Hacker
If I could afford this I would... But no body here really can.
Posted on Reply
#25

by: moto666
You can lose 1TB of data with a regular HDD also if it goes bad after 2year's! :D

But if you wish buy a 1GB HDD beside of the SDD to store your precious Data! (All your Porn and pirated films!) And for the system you can use the ultra fast SDD :D:D:D

SDD is the future! :slap:
ya sure it is the future and will do what you said, but first get the name right. its SSD ( Solid State Drive ) , not SDD ( Solid Disk Drive ) . :D :slap:
Add your own comment