1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Seagate to Offer Full SSD Lineup by 2010; Will Begin Offering Products 2008

Discussion in 'News' started by zekrahminator, Aug 25, 2007.

  1. zekrahminator

    zekrahminator McLovin

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2006
    Messages:
    9,113 (2.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    321
    Location:
    My house.
    SSD (Solid State Disk) technology is one of the most powerful advances in storage technology in some time. Unfortunately, at this point, it's hideously expensive, and only available to the major OEM companies. Fortunately, Seagate aims to change all that. Starting next year, Seagate will be releasing cost-effective desktop and laptop SSDs. By 2010, Seagate aims to eliminate current problems with SSD technology, such as high cost, low storage yields, and low availability.

    Source: Nordic Hardware
     
  2. russianboy New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,800 (0.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    90
    Good for Seagate, I look forward to this, especially if they can get it faster then two RAID 0-ed Raptors, maybe I can put two of those in RAID 0 and have Windows boot in 1 second!
     
  3. Weer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,417 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    94
    Location:
    New York / Israel
    Faster than the Raptor? The SSDs are hundreds of times faster than anything we have had up to this point.
    Think of an HDD almost as fast as RAM!

    It makes me feel bad about spending 200$ on a 150GB Raptor.. but right now, the price is way too damn high.
     
  4. WarEagleAU

    WarEagleAU Bird of Prey

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2006
    Messages:
    10,812 (3.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    547
    Location:
    Gurley, AL
    The good news is, storage will increase and prices will come down. If Seagate gets on board, you can bet it wont be too much longer before the other companies come calling. This is terrific news and pretty soon, SATA will not be used as much as SSD :)
     
  5. OnBoard

    OnBoard New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,044 (0.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    379
    Location:
    Finland
    SATA ?) SSDs are either SATA or IDE connected, it will be used more :p
     
  6. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,691 (6.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,987
    Location:
    some AF base
    that sounds like a good upgrade since my 60gb maxtor is failing :D make them cheap seagate i wanna use those 2 sata slots on my mobo :D
     
  7. GSG-9

    GSG-9

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,702 (0.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    150
    Location:
    Minneapolis, Mn

    I know what your saying, but traditional hard drives are still faster at some operations, if you look up a review you will see what I mean. But it is true they are much faster at almost everything and use much less power.
     
  8. Weer New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2007
    Messages:
    1,417 (0.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    94
    Location:
    New York / Israel
    No, they are not faster at anything. If you learn about seek times you will see what I mean.
    What they DO have is bandwidth, which is something that can easily be hightened with RAID 0.
     
  9. theonetruewill New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Messages:
    2,996 (0.96/day)
    Thanks Received:
    240
    Location:
    London - Close your eyes and you'll see me
    SSD's are slow at writing data. HDD's are not.
     
  10. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,691 (6.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,987
    Location:
    some AF base
    that im sure will be fixed b4 2010 im sure that the old old HDD didnt right to well either :D
     
  11. GSG-9

    GSG-9

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,702 (0.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    150
    Location:
    Minneapolis, Mn
    Im not even going to start this conversation again, Right now Ram is faster than flash access memory and supposedly that is faster than a hard drive do to access times and hard drives having moving parts.

    http://www.hothardware.com/articles/Gigabyte_IRAM_Storage_Device1/?page=3

    a Gigabyte ram disk (MUCH faster than SSD's) has much WORSE buffered reads all thie time, no matter what than traditional harddrives. You can go look up other reviews, the SSD technology will at one point surpass traditional drives, but right now they just have not. Im not going to go dig around for the SSD vs Raid.traditional drive reviews on this but Raid/Traditional Drives still has advantages over SSDs. Look it up next time.
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2007
  12. TalonThorn New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
  13. GSG-9

    GSG-9

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Messages:
    1,702 (0.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    150
    Location:
    Minneapolis, Mn
    Look at a bench that has buffered reads listed, the i-ram gets scores that are half as good as raptors in raid 0. Which is only because the tech. is still in the first generation, im sure when it matures it will have faster buffered reads. My only point is that SSDs dont beat traditional drives at everything, yet. :]
     
  14. TalonThorn New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Well, actually it is a pity that there is no "real world" benchmarks. These scores don't really tell us much. If you've ever looked at the raid 0 benchmarks for desktop machines, you'll agree that raid 0 is worthless for a desktop environment (short of just costing you a lot more for no real gain). The only use for raid 0 really is for applications that use it.

    My only interest (and why I found this thread) is to figure out if it is worth investing in a small piece of fast storage of some sort to make my video processing go faster. I'm still not convinced it is worth the price.

    Too bad a ram drive would be even more limited (in size). :/
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page