Sunday, January 10th 2016
Mushkin Shows Off a 500-Dollar 4 TB SSD
How to make headlines with a rather mainstream SSD controller like the Silicon Motion SM2246EN? Ask Mushkin - after unveiling a 2 TB variant of the Reactor SSD, which maxes out the NAND flash capacity limit for the SM2246EN controller, the company also showed off a prototype of its 4 TB variant, which overcomes the capacity limitation by doing a good old-fashioned multi-controller SSD subunit RAID, which is host-transparent. Your machine reads the drive as 4 TB, while internally, it's a JBOD of two 2 TB Reactor subunits.
The drive uses 3D MLC NAND flash to keep densities high. It features a standard SATA 6 Gb/s interface, and ships in a standard 7 mm-thick, 2.5-inch form-factor. The best part? Mushkin plans to sell the drive at $500, or $0.125/GB, making it an exciting game folder drive option. In addition to the Reactor duo, Mushkin unveiled a 1920 GB variant of the Striker, a performance-oriented drive based on the Phison PS3110-S10 controller, with faster MLC NAND flash chips. This drive could be pricier.
Source:
TechReport
The drive uses 3D MLC NAND flash to keep densities high. It features a standard SATA 6 Gb/s interface, and ships in a standard 7 mm-thick, 2.5-inch form-factor. The best part? Mushkin plans to sell the drive at $500, or $0.125/GB, making it an exciting game folder drive option. In addition to the Reactor duo, Mushkin unveiled a 1920 GB variant of the Striker, a performance-oriented drive based on the Phison PS3110-S10 controller, with faster MLC NAND flash chips. This drive could be pricier.
59 Comments on Mushkin Shows Off a 500-Dollar 4 TB SSD
I don't recall being impeded by a 2TB limit in WHS2011. WHS v1 yes but not WHS2011. I think there is an easy way around it if there is such a limitation. Stablebit Drive pool might help with that or some other third-party application.
EditI was expecting to see TLC at that price.
$500 / 4000 GB = $ 0.13 per GB
Which makes it even more amazing :)
A quick check tells me that in my country the Sandisk Ultra II (960GB) holds the crown atm with € 0.26 per GB.
There is no reason now not to make an M.2 NVM PCI-E drive with the similar tech.
sequential speeds matter jack shit, everyone knows that.
and unless youre hammering your drives with some serious IO (think multiple VMs running some heavy databases) sata6g is still plenty fast for pretty much everyone (that includes you and me).
but obviously having a fast pcie drive, thats fast on paper but happens to be almost on par with sata drives in real world... well, thats just great for bragging on the forums ;)
personally, ill take bigger and more reliable ssd any day of the week, even if that means sacrificing some performance
none of that tlc crap for me. if people realized how crappy flash is used nowdays in ssds, they would never even touch them, let alone store data in there.
PCI-E drives are significantly better for lossless game recording which can get held back by drive speed.
Btw, does lossless recording really take that much write bandwidth ?
I still think that ~10-20k IOPS (sequential doesnt really matter) is plenty enough for most desktop users out there.
Unless you got SM951-NVme, thats a different beast entirely.
NVMe drives can hit 300k IOPS... Even the cheap pm951 can hit 270k IOPS...
High Sequential speeds is for sheeps that dont know better. And maybe very specific workloads.
as for your compare... well you can get hdds that have quite a bit faster write speeds than ssds (thanks tlc) yet those ssds blow away hdds in real world usage. so more is not always better. but higher numbers sure sell better ;)