Monday, March 20th 2017

Samsung's Z- SSD Featuring Z-NAND Makes a Physical Appearance

NAND has come here to stay, and it's market penetration still has a lot of leeway. Samsung, bar none the biggest and best player in the NAND field, is in a uniquely privileged position to develop new technologies and capitalize on them. Remember that Samsung has so many distinct product lines on which to monetize its advancements that any new investment is hardly a make it or break it affair.

Z-NAND is Samsung's answer to other developing technologies such as 3D XPoint, of which Intel has just announced the first commercial product. Z-NAND looks to stand at the intersection between NAND and DRAM, and is more of an evolution of the NAND design than it is a totally new technology (thus distancing itself from the likes of 3D XPoint.)

Not all of the secret sauce is found on the Z-NAND dies: some of it is in a new controller of which there still are no specifications, which also allows for latency (presumably read latency) that will be 70% lower than current NVMe drives. The pictured Z-SSD, which has already begun sampling to customers, carries 800 GB capacity, and makes use of the PCIe 4x lanes to transmit data. Samsung lists tremendous sequential read and write speeds at up to 3200 Gbps, though its random speeds come in at a much more mundane 750K read and 160K write IOPS. No pricing or availability details are known, though it is expected that these drives will eventually come in at 1 TB, 2 TB, and 4 TB capacities.Source: AnandTech
Add your own comment

19 Comments on Samsung's Z- SSD Featuring Z-NAND Makes a Physical Appearance

#2
Raevenlord
News Editor
Ferrum Master said:
You sure?
You know those moments where you stare at the screen, you see what another person writes and think "I mean, yeah, of course I'm sure, I just fact-checked..."

That said, I am one of those guys who looks for his cellphone for a full minute before realizing he's holding it, so..

Damn.
Posted on Reply
#3
erixx
Wow! "proven NAND technology"... It is new, man! How can it be proven!

And then "improved ...price"... Yep! But I believe from the sellers point of view!

No more kidneys left...
Posted on Reply
#4
Solidstate89
erixx said:
Wow! "proven NAND technology"... It is new, man! How can it be proven!

And then "improved ...price"... Yep! But I believe from the sellers point of view!

No more kidneys left...
It's "proven" because it's still NAND. Where as the XPoint stuff from Intel and Micron is not physically NAND. It is a new type of solid state storage design.
Posted on Reply
#5
MxPhenom 216
Corsair Fanboy
inb4 everyone complains about it having a heatsink...
Posted on Reply
#6
csatahajos
"write speeds at up to 3200 Gbps" Are U kidding me? That is ~400.000Mb/sec!!! This would be several hundred times better then existing stuff...Am I missing something here?
Posted on Reply
#7
johnsushant
So you can fill the 1TB drive in under 3 seconds? Heatsink suddenly makes a lot more sense.
Posted on Reply
#8
DeathtoGnomes
csatahajos said:
"write speeds at up to 3200 Gbps" Are U kidding me? That is ~400.000Mb/sec!!! This would be several hundred times better then existing stuff...Am I missing something here?
Yep. its not a SATA connection....
Posted on Reply
#9
bug
Here's hoping it will do better than one write per day.
Posted on Reply
#10
R-T-B
MxPhenom 216 said:
inb4 everyone complains about it having a heatsink...
I'd be much more upset if it did not...
Posted on Reply
#11
csatahajos
DeathtoGnomes said:
Yep. its not a SATA connection....
I know that thank you. Current PCI-E NVMe SSDs are in the region of 3000 Mb/s sequential reads. This one is over 400.000 Mb/s...several magniutes faster. I'm not saying it is a typo but if it's true it's a quantum leap ot just a major step forward, that is why I'm skeptical it was meant to be 3200 Mb/s not Gbye or gigabit.
Posted on Reply
#13
esrever
csatahajos said:
I know that thank you. Current PCI-E NVMe SSDs are in the region of 3000 Mb/s sequential reads. This one is over 400.000 Mb/s...several magniutes faster. I'm not saying it is a typo but if it's true it's a quantum leap ot just a major step forward, that is why I'm skeptical it was meant to be 3200 Mb/s not Gbye or gigabit.
You are confusing Mb and MB.
Posted on Reply
#14
Blueberries
I really hope Samsung offers a consumer ZNAND product, like their Pro/Evo series at a sub $1000 price.
Posted on Reply
#15
eidairaman1
Shoot
MxPhenom 216 said:
inb4 everyone complains about it having a heatsink...
I'd strip the case off my 840 Pro and put a hsf on it for even better temps lol
Posted on Reply
#16
Prima.Vera
Crazy zookeepster said:
Does it really do 3200 Gbps?
csatahajos said:
"write speeds at up to 3200 Gbps" Are U kidding me? That is ~400.000Mb/sec!!! This would be several hundred times better then existing stuff...Am I missing something here?
csatahajos said:
I know that thank you. Current PCI-E NVMe SSDs are in the region of 3000 Mb/s sequential reads. This one is over 400.000 Mb/s...several magniutes faster. I'm not saying it is a typo but if it's true it's a quantum leap ot just a major step forward, that is why I'm skeptical it was meant to be 3200 Mb/s not Gbye or gigabit.
Calm down, is 3.2 GBps or 3.2GB/s
typo. :)
Posted on Reply
#17
Crazy zookeepster
Prima.Vera said:
Calm down, is 3.2 GBps or 3.2GB/s
typo.
So then the point of this would be reduced read latency?
Posted on Reply
#18
csatahajos
Jeeez guys....one says "You are confusing Mb and MB." the other "Calm down, is 3.2 GBps or 3.2GB/s typo. :)" Ffs please READ the article, it says explicitly "3200 Gbps". How can it/I confuse Mb and MB and how could it be a typo if both the number and the metric is wrong? It is both wrong as 3200 GB/s or Gbps - logically of course it would make sense as 3.2 Gb/s but then what is to be excited about as current Samsung NVMe SSDs can beat that.... :D
Posted on Reply
#19
Prima.Vera
csatahajos said:
Jeeez guys....one says "You are confusing Mb and MB." the other "Calm down, is 3.2 GBps or 3.2GB/s typo. :)" Ffs please READ the article, it says explicitly "3200 Gbps". How can it/I confuse Mb and MB and how could it be a typo if both the number and the metric is wrong? It is both wrong as 3200 GB/s or Gbps - logically of course it would make sense as 3.2 Gb/s but then what is to be excited about as current Samsung NVMe SSDs can beat that.... :D
Exactly. Read the article!!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment