backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 16 comment(s) - last by hcforde.. on Aug 20 at 9:15 AM

  (Source: Impress Watch)
For those that prefer to build their own SSD, a new solution may soon be available.

Solid state drives (SSDs) a hot topic these days and numerous manufacturers have jumped on the high-speed bandwagon. Companies like OCZ and Super Talent provide high performance drives at a somewhat affordable price while companies like Samsung and Mtron are cranking out expensive, incredibly fast offerings.

The folks over at Engadget noticed that there is a new solution available for those that want to go the solid state route, but prefer to bring their own NAND flash along for the journey. The PhotoFast SSD CR-9000 features a standard 2.5" drive form factor along with SATA II and power connectors. Within the chassis are six Secure Digital slots which will allow you to upgrade storage capacity at will.

Using six Transcend 8GB SDHC cards, Impress Watch was able to extract sequential reads of 111.4 MB/sec and sequential writes of 55.17 MB/sec while operating in a RAID-0 configuration. For comparison, the OCZ Core Series is rated at 120 to 143 MB/sec for reads and 80 to 93 MB/sec for writes; Super Talent's upgraded MX Series SSDs clock in at 120MB/sec read and 80MB/sec write.

According to Impress Watch, the PhotoFast SSD CR-9000 costs roughly $91 by itself. Taking a quick trip over to Newegg, 8GB SDHC cards are running roughly $24 apiece; 16GB SDHC cards are priced at around $50 each.

So this DIY SSD would cost you about $235 for 48GB and $391 for 96GB. With pricing for OCZ's Core Series hovering at about $240 after rebate for the 64GB model and $440 after rebate for the 128GB model, this DIY solution might not exactly be the most cost effective route.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RAID Support?
By Cobra Commander on 8/11/08, Rating: 0
RE: RAID Support?
By FITCamaro on 8/11/2008 11:57:40 AM , Rating: 5
It doesn't matter. Compact flash cards aren't built for constant reading and writing. The cards would probably be dead in a year.


RE: RAID Support?
By PandaBear on 8/11/2008 11:59:33 AM , Rating: 2
Very true, and SD is even worst because the design is for digital camera and it usually doesn't have as high of a wear spec as even CF, which is usually professional camera cards nowadays.


RE: RAID Support?
By Lord 666 on 8/11/2008 2:23:14 PM , Rating: 2
While they might be dead in a year, if quality cards were purchased in the first place, most of them have lifetime warranty.

Following best practices of data backup (i always keep backups in three's actually) it shouldn't be an issue.


RE: RAID Support?
By mikeyD95125 on 8/12/2008 12:46:22 AM , Rating: 2
I have doubts that using SD cards in a DIY SSD is covered under the lifetime warranty.


RE: RAID Support?
By JonnyDough on 8/12/2008 1:55:34 AM , Rating: 2
If the device that uses SSD is licensed and made for it, and the warranty does not specifically exclude the use of the cards in an SSD device then it would be covered under the warranty. Any court would side with the consumer.


RE: RAID Support?
By JonnyDough on 8/12/2008 2:01:37 AM , Rating: 2
Oops. Sorry I'm tired. I meant "If the device that uses SD memory cards..."


RE: RAID Support?
By 306maxi on 8/12/2008 5:31:21 AM , Rating: 2
How will they know you've been using it in an SSD anyway? These cards are so cheap to manufacture that it's just cheaper to replace them without testing than to test them and then contact the user and say their warranty is void because it was used in a DIY SSD.


Only costs a lot now
By Generic Guy on 8/11/2008 12:44:01 PM , Rating: 3
I love these kinds of invention. Yeah, costs for large SD cards are high now, but in a year those same 16GB cards will likely be at the $24 mark, maybe even less. I bought a 16GB SDHC back in Feb for $80 (down from over $100), and already they are hitting the $50 mark. Heck, I've been getting coupons from MicroCenter offering *free* 2GB SD cards, so the costs are obviously coming down fast.

This is not a unit for performance nuts. But in more casual settings this could be a useful niche device. Cheap laptop replacement, since the HDD is always the most likely piece to fail; Or a cool'n'quiet PS3 drive replacement with some leftover camera memory. The biggest impediment would seem to be the $91 cost of the main unit itself




RE: Only costs a lot now
By mmntech on 8/11/2008 1:02:18 PM , Rating: 2
As the others said, SD cards aren't meant for constant writes and will wear out faster. However, I think something like this would be useful as an expandable media server in the form of a portable drive.

One problem I can see though is reliability. I don't know much about RAID but I wonder how it handles storing data between the memory cards.


RE: Only costs a lot now
By Targon on 8/11/2008 7:44:14 PM , Rating: 2
RAID is generally handled by the drive controller, so is seen as a single drive to the operating system, even if you have 2-6 physical hard drives in the array. As a result, the real issue is the hard drive controller, which is probably why SSD drives are not performing as well as people expect them to.

For something like a SSD, I would prefer a new type of drive controller designed to take advantage of the hardware. SATA may seem amazing compared to the old EIDE/ATA/PATA drives, but it SHOULD be seen as the place where things slow down for SSD. How quickly can the memory on the drive be read if it were connected via a HyperTransport type connection?


RE: Only costs a lot now
By ET on 8/12/2008 4:18:28 AM , Rating: 2
Sure it's been said that SD cards aren't meant for constant writes, but I wonder whether there's any proof of that. In my book, just having a lot of people say it doesn't mean it's true.

There's an interesting comment about this in the article at http://www.notebookreview.com/default.asp?newsID=4...


Now...
By Clauzii on 8/11/2008 2:01:10 PM , Rating: 3
.. that real SSDs are going mainstream it seems this product is a little to late. And expensive. But probably a good idea for people having a ton of SDs to spare.




RE: Now...
By hcforde on 8/20/2008 9:15:44 AM , Rating: 2
I was asking about something like this a few days ago at FRY's. Depending on the application it would be perfect. I have a dedicated application that I want to use in a laptop that I only use when I travel. All I need is the OS and this one application and maybe MS Office. I currently have XP and the application on a 6GB drive. I was informed about tinyXP 2 days ago. Is this new unit cost effective over a small HDD? NO!!, You can get 160GB notebook sata drives for $80 at Fry's on sale just about every week. BUT if you need to be in an environment that is hostile to moving parts in a HDD this might be the ticket.

I can easily see these being used in the military.


Keep reading news reporters!
By littleprince on 8/11/2008 11:51:43 AM , Rating: 1
If you report the news from other articles, you should read the entire article before posting it as news.

The speeds quoted were from a RAID 0 array of the drives.
Theres clear screens and horrible translations in the original link.




RE: Keep reading news reporters!
By Alpha4 on 8/11/2008 6:28:19 PM , Rating: 2
You might be right, but at the moment the article reads "sequential reads of 111.4 MB/sec and sequential writes of 55.17 MB/sec while operating in a RAID-0 configuration."

In your defense some Dailytech editors like to modify articles without responding to posts like these, making the comment author's look bad. It's possible they spot the errors themself though. Your best bet is to Email the author instead. On that note I think suggesting some DT editor's don't fully read the articles they reference is a bit presumptious.


"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot











botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki