Print 29 comment(s) - last by Oregonian2.. on Apr 25 at 4:34 PM

Toshiba also says the price of NAND will drop 50% every year from now on

While solid-state drives (SSDs) aren’t the most popular storage medium in notebook computers right now, they are expected to grow significantly in the near future. Toshiba Semiconductor is betting that SSD drives grow significantly over the next three years and is enhancing capacity and reducing costs to grab that growing market.

Toshiba Semiconductor President Shozo Saito said at a seminar that he expects a full quarter of all notebooks shipped to be equipped with SSDs by 2011. Toshiba expects the SSD market to grow 133% every year on average through 2010 and Toshiba says its building capacity faster than that.

Toshiba plans to address several issues currently keeping SSDs from becoming more widely used. Toshiba is also addressing the concerns with regards to the rewrite limit for multi-level cells used in today’s SSDs. Saito said at the conference that, “If data is efficiently concentrated and stored in caches in an effort to reduce the frequency of rewrites, rewrites on SSDs can be reduced to a number far below 10,000 times in five years, even for heavy PC users."

Other major hurdles for the widespread adoption of SSD drives are the price and capacity current drives offer. Toshiba s addressing the capacity issue by working on miniaturizing the production process it uses from the current 43nm process it introduced in March 2008 to 30nm which it expects to introduce in 2009.

Toshiba will also improve multi-valuing by moving from its current 3-bit-per-cell product to a 4-bit-per-cell product. SanDisk beat Toshiba to market by a month with its 40nm 3-bit-per-cell process in February of 2008.

The price premium for SSDs compared to 2.5-inch Hard drives is expected to drop to a 3.2 times premium, roughly half of what it is now according to Toshiba.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Dreaming is nice
By HakonPCA on 4/24/2008 12:13:05 PM , Rating: 2
sadly you're probably right, not that Seagate will really be able to do anything substantial in terms of stopping the SDD market from developing.

This reminds me of Kodak and film cameras vs. Digital. They tried to fight it a little too long, and then got into the new market a little late. Any they went from being synonymous with cameras and film to, who owns a Kodak camera or printer? although some people do buy their Kodak inkjet photo paper.

I like my Seagate HDDs and I hope they are smart enough as a company to get on this asap and become a driver of SDD before the market really takes off.

RE: Dreaming is nice
By daftrok on 4/24/2008 1:15:40 PM , Rating: 3
I would much rather see the movement from 2.5" to 1.8" on laptops. 1.8" HDDs are now capable of running at 5400 RPM. This means that now laptops can run on these tiny HDDs and get the same (if not better) performance they do with a 2.5" 5400 RPM HDD. And if they want the boost to 7200 rpm, then they can get a 2.5" HDD.

This could also mean that desktops can now adequately run on 2.5" 7200 rpm HDD instead of 3.5" 7200 rpm. And now with the Velociraptor 2.5" 10,000 rpm HDD, people would only need a 3.5" HDD for 15,000 rpm (that and 1 TB HDDs).

I think this would happen before SSDs become accepted. Right now SSDs are just too expensive. They need to at least make a 128 GB SSD that runs faster than a 5400 rpm HDD both in reading AND writing AND take a lot less power doing it AND last longer AND be around 200-300 dollars. In other words, this is gonna take a while.

RE: Dreaming is nice
By Pandamonium on 4/24/2008 1:45:21 PM , Rating: 3
No OEM wants to have a chassis that has to be able to switch between 1.8"/2.5" drives. Very few home users would willingly accept the same speed hard drive in a new computer in exchange for a smaller physical disk.

You're setting the bar too low for what people expect.

As for what SSDs are: current SSDs are 1) faster than 5400RPM HDDs, 2) use far less power than HDDs, 3) have projected MTBF based on rewrite cycles (with the 64+GB models) greater than HDDs, 4) are much more shock resistant than HDDs.

The only requirement in your list not yet met is price, which is exactly what this article is about.

RE: Dreaming is nice
By daftrok on 4/24/2008 2:11:51 PM , Rating: 1
There are times when SSDs take around the same power as their HDD counter parts and have COMPARABLE read and write speeds. Of course they have the seek time but there are times when they are slower when it comes to reading and writing. There have also been cases when faulty SSDs hit the market and crapping out a lot sooner then they should. They have a lot more hurdles to jump (biggest one price) before it is accepted. Frankly I'd rather get an 80 GB 1.8" 5400 rpm HDD with a 2.5" casing I can stick into my laptop instead of a SSD.

RE: Dreaming is nice
By hanishkvc on 4/24/2008 3:58:48 PM , Rating: 2
The amount of parallelism possible in a SSD is such that if cost is not a factor the speeds (both read and write) that can be achieved is really superb, and thus is in a way decoupled from the speed of the individual flash chips.

RE: Dreaming is nice
By MrDiSante on 4/24/2008 7:14:45 PM , Rating: 2
This could also mean that desktops can now adequately run on 2.5" 7200 rpm HDD instead of 3.5" 7200 rpm. And now with the Velociraptor 2.5" 10,000 rpm HDD, people would only need a 3.5" HDD for 15,000 rpm (that and 1 TB HDDs).

I understand why you'd want a smaller hard-drive in your lappy, but what on earth is the need for smaller than 3.5" HDD's in your desktop? There's no performance advantage - quite the opposite, on the outer part of the disc you'll get better performance with a 3.5", no cost advantage, no noise advantage, etc. If I can get a 640GB 7200RPM HDD for $120 why on earth would I settle for 250GB 5400RPM HDD? There's just no sense in that. I'm all for smaller (physically) hard-drives in laptops, but in desktops? There's just no point.

RE: Dreaming is nice
By Omega215D on 4/25/2008 4:05:53 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe these would be good in HTPCs?

RE: Dreaming is nice
By Diesel Donkey on 4/24/2008 9:46:06 PM , Rating: 3
I have a 7200 RPM HDD in both my laptop and my desktop, and I guarantee you that the one in the desktop is substantially faster. The tangential velocity at the outer edge of the platters changes linearly with the radius, so the outer part of the 3.5" platter is spinning 40% faster than the outer part of the 2.5" platter. I'll keep my 3.5" drives for the desktop, thank you!

RE: Dreaming is nice
By Oregonian2 on 4/24/2008 3:48:41 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure if that's being fair to Kodak. Now, their film division would certainly not stop promoting film, as they surely aren't even now, Kodak certainly is part of digital photography's foundation. The Bayer pattern that 99.9% of all digital camera sensors use came from Kodak. One of it's leading replacements is coming from Kodak (no, not Foveon). Kodak was about the very first makers of digital cameras (remember those Nikon bodies that they hacked up and made into very spendy digital cameras a VERY long time ago?). They also were, if still aren't, a major CCD supplier for digital camera makers (themselves and others) -- not that others haven't since come along and prospered, but Kodak was there long ago. They just haven't been as successful as others -- they have been trying. Tt's just that their instamatic success hasn't transferred over to digital. Yes, partly it's because their commitment to "go big" might have dragged, but they were participating early -- even if not done in a successful manner.

RE: Dreaming is nice
By TonyB on 4/24/2008 9:16:53 PM , Rating: 2
from what I can remember, Kodak was trying to push their crappy APS (Advanced Photo System) down everyone throats instead of 100% embracing Digital as the new thing.

RE: Dreaming is nice
By Oregonian2 on 4/25/2008 4:34:16 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, and those Japanese makers of digital cameras (Canon, Nikon, etc) all still try to sell you film cameras too. APS was a stupid idea because ALL of the real benefits were for the processor and for Kodak. It was something to increase profitability, not to make a better product for the customer. But that had nothing really to do with digital activities going on at the same time. Their film and chemical divisions SHOULD still be trying their best to sell product and make money until they simply can't do it -- not lay down and die just because they aren't digital.

"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer
Related Articles

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki