backtop


Print 38 comment(s) - last by Bladen.. on Apr 14 at 5:25 AM

Samsung's 32GB Flash-SSD is official

We reported earlier this month that Samsung had shown off a prototype of its new 32GB solid-state hard drive at CeBIT. Samsung has now announced that it has officially introduced the drives for the mobile sector.

According to Samsung, the 32GB Flash-SSD weighs half as much as a comparable disk-based dives and reads data three times faster and writes 1.5 times faster. It also uses roughly 5% of the electricity needed to run a comparable mobile hard drive. It is also completely silent and free of moving parts.

The commercialization of Samsung's 32GB Flash-SSD is a historic milestone for storage devices as it marks the initial entry of NAND flash memory in the mass mobile PC market. Samsung sees the overall global SSD market surging from US$540 million in 2006 to US$4.5 billion by 2010.

Pricing and availability have not yet been announced for the new drive.



Comments     Threshold


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

are they really faster?
By Visual on 3/22/2006 11:04:36 AM , Rating: 2
i can't imagine these would be faster than HDDs.
if they can beat the raptors in performance, they can sell millions in the first month :p i can see it selling perfectly well even at absurd prices like $150 (twice the raptors)
someone gotta make some reviews, fast. raid performance is something that should be checked too. will it be hotswappable?

an mp3 player that uses these discs (but easily changeable, just like some humongous flash card) will be great too




RE: are they really faster?
By Motley on 3/22/2006 11:12:29 AM , Rating: 2
You are right about the "absurd" price, but your guess is off a little.
quote:
would cost about $960 for the memory alone



RE: are they really faster?
By TomZ on 3/22/2006 11:15:29 AM , Rating: 2
When writing, flash based SSD is a little faster, and when reading, SSD is much faster, like 100x.


RE: are they really faster?
By ksherman on 3/22/2006 11:36:33 AM , Rating: 2
The target for these is not to replace or even compare to the WD Raptors. These are for laptops and other mobile devices. The HD performance in that sector/market is a bit worse than most-all Desktop HDs... Now with these SSDs being so small, most laptop manufacturs could probably cram two of them into a laptop, and run them in a RAID configuration... sweet stuff on the Horizon, too bad these are bloody expensive right now...

and my question is, since when were SSDs so small? [/Darth Vaders Theme Song] ;-)


RE: are they really faster?
By Cincybeck on 3/22/2006 11:41:31 AM , Rating: 1
"i can't imagine these would be faster than HDDs. if they can beat the raptors in performance"

These are going to be hell of alot faster then any hard disc drive because, there are no moving parts, it's NAND Flash Memory...I believe they'll be limited by the ATA interface whether it's SATA or SATA 2.

And as for the $960 I think you're quoting the price of the memory needed for I-RAM drive reviewed on anandtech, once again this is NAND Flash Memory not DRRAM...

NAND Flash memory is exciting but I would like to see it incorprated into a new interface other then SATA, which I believe slows it down. The ultimate imho would be to connect it directly to AMD's Hypertransport..


RE: are they really faster?
By Cincybeck on 3/22/2006 12:14:56 PM , Rating: 1
I'm going to stick my my foot in my mouth now. Found an article and the read and write speeds are 12MB/sec for read and 9MB/sec for the latter. Sequntial read access time is 30ns. At least for this particular controller chip.


RE: are they really faster?
By rrsurfer1 on 3/22/2006 3:18:43 PM , Rating: 2
Some new controllers feature much faster data throughput. The true increase in speed would be seen in the seek time, on the ns scale instead of like 12 ms for HDs. That means the data is there when the processor needs it. Even if throughput isn't as high, the processor will have more time to work with the data instead of waiting for the hard drive to spin up and find what it needs.


RE: are they really faster?
By sh7e95 bdy on 3/22/2006 3:43:05 PM , Rating: 2
I agree the much faster response times will be a great benefit, but I'd hold out for the benchmarks before passing judgement on how fast those response times are.

The lower power requirements and silent operation are quite appealing.


RE: are they really faster?
By Zoomer on 3/22/2006 10:46:02 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't that approaching pc100 latencies? 8ms vs 12ms.

Quite an improvement over 12ms. :)


RE: are they really faster?
By sh7e95 bdy on 3/22/2006 3:33:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
These are going to be hell of alot faster then any hard disc drive because, there are no moving parts, it's NAND Flash Memory...I believe they'll be limited by the ATA interface whether it's SATA or SATA 2.


Samsung was using a slow 1.8” 30 GB drive to compare against the flash drive. That hard disk doesn’t even come clost to Raptor speeds. When the flash drive is compared to a 36 GB Raptor, throughput is about the same. Granted, random I/O should be faster on the flash drive, but overall I’m not impressed with flash performance.

The interface won't even come close to limiting this flash drive. Read speed for the flash drive is 57 MB/s.

quote:
And as for the $960 I think you're quoting the price of the memory needed for I-RAM drive reviewed on anandtech, once again this is NAND Flash Memory not DRRAM...


Also, the drive really is priced at $960. http://dailytech.com/article.aspx? newsid=1196

quote:
NAND Flash memory is exciting but I would like to see it incorprated into a new interface other then SATA, which I believe slows it down. The ultimate imho would be to connect it directly to AMD's Hypertransport..


I do like the idea of using Hypertransport for end devices, but it isn't likely with the advent of PCI express and SAS. Not to mention, SATA is more than enough for flash or future hard disk drives.


RE: are they really faster?
By Xenoterranos on 3/22/2006 12:18:20 PM , Rating: 2
Where are you getting a raptor for $75! I'll buy 2 from you!


RE: are they really faster?
By SunAngel on 3/22/2006 4:18:10 PM , Rating: 2
ebay


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki