www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ssds/16tb-m2-ssds-will-soon-grace-the-market
16TB M.2 SSDs will soon grace the market — Kioxia unveils 2Tb 3D QLC NAND to build bigger SSDs
Newsso at least in consumer land demand for high density drives is low.
oh oh oh, don't mistake fixed pricing for a long time with no real reduction for missing demand ;)
in the tech industry one may not have too much to do with the other, ESPECIALLY when there is only less than a hand full of producers.
3 producers for hdds rightnow....
with newer tech commanding a premium.
newer bigger drives should have the same euros/TB than the older smaller drives, or less.
that is where the overall price reduction in price/TB should come from, BUT lately that isn't happening anymore and imo that is based on a middle from the industry, rather than a random increase in production cost with stop.
its not like its new tech. They are just cramming more platters. all cost deduction comes from corner cutting, such as using air filled drives.
lol, you can't have more platters and air-filled drives at the same time, the reason they use Helium in high-capacity drives despite the difficulties in sealing them and the added cost, is it's a necessity when you stack platter that close together. Air is only still used in low-capacity drives which don't offer the best cost to storage ratio.
Seagate's Mozaic 3+ drives use Heat Assisted Magnetic Recording which is a new technology despite its long time in coming to market.
you can't have more platters and air-filled drives at the same time
Tell that to WD. Please please tell that to them. Because they are doing this and the resulting drives are shit. They are hot, noisy and vibrating the whole rack. But WD policy is if it spins it ships.
I'm not aware of any WD air fill drives larger than 12TB which only have 6 platters, Helium filled drives are typical reserved for 7 platters and more.
such as using air filled drives.
now theoretically an air filled drive has a reduced failure point. no helium leaks possible.
but that only matters, if the drive runs cool enough without helium.
wd is selling airfilled drives in external enclosure with the 8 and 10 TB sizes, that are COOKING! i think up to 60 degrees c under load if i remember right. cooking!
they run so hot, because they are designed for massive server airflow and they absolutely shouldn't be used for anything else.
so in those cases i'd argue, that you can expect much earlier failure due to it being way too hot, because they didn't use helium.
the highest capacity drives are always helium drives, that won't change.
actually by a huge margin. highest capacity wd airfilled drive (as far as i know rightnow) 10 TB.
highest capacity helium drive at least 22 TB.
They are certainly cooking. Right now spinning idle its reporting 50C. Ive seen it go as high as 70!
Ive seen it go as high as 70!
that sounds insane. why didn't you return that garbage? unaware of the issue at the time?
and i heard 60 degrees c numbers from reports. 70 is where i question why it didn't have any protection kick in already.
wd customer side: producing external drives SO UNUSABLE, that you would have to shuck them to get them acceptable....
There was no real grounds for return. It was working as advertised (and still is a year later so its not DoA drive).
Its a Red Pro drives, not exactly aimed at regular customers, but not fully enterprise either. Altrough to be fair i do keep them in a rack with others so it has to share cooling with other drives.
We don't really know the manufacturing costs.
The storage sector it's famously ran as a cartel.
I mean we know last year you were able to buy a 2TB top of the line Kingston Fury Renegade / WD SN 850X / Samsung 980 Pro for 2/3 of the price that these models are today.
At least a return to mid 2023 pricing would be of huge help.
This prbnlem will solve itself in 6 months when we wish we could get back to 2024 pricing /s
Because they all collectively overproduced
The SFF people with way too much money might, but for the broader market you are definitely right
so at least in consumer land demand for high density drives is low.
I had demand for high density drives, but wont anymore. Why? Because they have gone to shit. You have enterprise-aimed drives be air filled, noise, demand up to 8W on spinup which makes daisichaining power impossible. If i can afford it ill go to SSDs just to avoid the issues. As little as 4 years ago i loved the high density HDD market, but they are cutting corners hard now.
Has QLC NAND been steadily improving in speed and endurance since its introduction and, if so, how much?
Depends heavily on the manufacturer, technology and use case of the NAND. For instance, Samsung's latest "v7 QLC NAND sequential read and write speeds are at least double, and random reads quadruple, those of v5" and "Endurance, in drive writes per day (DWPD), goes to 0.26 for the new device from 0.18 for the previous generation. Power-off data retention is increased from 1 month to 3 months" For their new data center drives. However the write speeds are still only 2000MB/s for a 61.44TB drive.
Micron claims on their latest 232 layer QLC can be found here
Edit - removed comparison of micron drives, accidentally grabbed 2550 spec page instead of 2500. Techpowerup doesn't currently have a page for it.
Not really. QLC is still very slow and we use SLC caching tricks to make it appear not so. The endurance is still as bad as it was.
16TB double sided nvme: I sleep
8TB single sided nvme: real shit
With speeds that'll make you lament the demise of 5400RPM HDD's (once cache is exhausted).
Big, fast, cheap. Chose one.
I get the sentiment but Native QLC write speeds are barely relevant for a lot of usage as long as the cache is large enough. Try not to go for QLC drives under 2TB (Intel 670P being the exception) and most will be fine. Otherwise this is supposed to be able to operate at 3600MT/s for read and pSLC which makes it some of, if not the fastest NAND on the market.
I have a 1TB Intel 670P in my laptop which works great and a 1TB crucial P3 in an older desktop which is mostly fine but slows down when doing large file transfers and updates when it's mostly full. The Intel drive has about 400MB/s native write speeds and the Crucial drive has about 80MB/s native write speeds. All QLC is not the same.
The Intel drive has about 400MB/s native write speeds and the Crucial drive has about 80MB/s native write speeds.
Interesting, thanks, I assume this boils down to the number of NAND modules physically present (the more there are the more parallel you can be with reading/writing). I also updated my original post to clarify I meant when cache was exhausted.
Unless the $/TB comes down there won't be a large market for this stuff.
It's the same in the HDD market, the $/TB has stabilized, so at least in consumer land demand for high density drives is low.
There also doesn't seem to be scaling across their product stacks. Older drives that are still in production should be seeing their $/TB incrementing downward, with newer tech commanding a premium. Yet the $/TB is pretty consistent from top to bottom of product stacks from producers.