32 GB Flash Storage Drive Announced 381
Audrius writes to tell us TG Daily is reporting that Samsung has just announced a new 32 GB Flash storage device. The aim of this new solid state disk (SSD) drive is to completely replace the traditional hard drives in many laptops on the market. Some of the advantages offered are the 1.8" form factor, read speeds more than twice that of a normal hard drive, and the promise of 95% less power use.
Digital Camcorders (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Digital Camcorders (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Digital Camcorders (Score:2)
That wouldn't be too good for a camera or a laptop...
Re:Digital Camcorders (Score:2)
Anyone with "yes or no" power around?
Re:Digital Camcorders (Score:2)
Re:Digital Camcorders (Score:2)
The mean cycle count is 150K+ on the devices I am most experienced with though the warrenty is 100K cycles.
-nB
flash wear-out (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:flash wear-out (Score:2)
Cycle count is 100-500K for nand and nor flash.
wear leveling is already built in to all Flash.
the leveling is accomplished on a block level. If you want to kill a flash drive compute the block size and write enough data to fill n-1 blocks then continuously update a small file with new data.
you'll burn away that last block in a few weeks to a month.
-nB
Re:flash wear-out (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, this won't work. The wear levelling doesn't know if a block is 'full' or not, so it will just switch the contents of a pair of blocks. Your frequently-written file will move all over the flash chip(s), and so will your static files.
Re:flash wear-out (Score:3, Informative)
The flash device has a control processor on board that manages the charge pump operation (for writing and erasing) and keeps the status of the array (bad blocks). When the application layer asks to store data the flash control processor goes and stores the data on the next erased block with the least number of erase cycles against it (erase is what causes damage to the flash cell). The application layer has no idea where in the arr
Re:Digital Camcorders (Score:3, Informative)
The typical number tossed around for NAND erase cycles is 100,000. You can read as often as you like, but to write data, you have to erase a block of data first, 132KB on the devices that I design with.
Of course, those are the data sheet numbers - that is what the manufacturer guarantees. Reality is usually quite a bit better. And it wouldn't surprise me if Samsung and others had some mu
Re:Digital Camcorders (Score:2)
Definitely. I always thought those dvdburner camcorders were a bad idea.
or, an HD that works above 12,000 feet. (Score:2, Interesting)
My question is how many write operations is it rated for? Others list 300,000 -- is that a lot or a little?
Re:or, an HD that works above 12,000 feet. (Score:2)
Interesting .... (Score:5, Informative)
$50.00~70.00 per gb is still nothing in comparison to $0.40~$0.80 you can get on hard drives.
Re:Interesting .... (Score:2, Informative)
amazon.com has the new Seagate 8GB CompactFlash Photo HD ST68022C-RK for a low $149.99. No rebates. Free shipping. Tax in KS, ND, WA.
4GB $74.09 shipped free.
from techbargains.com
$18.5 / GB -- and who here doesn't remember when a 100MB hard drive was $300+?
Re:Interesting .... (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyways you are right though. I can see solid state drives taking over hard drives in the future. The less moving parts the better.
All I was trying to point out was its to early now for widespread adoption.
Re:Interesting .... (Score:5, Informative)
Hmmm
The article certainly sounds like it's not using any spinning-platter/read-write heads technology -- that would not really be solid-state. That seems to be how it uses less energy and makes no noise.
To me, this doesn't sound like a "hard drive", but a big whack of Flash memory which is treated like a hard-drive.
The $6400 figure comes from the article:
So, it's not like the posted pulled the number out of thin air.
If it's got no moving parts, it's not what we would traditionally call a hard-drive.
Re:Interesting .... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Interesting .... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Interesting .... (Score:3, Interesting)
The other thing people haven't mentioned, is that many laptops use 4200 or 5400rpm drives to conserve power, which often become the limiting fact
Re:Interesting .... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Interesting .... (Score:2)
The price of flash, on the other hand, is in a total free-fall. We're paying a lot less than $50/gb right now. 10 years ago we were paying close to $50/mb.
You also have the issue that laptop drives tend to be pretty small due to space and heat restrictions. The biggest laptop HD I've seen is 120gb, and drives that big are rare and expensive. If you could get a speedy solid-state 60gb drive for about $300, the market for it would
Re:Interesting .... (Score:2)
Data Integrity (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Data Integrity (Score:2)
And correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't lots of enterprise-class servers, routers, switches, etc. booted from PC-card style flash drives?
Re:Data Integrity (Score:5, Informative)
Not relevant... (Score:2)
MadCow.
Re:Not relevant... (Score:3, Informative)
A w
Re:Not relevant... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Data Integrity (Score:5, Insightful)
Guess we have to reconsider some habits we've got accustomed to if traditional hds are replaced.
Fragmentation? (Score:4, Insightful)
Does fragmentation matter when there are no heads to move?
Re:Fragmentation? (Score:2)
Re:Fragmentation? (Score:4, Insightful)
You eventually have to consolidate the data of each file. Not nescesarily to sequential blocks, but so files are not sharing blocks.
For flash memory, non-journalled filesystems like Ext2 (mounted -o noatime) may be best. Although that still tries to keep large chunks of files sequential. It might be better to have a non-journalled filesystem that does not pre-allocate inodes and data blocks, but just keeps a free block list and allocates from it in Least-Recently-Used order.
Re:Data Integrity (Score:2)
Re:Data Integrity (Score:2)
Flash memory that works has a much longer MTBF (Score:2)
Re:Data Integrity (Score:2)
Re:Data Integrity (Score:2, Funny)
Reliability? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Reliability? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Reliability? (Score:2)
What about the limited number of writes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What about the limited number of writes? (Score:4, Informative)
Its just a matter of time for flash.
Re:What about the limited number of writes? (Score:4, Informative)
With a careful configuration of Windows (no page file, no IE cache, no temporary files, use a RAM disk), this is certainly viable. In the absense of music/movie collections and monster games, even the 32GB size isn't that restrictive.
Re:What about the limited number of writes? (Score:2)
Re:What about the limited number of writes? (Score:2)
Something like this will most likly be used to store the OS and main programs essentially being a read only drive, while a second drive can be used to store data and temporary files. I really don't see the advantage here unless the flash memory is much faster though from my exp
Re:What about the limited number of writes? (Score:5, Informative)
(1) The number of rewrites is now quite large (hundreds of thousands?)
(2) The writing-to-disk software/hardware implements "load balancing." If you rewrite the same file 1000 times, it won't use the same exact block on the flash disk for each of those writes. Instead it will move from block to block with various writes/deletes/modify actions. This, coupled with some "slack" (the actual disk size is a little bit bigger than the "useable" disk size) allows for the wear to be distributed over the whole device.
(3) The system uses conventional error-correction and flagging of bad blocks.
As another poster pointed out, magnetic hard disks also have a limited number of rewrite cycles. But in practical terms we usually don't reach this limit. For critical applications I imagine you'd use a RAID of flash disks just like a RAID of magnetic drives.
Re:What about the limited number of writes? (Score:3, Insightful)
This will be further enhanced with small, battery backed RAM write cache integral to the device. BBWC is commonplace in storage. Flash storage (eventually it will occur to us that emulating disks isn't useful) will just scale it down to a few hundred kilobytes + tiny battery and some large percentage of writes direct to Flash will not occur. Between the write cache and write balancing you'll get many years of use, and failure predicted by
Re:What about the limited number of writes? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:What about the limited number of writes? (Score:5, Informative)
The nice thing about Flash is that after a cell has failed, it just becomes read-only. You can get around this quite easily in the OS by just marking the failed block as bad in your inode list. Over time, your flash drive will shrink in capacity. When it gets too small, you just copy it over to a new one and repeat the process.
In my experience... (Score:3, Insightful)
In my experience, promised things usually fall flat on their face. Microsoft springs immediately to mind.
And hopefully, Flash drives will replace the current magnetic platter ones. It's kind of odd for one of the most important devices in a computer to be the only moving one (And therefore the most susceptible to damage, especially in laptops).
I'd buy it (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me know when they come up with (Score:2)
Warning... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Warning... (Score:2, Funny)
Old news (Score:2, Funny)
Ohhh, G i g a b y t e s - thougt it said megaby...
WTF? (Score:2)
Re:Old news (Score:2)
A step in the right direction... (Score:2)
When are we going to see flash type drives that are cheap AND super fast? After all, secondary storage is perhaps the only remaining perfomance bottleneck in computers these days (well, that and crappy ISPs that
Not the biggest power eater (Score:5, Informative)
Technology currently in use already (Score:4, Informative)
When placed in the right environment, this technology just screams. A good example would be for huge database operations that have hundreds if not thousands of concurrent accesses. The databases that maintain the pay information for the US Military come to mind easily.
Re:Technology currently in use already (Score:5, Informative)
Most large scale systems that use SSD's to increase DB performance do so using DRAM (mainly) or SRAM based units with battery backup, RAM based RAID and controllers that dump the data to disk either on an ongoing basis or in the case of a power failure (using battery power to keep things up at least long enough to write a consistent snapshot to disk).
The units are ridiculously expensive, but far faster than anything you'd manage to get with flash or harddisks (typically they're maxing out the controller/bus you connect to them via).
Nice estimated price... (Score:5, Informative)
With compression you might get 50 gig (Score:2, Interesting)
This is big news. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This is big news. (Score:2)
But maybe it will get faster yet.
NO NO NO NO NO! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm trying to close on buying a house! And Samsung, Apple's iPod Nano flash supplier comes out with this?
APPLE, please PLEASE do not come out with an Intel Mac portable featuring a flash drive (with its tasty power consumption, lower power and low low low seek times) after I clean out my savings! I would have been exceptionally happy to have a PowerPC flash computer a year ago or 6 months ago, or even maybe 3 months ago, but I'm cleaning out my savings here for the part of a house that the bank won't cover!
Wait 6-12 months for a flash based portable and I'll forgive you for going to Intel.
Star Trek (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Star Trek (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Star Trek (Score:5, Funny)
Something about ST just seems to bring out the worst part of geekdom.
Now all the TREKKIES are going to mod me down because I called Data a ROBOT when he's clearly an ANDROID. Karmic Suicide.
disclaimer: I'm currently watching the entire run of ENT start to finish. But I actually get away from the screen
FlashBelt (Score:2)
Where I see SSDs in laptops being used most. (Score:3, Insightful)
Example: a mechanic using it to interface with a car's OBD port.
He's not going to be writing to the HD a while lot, but you know damned well that it's not going to be treated lightly. 32GB is pleanty large to put and OS and the diagnostic/tuning apps on.
Make that laptop low enough power to plug into a cigarette lighter and you got a nice tool.
Another example: Some geologist needs to take data off of some geophones in the middle of places with names like "Desolation Wilderness". A laptop with a longer battery life and a HD that is going to survive being in a backpack is going to make things alot easier. Hiking out 10 miles to the middle of nowhere isn't something that you want to have to re-do because something broke or you ran out of battery life.
I don't forsee anyone having one at the next LAN party. Though given the number of people with hilarious setups, it could happen. Afterall, who'd buy a 150GB HD that cost $350? (WD Raptor)
32GB and shrinking... (Score:2)
Worse if you runs Windows, where you can't even scratch yourself without causing a write to the registry. You'll find your 32GB drive shrinking over the months towards zilch.
Guess it's probably ok for portable use, where mechanical drives have a risk of sudden failure. And one can always buy a new flash drive and copy over the data
Environmentally friendly too (Score:3, Funny)
They are small and lighters and take less space (doesn't use as much fuel to ship), don't produce much heat, use less electricity, and I think there's probably less wasteful throwing out a little stick when its bad than an HDD.
Another level of cache (Score:3, Insightful)
Shock and vibration (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:ouch (Score:5, Informative)
Re:ouch (Score:2)
Re:ouch (Score:2)
RTFA! (Score:5, Informative)
-Rick
Re:ouch (Score:2)
Volume production will bring prices down. Remember the $2000 component CD burners in the late 90s?
I can't wait until I can afford all these GBs of flash tastiness!!!!
Re:ouch (Score:3, Informative)
0.0308676(Taiwan/US) * 6400(Taiwan) = 197.55264(US)
That's still $6.20 US/GB so still not very desirable, but if they can EoS down, and get the battery life trade off it may be worth it.
Re:Current drives only up to 80GB? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Current drives only up to 80GB? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What about burnout? (Score:2)
Like 600? Or 600,000,000? If it were the later I don't think there is any reason for your post.
Re:What about burnout? (Score:3, Informative)
~S
Re:What about burnout? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Um Guys? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Read yes, what about write? (Score:3, Informative)
And now for that questionable bit, from the article: While the SSD's capacity of 32 GB cannot compete with traditional hard drives that currently of
Re:Read yes, what about write? (Score:2)
Re:Read yes, what about write? (Score:2)
Re:Read yes, what about write? (Score:2)
Re:Read yes, what about write? (Score:2)
Re:Read yes, what about write? (Score:2)
Flash memory has a write endurance limit. This limit is the number of times the flash memory cell can be written until it can not be restored to its initial condition. The industry refers to this as the erase cycles. The endurance is rated between 10,000 and 100,000 erase cycles for different types flash memories.
Re:Read yes, what about write? (Score:2)
Slightly out of date (claims 100k writes, while current generation flash gets around 300k, I think, but I couldn't find a cite for that quickly).
That should be more than adequate for a typical 2-3 year laptop lifespan.
Re:Welcome to the future (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Laptop Storage? (Score:3, Interesting)
Is windows is large and so is office, but thats 10G. The remainder is emails and docs, which don't take a lot of space.
Now, you add movies, mp3, games, etc . . . it won't be big enough.
Re:Flash Drives vs. HD (Score:3, Interesting)
My own research shows the opposite is happening. Flash is charging hard after disk and the rate it is catching up is accelerating.
http://www.mattscomputertrends.com/flashvsharddis k
I am due to update this years figures but a quick analysis shows the trend is continuing.
Re:New File System Optimized for Flash? (Score:3, Interesting)