True, it's only around 5x the price of 64TB Enterprise HDD storage. That actually isn't bad when you consider the storage density, performance and expected reliability. Footprint is going to be everything going forward as HDD's have really hit a wall (2x storage density in the last decade)
I believe though you couldn't upgrade to these. Unless they have changed in last couple years, synology is pretty specific on size and types of hardrives you can install. I mean its a huge selective, but enterprise stuff is not supported in its configs for most part. If you are hell bent on installing a $3k+ drive i would contact them to make sure they synology OS even supports that oddity of size.
Hi there! We have tested ExaDrive NL in Synology DS1819+ NAS - works without any issues. We plan to publish a more complete compatibility list in the coming weeks. Thank you for your comment!
Yes. Although I would like to see more HDD improvement so I could fit 2.5" HDD first at a reasonable cost before moving to SSD. Which is still quite expensive.
...for now at least. It could also depends on thermals and things, or QLC supply. I think one QLC wafer is good for ~55 TB? The DC range also had 64 TB versions, so perhaps they're just going for what fits right for the customer base. Or, if you want the densest, you have to pay the premium - right now, competition for them is limited.
Hi there, this is due to the slightly higher power consumption of QLC flash NAND compared to TLC flash NAND. In order to stay within the power envelope of HDDs, 64 TB of QLC is the highest possible (at least with today's QLC flash NAND).
I wonder how multi-actuator HDD's will perform compared to QLC. Even with QLC's cost cutting, the price difference between this and enterprise HDD's remain huge.
Multi-actuator cuts the HDD into two halves - so your OS sees two devices, not one, which is a big negative since removing a drive now removes two devices in your OS. Multi-actuator is only single-port SAS only, so it's not enterprise HA ready. And multi-actuator does not provide any improvement in MBps over single actuator.
Thats not a terrible premium. For reference, 64 TB of an absolute bottom barrel 1TB consumer 2.5" SSD works out to around $5120. 64TB of the cheapest 8TB drives is around $7.1k.
Since they're using an FPGA anyway, would there be any market for a PCIe of SAS version of this? SATA seems like a huge bottleneck for that much flash.
These are surprisingly reasonable. Good 8TB drives would be around $200 each right now, a 64TB array would need nominally 10-12 drives - so $2000-2500 or so for spinny drives. 5x the cost reduces that to a single 3.5" drive which really isn't bad at all as it allows (think about it!) 256TB in a single 1U server...
"As a result, they are using some of the best enterprise-grade QLC available on the market, which I’m told is rated for 1500 P/E cycles minimum."
I'm skeptical.
QLC doesn't have any redeeming qualities in my opinion. The density argument isn't strong enough given the drawbacks. A case of diminishing returns pushed too far.
Hello there, well, it depends on the workload. If the workload is large files, unstructured content, and read-biased, then 25% lower cost per GB is a great advantage since these workloads won't stress QLC endurance. But of course, for high IO workloads like VDI and databases, TLC is a wiser choice. This is why we offer both ExaDrive NL (QLC based) and ExaDrive DC (TLC based) at different cost points, so you can choose the best balance for you.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
25 Comments
Back to Article
stanleyipkiss - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
Amazingly, can both afford and want two to replace a 12 disk 8TB Synology NAS. It would be simpler and easier to maintain and no raid rebuilds.nathanddrews - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
I mean, it's expensive, but I surprised at how reasonable it seems!Samus - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link
True, it's only around 5x the price of 64TB Enterprise HDD storage. That actually isn't bad when you consider the storage density, performance and expected reliability. Footprint is going to be everything going forward as HDD's have really hit a wall (2x storage density in the last decade)phoenix_rizzen - Thursday, September 3, 2020 - link
When a 4 TB Dell-branded SATA drive costs over $800 CAD, $3800 CAD for 16 TB of SSD doesn't seem that bad. :)https://www.dell.com/en-ca/shop/4tb-72k-rpm-sata-6...
imaheadcase - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
I believe though you couldn't upgrade to these. Unless they have changed in last couple years, synology is pretty specific on size and types of hardrives you can install. I mean its a huge selective, but enterprise stuff is not supported in its configs for most part. If you are hell bent on installing a $3k+ drive i would contact them to make sure they synology OS even supports that oddity of size.nimbusdata - Friday, August 28, 2020 - link
Hi there! We have tested ExaDrive NL in Synology DS1819+ NAS - works without any issues. We plan to publish a more complete compatibility list in the coming weeks. Thank you for your comment!ksec - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link
Yes. Although I would like to see more HDD improvement so I could fit 2.5" HDD first at a reasonable cost before moving to SSD. Which is still quite expensive.I am still waiting for Qnap's ZFS Hero OS.
frbeckenbauer - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
Interesting that the QLC version is only available in lower capacity, even though QLC offers higher density.FreckledTrout - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
Over provisioning to keep the workload rating reasonable?Ian Cutress - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
...for now at least. It could also depends on thermals and things, or QLC supply. I think one QLC wafer is good for ~55 TB? The DC range also had 64 TB versions, so perhaps they're just going for what fits right for the customer base. Or, if you want the densest, you have to pay the premium - right now, competition for them is limited.brucethemoose - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
Perhaps anyone who wants that insane density would want the extra endurance of TLC anyway.Samus - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link
I've noticed that trend too even in some consumer drives. Not really sure what the justification is.nimbusdata - Friday, August 28, 2020 - link
Great observation! This is in order to make sure ExaDrive NL is compatible with virtually any 3.5" HDD enclosure from a power and cooling perspective.nimbusdata - Friday, September 18, 2020 - link
Hi there, this is due to the slightly higher power consumption of QLC flash NAND compared to TLC flash NAND. In order to stay within the power envelope of HDDs, 64 TB of QLC is the highest possible (at least with today's QLC flash NAND).WolfpackN64 - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
I wonder how multi-actuator HDD's will perform compared to QLC. Even with QLC's cost cutting, the price difference between this and enterprise HDD's remain huge.xd52gy - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
Multi-actuator cuts the HDD into two halves - so your OS sees two devices, not one, which is a big negative since removing a drive now removes two devices in your OS. Multi-actuator is only single-port SAS only, so it's not enterprise HA ready. And multi-actuator does not provide any improvement in MBps over single actuator.rpg1966 - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
Any idea why they can't create drive firmware that presents both actuators as a single drive (if you get my meaning)?brucethemoose - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
Thats not a terrible premium. For reference, 64 TB of an absolute bottom barrel 1TB consumer 2.5" SSD works out to around $5120. 64TB of the cheapest 8TB drives is around $7.1k.Since they're using an FPGA anyway, would there be any market for a PCIe of SAS version of this? SATA seems like a huge bottleneck for that much flash.
IanCutress - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link
There are dual port SAS versions of this 64 TB drive.brucethemoose - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link
Ah I missed that and just read "SATA", thanks.bill.rookard - Wednesday, August 26, 2020 - link
These are surprisingly reasonable. Good 8TB drives would be around $200 each right now, a 64TB array would need nominally 10-12 drives - so $2000-2500 or so for spinny drives. 5x the cost reduces that to a single 3.5" drive which really isn't bad at all as it allows (think about it!) 256TB in a single 1U server...DigitalFreak - Thursday, August 27, 2020 - link
I was so hoping that Linus was going to end up destroying that drive when he took it apart.nimbusdata - Friday, August 28, 2020 - link
Haha no chance! ExaDrive withstood the beating and is in full operation. :-)Oxford Guy - Tuesday, September 1, 2020 - link
"As a result, they are using some of the best enterprise-grade QLC available on the market, which I’m told is rated for 1500 P/E cycles minimum."I'm skeptical.
QLC doesn't have any redeeming qualities in my opinion. The density argument isn't strong enough given the drawbacks. A case of diminishing returns pushed too far.
nimbusdata - Friday, September 18, 2020 - link
Hello there, well, it depends on the workload. If the workload is large files, unstructured content, and read-biased, then 25% lower cost per GB is a great advantage since these workloads won't stress QLC endurance. But of course, for high IO workloads like VDI and databases, TLC is a wiser choice. This is why we offer both ExaDrive NL (QLC based) and ExaDrive DC (TLC based) at different cost points, so you can choose the best balance for you.