"Compared to stacking eight 32 TB SSDs, one 256 TB SSD consumes approximately seven times less power, despite storing the same amount of data," a statement by Samsung reads."
I just don't understand why put that in the comment. we likely have the densest motherff.... on the planet here, and that drive does not need raid magic or any software stuff that can fail, let's focus on power usage that is near 15W, while other solutions can be up to 90W. what a difference. Maybe even we will install 1900W instead of 2000W on server now. that's the most useless info we could get. to be honest incredible product, if we will see it this or next year.
It would have been more interesting to know where the various power savings came from. For all we know, it could all have come from Samsuang needing only one controller and far fewer active NAND dies. But for this segment, as pointed out above, power savings is always welcome. This is not a Desktop PC product, though it would certainly make an interesting one.
On the other hand you are trading off power for speed; if you have eight drives each using four lanes of PCIe you have eight times the bandwidth of one drive using four lanes of PCIe, and twice the bandwidth even if the drive uses sixteen lanes, which I'm not sure fit on the edge connector depicted there.
I can't think of very many applications which require pure volume of SSD and are willing to trade off speed that strongly for it; the flash dies, even stacked, are a commodity with a pretty fixed price per terabyte so a drive twice the size will be roughly twice the cost.
They could boast about the data density per node instead of the power of single SSD. Showing a 1U server holding 2x4U worth of data is certainly much more appealing.
Way off. The baseline server in these will be a couple of hundred watts, likely half that. They're for storage, not compute. Packing eight times as many as these in means a 87% reduction in the number of machines, the same reduction in power. It's a huge change.
It never ceases to amaze me how the first thing that comes to mind when we speak of storage is porn. Don't you boys have better things to store on your systems? And what about getting a real woman instead of just staring at what the big boys (sorry I had to say it), can get?
It's because the former CEO of Seagate, Bill Watkins, made the remark of not caring how much porn people store on Seagate drives.
As for other storage? Most newer game titles are hitting 100~150GB, with the largest topping out at 400GB. IDK why anyone would keep more than 10 of these games on their disk at the same time, unless they have very slow internet.
A) Women like porn too 2) I agree, who downloads pr0n anymore? Frankly now that I have a family and kids, I don't actually want that shit on my PC's lol
I'd be happy with an affordable 16tb 2.5" SATA SSD... (pair up 4 of those to make some nice sized media)
To be fair, I just picked up 4 2TB SSD's (new) for about $60 each. Gonna pick up 4 more for a total of 16TB for just under $500. If we could get parity with HDDs on a $/GB scale that would be good for me. I'd switch everything over to SSDs immediately, but they just don't offer larger bulk storage SSD's for RAIDed systems at a fair price. Usually going larger saves you $/GB, but not with SSDs yet.
We REALLY need a better solid state storage solution than NAND flash.
[cough]Optane[cough]
alas, no one bought it. imagine a 'standard' commercial (GL centric) all-in-one 'solution' running on generic PC, but running single-level (aka, main memory) RDBMS storage. such was the allure of Optane. not implemented all that much.
That's insane density. I suspect these are E1.L form factor which has 7 times the area of M.2 2280. So that's the equivalent of making a 32TB M.2 SSD. So it shows you the technology exists, they can probably make 4TB packages now. They just don't want to give us large affordable consumer drives. I wish they would update the QVO line with a 16TB model, it would cost less than $700 at this point and would be great for a NAS. Or give us an 8TB M.2 at the same price/TB as existing 2TB drives. Or heck Samsung, when is that 4TB 990 Pro coming out?
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
27 Comments
Back to Article
deil - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
"Compared to stacking eight 32 TB SSDs, one 256 TB SSD consumes approximately seven times less power, despite storing the same amount of data," a statement by Samsung reads."I just don't understand why put that in the comment.
we likely have the densest motherff.... on the planet here, and that drive does not need raid magic or any software stuff that can fail, let's focus on power usage that is near 15W, while other solutions can be up to 90W.
what a difference. Maybe even we will install 1900W instead of 2000W on server now.
that's the most useless info we could get.
to be honest incredible product, if we will see it this or next year.
ballsystemlord - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
It would have been more interesting to know where the various power savings came from. For all we know, it could all have come from Samsuang needing only one controller and far fewer active NAND dies.But for this segment, as pointed out above, power savings is always welcome. This is not a Desktop PC product, though it would certainly make an interesting one.
TomWomack - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
On the other hand you are trading off power for speed; if you have eight drives each using four lanes of PCIe you have eight times the bandwidth of one drive using four lanes of PCIe, and twice the bandwidth even if the drive uses sixteen lanes, which I'm not sure fit on the edge connector depicted there.I can't think of very many applications which require pure volume of SSD and are willing to trade off speed that strongly for it; the flash dies, even stacked, are a commodity with a pretty fixed price per terabyte so a drive twice the size will be roughly twice the cost.
ballsystemlord - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
Good point.erinadreno - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
They could boast about the data density per node instead of the power of single SSD. Showing a 1U server holding 2x4U worth of data is certainly much more appealing.dontlistentome - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
Way off. The baseline server in these will be a couple of hundred watts, likely half that. They're for storage, not compute. Packing eight times as many as these in means a 87% reduction in the number of machines, the same reduction in power.It's a huge change.
Threska - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
Summary: the big boys have all the cool stuff. Not sure what I'd do with 256 TB. That's a LOT of porn. Takes a lot to rule the world I guess.FunBunny2 - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
That's a LOT of porn.there's no such a thing as too much.
ballsystemlord - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
It never ceases to amaze me how the first thing that comes to mind when we speak of storage is porn. Don't you boys have better things to store on your systems? And what about getting a real woman instead of just staring at what the big boys (sorry I had to say it), can get?meacupla - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
It's because the former CEO of Seagate, Bill Watkins, made the remark of not caring how much porn people store on Seagate drives.As for other storage? Most newer game titles are hitting 100~150GB, with the largest topping out at 400GB.
IDK why anyone would keep more than 10 of these games on their disk at the same time, unless they have very slow internet.
Samus - Saturday, August 12, 2023 - link
A) Women like porn too2) I agree, who downloads pr0n anymore? Frankly now that I have a family and kids, I don't actually want that shit on my PC's lol
PeachNCream - Sunday, August 13, 2023 - link
Why A) and then 2)?boozed - Sunday, August 13, 2023 - link
III) BecauseDirtyLoad - Monday, August 14, 2023 - link
Actually, it should be b) but who's counting?DirtyLoad - Monday, August 14, 2023 - link
The only reason I think of porn is because my wife loves to watch porn with me. It really gets her engine revving.Oxford Guy - Tuesday, August 22, 2023 - link
'Teases'Every journalist who uses that corporate-speak should be 'teased' with a halibut.
meacupla - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
I would be happy with a 16TB 2280 NVMe SSD.bill.rookard - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
I'd be happy with an affordable 16tb 2.5" SATA SSD... (pair up 4 of those to make some nice sized media)To be fair, I just picked up 4 2TB SSD's (new) for about $60 each. Gonna pick up 4 more for a total of 16TB for just under $500. If we could get parity with HDDs on a $/GB scale that would be good for me. I'd switch everything over to SSDs immediately, but they just don't offer larger bulk storage SSD's for RAIDed systems at a fair price. Usually going larger saves you $/GB, but not with SSDs yet.
meacupla - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
Yeah, budget SSDs are very price competitive compared to 2.5" HDDs at 2TB, but completely pale in comparison in larger capacities.nandnandnand - Sunday, August 13, 2023 - link
I just learned that the TeamGroup QX 15.36 TB exists.https://www.anandtech.com/show/16061/teamgroup-pre...
I think 2.5" SATA will be neglected in favor of M.2 NVMe. And an adapter can be used.
xane - Friday, August 11, 2023 - link
QLC...PeachNCream - Sunday, August 13, 2023 - link
Yeah pretty much this.nandnandnand - Sunday, August 13, 2023 - link
QLC: Maligned now, celebrated once PLC/HLC/7LC/OLC are forced on the public.PeachNCream - Monday, August 14, 2023 - link
TLC massively sucks too, but we're stuck with it for now. We REALLY need a better solid state storage solution than NAND flash.FunBunny2 - Monday, August 14, 2023 - link
We REALLY need a better solid state storage solution than NAND flash.[cough]Optane[cough]
alas, no one bought it. imagine a 'standard' commercial (GL centric) all-in-one 'solution' running on generic PC, but running single-level (aka, main memory) RDBMS storage. such was the allure of Optane. not implemented all that much.
Qbccd - Saturday, August 12, 2023 - link
That's insane density. I suspect these are E1.L form factor which has 7 times the area of M.2 2280. So that's the equivalent of making a 32TB M.2 SSD. So it shows you the technology exists, they can probably make 4TB packages now. They just don't want to give us large affordable consumer drives. I wish they would update the QVO line with a 16TB model, it would cost less than $700 at this point and would be great for a NAS. Or give us an 8TB M.2 at the same price/TB as existing 2TB drives. Or heck Samsung, when is that 4TB 990 Pro coming out?