Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


SDD price trends


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
17 replies to this topic

#1 irreversible   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1302

Posted 06 September 2011 - 04:32 AM

Has anyone been following the market regarding these lately? I've wanted to invest in an SSD setup for a long time, but I need something like half a TB of storage, which is mad expensive to get. Are there any signs that the tech will plummet price-wise any time soonish? It's been up there for a long time now and I gave up keeping an eye on the industry about 8 months ago.

Sponsor:

#2 valderman   Members   -  Reputation: 512

Posted 06 September 2011 - 05:20 AM

Has anyone been following the market regarding these lately? I've wanted to invest in an SSD setup for a long time, but I need something like half a TB of storage, which is mad expensive to get. Are there any signs that the tech will plummet price-wise any time soonish? It's been up there for a long time now and I gave up keeping an eye on the industry about 8 months ago.

Assuming that we're talking about a workstation or desktop here, why would you need half a terabyte of ridiculously fast storage? Why not get a 200 GB SSD for everything that needs to be fast and that you're actively using, and a huge mechanical drive for long-time storage?

#3 irreversible   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1302

Posted 06 September 2011 - 05:37 AM

Why? Sample packs and video streaming for editing purposes. Both of these can be ridiculously demanding on storage access and nowadays 200GB no longer cuts it if you want to go with a single dedicated drive (there's always the option to use multiple drives, but using anything smaller than 120GB can leave you picking out your hair and is just plain frustrating for anything sizable). SSDs are a heaven send for multimedia workstations, but sadly not so if you're not running a big studio.

#4 valderman   Members   -  Reputation: 512

Posted 06 September 2011 - 06:19 AM

Why? Sample packs and video streaming for editing purposes. Both of these can be ridiculously demanding on storage access and nowadays 200GB no longer cuts it if you want to go with a single dedicated drive (there's always the option to use multiple drives, but using anything smaller than 120GB can leave you picking out your hair and is just plain frustrating for anything sizable). SSDs are a heaven send for multimedia workstations, but sadly not so if you're not running a big studio.

Yeah, I guess that would rule out the middle way. I know a lot of people who blow crazy money on solid state storage for their oversized music collection that they don't even listen to, so I was curious about whether your use case actually required the speed offered by SSDs or if it was just another case of "SSDs are neat, I need one!" :)

#5 Promethium   Members   -  Reputation: 580

Posted 06 September 2011 - 07:03 AM

How about getting two 250 GB disk and setting them up in raid 0? Then it will look like a 500 GB disk to the OS and you, but you are in the more comfortable middle of the price spectrum.

#6 Antheus   Members   -  Reputation: 2397

Posted 06 September 2011 - 07:19 AM

I've wanted to invest in an SSD setup for a long time


If you want to treat SSD as an investment, then calculate the time saved vs. price vs. expected lifetime.

Otherwise, treat it as a write-off and buy whatever you can afford.

but I need something like half a TB of storage, which is mad expensive to get.


If you *need* it, then price is not a factor. Either you need that much space because you cannot get work done otherwise, or because it will make your work so much faster.

Otherwise, you don't *need* it.

their oversized music collection that they don't even listen to

Noise. Power consumption. Form. And even access times, scanning ID3 tags of 5000 files is quite slow on standard HDs.

#7 ChurchSkiz   Members   -  Reputation: 443

Posted 06 September 2011 - 07:36 AM

You could do what I'm doing for my new build, 128GB SSD for OS and a few choice programs, then a 1TB drive linked to a 64GB SSD SRT drive to speed up the 1TB of storage.

Though admittedly I'm not sure if SRT is beneficial for video editing. You might want to see benchmarks first.

I plan on having a ton of games on my 1TB of storage and the benefits of SRT on gaming and application launching is huge.

You might have to get a new mobo though, I think z68 is the only chipset to support SRT so far.

#8 valderman   Members   -  Reputation: 512

Posted 06 September 2011 - 07:41 AM

their oversized music collection that they don't even listen to

Noise. Power consumption. Form. And even access times, scanning ID3 tags of 5000 files is quite slow on standard HDs.

Yeah, those are valid concerns. However, the reason quoted for that storage solution is HOLY SHIT THIS IS SO FAST I CAN MAKE FIVE COPIES OF THIS ALBUM IN LIKE NO TIME AT ALL rather than the others. Of course, if that's what you want to do with your money then that's an equally valid reason. Doesn't seem very reasonable to me though.

#9 Antheus   Members   -  Reputation: 2397

Posted 06 September 2011 - 07:51 AM

Yeah, those are valid concerns. However, the reason quoted for that storage solution is HOLY SHIT THIS IS SO FAST I CAN MAKE FIVE COPIES OF THIS ALBUM IN LIKE NO TIME AT ALL rather than the others. Of course, if that's what you want to do with your money then that's an equally valid reason. Doesn't seem very reasonable to me though.


When someone shows you their new car, they aren't going to elaborate on properties of shock absorbers. They'll rev the engine, since that's something you can see and hear.

But when they were choosing it, they considered the whole package. If some drive had same properties, but produced the sound of a lawnmower, they wouldn't buy it, despite being able to copy fast.

See: Apple. Style, design, brand and looks do sell. At least for those with enough disposable income.

#10 Krohm   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3049

Posted 06 September 2011 - 01:01 PM

As a side note, as they're selling like bread I've seen a shop around there selling the Revodrive 3 at the same price of the Agility...
A friend of mine got a CF adapter. Write is slow as death but the 0.1ms sustained random read is just awesome for small files. Bad news is, it's more expensive than mainstream SSD on a per-GiB basis.

#11 Sirisian   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1725

Posted 06 September 2011 - 01:26 PM

Personally I've never used more than 80 GB on a computer so I've been happy with my 120 GB SSD. I'd check newegg if you haven't already. They have some cheap 512 GB SSDs for around 800 USD. You'll notice the price is nearly linear. A normal 120 GB is 200 USD so buying 4 of them to get 480 GB would cost you 800 USD. This trend stops for some of the larger drives. I saw a 2TB drive for 3K USD a while back though which was insane deal. Can't find the link atm though. I believe it was a PCI-Express one.

#12 irreversible   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1302

Posted 06 September 2011 - 01:30 PM

Promethium - yeah, I considered that, but it's still too expensive. I mean, yes I've been drooling about an SSD setup, but realistically it doesn't make almost any sense in investing in one at this time (as the storage that I would require is too much for the money I could spend elsewhere). I'd be happy to consider it if SSD's didn't ramp up at 3x the normal rate in price as size increases and were at least 2x cheaper on the baseline. As far as I can tell there hasn't been much change in this respect since SSD's hit the market.

If you *need* it, then price is not a factor. Either you need that much space because you cannot get work done otherwise, or because it will make your work so much faster.

Otherwise, you don't *need* it.


I'm sorry to sound a bit counter-uptight towards your latching on to a single word, but please consider that something that doesn't lend itself to a black-and-white classification can still be a valid reason for needing it. In this case the fact that I can't split up a 300GB sample library because of technical reasons. I don't *need* the half-TB SSD existentially, but I do need it functionally and grammatically speaking - as in I can *live* without it, but it can get *frickin' annoying at times*. Or worded in a less vernacular fashion, if you will: for technical reasons I require the drive to be at least 350GB in size (which I rounded to half a TB because I'd be able to add other stuff there as well - this is where video editing comes in). Which in turn directly lends to the title of this thread - because the price literally is THE factor.

Which, in yet other words, is to say that I'm running a private setup and that's is costly enough as it is while I'd be happy to upgrade if the cost showed signs of getting cheaper some time soon.


#13 Luckless   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1765

Posted 06 September 2011 - 01:46 PM

Prices are falling, but I'm expecting at least 2-3 years before things start to level out and we see 'stable' prices on decent sized SSDs. The big question is when standard hard drives will stop having huge density gains over SSDs, and if they will go the way of the floppy drive.
Old Username: Talroth
If your signature on a web forum takes up more space than your average post, then you are doing things wrong.

#14 alnite   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2068

Posted 06 September 2011 - 02:11 PM

Did you consider purchasing an SSD Hybrid? It's considerably cheaper, faster for reading though not necessarily faster for writing.

#15 Ravyne   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 7116

Posted 06 September 2011 - 03:08 PM

I forget who, but someone recently demoed a PCIe-based Hybrid solution that had a 100GB of Flash capacity, backed by a 1TB 2.5" drive (also mounted to the card). It's an interesting solution, and one would think it would be pretty smart about caching your most-used samples. You might look into that (assuming you have a desktop, and not a laptop) and setting it up exclusively for samples in order to make the best use of the cache.

Then perhaps you could get a smaller flash disk for OS+important software, or just run the rest off of a mechanical drive.

#16 ChurchSkiz   Members   -  Reputation: 443

Posted 06 September 2011 - 04:07 PM

I forget who, but someone recently demoed a PCIe-based Hybrid solution that had a 100GB of Flash capacity, backed by a 1TB 2.5" drive (also mounted to the card). It's an interesting solution, and one would think it would be pretty smart about caching your most-used samples. You might look into that (assuming you have a desktop, and not a laptop) and setting it up exclusively for samples in order to make the best use of the cache.

Then perhaps you could get a smaller flash disk for OS+important software, or just run the rest off of a mechanical drive.


Windows does that with ReadyBoost. Now Intel has something even better, which I mentioned, Smart Response Technology (SRT), which is built directly into the chipset and can boost performance by as much as 400% to a regular hard drive.

Unfortunately, it only works as a cache, so the operations have to be repetitive. So if you load a brand new game, you won't see a performance increase, but if you load the game a 2nd time, the entire process might be cached to the SSD. If you load level 1, some of the process will cache, and if you then load level 2, you may still see a high performance increase because of the access of similar resources.

However, I'm not sure how this works for things like video compression or sampling. If you access repetitive data, it may speed it up tremendously, but if the data is brand new every time, there may be no gains. This article suggests video editing shows no real performance gain, http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1587/5/ (but see the other tests confirming how much more awesome this is than a 10k raptor drive). Here is another test that shows some video editing, http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2593&page=5 .


One thing is for sure, price to performance nothing is going to beat it. A 64GB SSD you can get for $100, and you can get a 1TB drive for $75. That's $175 for 1TB of super fast storage.

#17 mdwh   Members   -  Reputation: 853

Posted 08 September 2011 - 06:30 AM

How well does Windows these days cope with storing programs and user data on a separate drive?

See: Apple. Style, design, brand and looks do sell. At least for those with enough disposable income.

And with every other PC company - these products sell. Style is a matter of opinion (I find the Apple PCs look quite ugly myself).
http://erebusrpg.sourceforge.net/ - Erebus, Open Source RPG for Windows/Linux/Android
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mark.harman/conquests.html - Conquests, Open Source Civ-like Game for Windows/Linux

#18 Luckless   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1765

Posted 08 September 2011 - 08:01 AM

How well does Windows these days cope with storing programs and user data on a separate drive?


Programs don't really seem to care where they're installed. My current setup at home looks like:

C: 50GB SSD: Windows 7 + Programs that installed to C Drive without permission that I haven't gotten around to relocating to other drives.
D: 1.5TB HD: Steam Drive. Was suppose to be only Steam Games, but I got careless in installing a few things and accidentally put a few other programs in there.
E: 1.5TB HD: Program/Documents Drive: Remapped all the "My Documents/Pictures/etc" types from the C to this drive. Also suppose to have all the 'normal' programs.
F: Mirrored 1.5TB HDs: Regularly archived backup of My Documents, plus art data.
(Plus a few other older drives with stuff that hasn't been migrated to the newer drives yet.)

So far I haven't found any issues that Windows hasn't liked, and doesn't appear to care how many drives you throw at it. Cases and power supplies will complain before windows does.
Old Username: Talroth
If your signature on a web forum takes up more space than your average post, then you are doing things wrong.




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS