BitMicro Takes Wraps Off 832 GB Flash Drive 241
Lucas123 writes "BitMicro has unveiled an 832GB NAND flash drive that will begin shipping later this year. The E-Disk Altima drive is expected to have sustained read rates of up to 100MB/sec and up to 20,000 I/O operations per second. The device features a SATA 3.0 G/bps interface. No pricing as of yet."
Mortgage? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
USB power, that's not the question. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Mortgage? (Score:5, Funny)
cost estimate (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:cost estimate (Score:4, Funny)
Re:cost estimate (Score:4, Funny)
lrn2economics
Re:cost estimate (Score:5, Funny)
try selling a nintendo or an old watch calculator made in the 80s in 10 years, I doubt you'll get more than a 5-10 bucks. The point is, the car analogy has yet again made someone look like an idiot
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The NES/Famicom probably won't go up much, but as supply drops due to (1) no longer being manufactured (2) damage and disrepair over time, the price of a pristine NES will definitely go up.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
a) the X axis is time - yes, storage becomes cheaper; but how long will it be before it becomes *truly* affordable. Given the drive size, I would expect them to go more after the business market, rather than end-users - as such, the price decrease will not be too quick.
b) Some items may well fade out and be replaced with something 'better' instead of falling below certain thresholds (luxury items usually fall into this category) - though, I don't quite see this as
Re:cost estimate (Score:4, Informative)
If they are shooting for video editing only that price would be right, but the enthusiast & business market will IMO want something under $2000. TFA suggests business application.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, I'm just having trouble imagining exactly what that niche market is; for that price you can obtain vastly superior performance simply by dumping the money into RAM and disk spindles instead.
You'd have to have some very artificial constraints and a very odd load to actually find a situation where the money would be well spent (as in large mis-programmed database running on a 32bit-only machine that cant have more than 1 sata controller).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:cost estimate (Score:5, Informative)
Really, there is. Computers that fly, sail, drive or are employed in low power, low heat, low noise, high vibration, high dust, high heat, low heat environments. Be creative: That starts with laptops in the space shuttle and surely doesn't end with onboard systems of surveillance planes. All Gigabyte-intensive operations where you do not have an unlimited power socket in the wall and/or have other considerations about weight and shock tolerances.
And all of these applications have powers with large checkbooks behind them, who will write off 5000USD as merely half a percent price increase for much better reliability and power consumption.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
rugged field computers (Score:2)
Re:cost estimate (Score:5, Interesting)
I think we discussed this on
Re: (Score:2)
Sweet (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sweet (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not as if you need a portable video library anyways. Stick a few on your device and go. Your battery life is by far going to be the limiting factor. Apple would be much better off trying to create a mobile video streaming device than to waste so much flash memory on a portable device.
Sure, in five years then I'll probably have a terabyte of flash memory in my car key that only costs eight bucks. And at that point, this kind of thing would make sense. Right now, that's a TON of flash storage that would carry a huge price that would make it beyond impractical for portables. If you want a mobile HD player, create something with a 720p screen and one of those brand new 500GB laptop drives and stick half a gig of RAM in as a massive buffer.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
hmm. (Score:4, Funny)
832GB SSD?! holy cow thats going to be dear.
Now tell me why anybody should want this outside of the media/video industry...
Re:hmm. (Score:5, Funny)
We've found Bill Gates' Slashdot user account.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd take one for my gaming laptop. I could live with something as small as 200 gigs, but if they're going to give me 4x that much I'll take it!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I would have thought he would have had a much lower UID.
Or did you lose your password a few times Bill?
Re: (Score:2)
The various media in my house, shared among four PC's comes to well over 600Gb. It would be more, but I don't have the room to rip all my DvDs yet, and it grows, thanks to my various subscriptions, by several Gb a month. Having all that on one fast access solid state device would be serious bonus.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:hmm. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
-Lou
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:hmm. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
2*832G 2.5" SSD: £????, 800G RAID-1, ~40,000 IOPS, fits in 1U server, 10W.
They could be £5k each and still be rather attractive, though the crappy write performance on SSD's reduces their appeal rather a lot.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Perhaps you are unaware that "fastest" in this context is generally not considered a good thing?
Re: (Score:2)
Yawn (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
832? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:832? (Score:5, Funny)
No. It is even.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:832? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:832? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Either way, it nicely explains the 1.6TB version (128MB modules instead of 64MB modules..)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Perhaps they are giving the formatted capacity.
I know. I don't believe it either.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
They could just as easily make a 512 GB unit with three chip select lines and only 8 flash modules if they wanted to cut costs. It'd still sell.
The flash chip cost is built into the base cost of the drive, too. It's the design and development time they need to recover on top of parts cost to make a profit. Why complicate things when it's natural to develop binary products based on powers of two?
If it really is
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
U3 (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm still waiting for a Linux or OS X U3 removal tool, because I don't do Windows.
Raid (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It's twice 416 (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.bitmicro.com/press_news_releases_20070911.php [bitmicro.com]
The bit I'm slightly skeptical on is the environmental specs. While -40C and +85C are becoming a more common standard, not many SSD manufacturers can reliably hit past -25C and +75C. This may not seem that big of a deal, but in some industries - which would currently be the only ones spending Close to the $10k (judging by current pricing for extended/extreme versions of these drives) for them initially - thi
I want one (Score:5, Funny)
Will it run... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ok, I'm running my linux (see screenshots, below) from a 2 GB SanDisk Micro Cruzer drive at this time,
on a Gateway 2000 Pentium II. Use these files [rapidweather.com] to kick off the Flash Drive, using loadlin. You have to have a small msdos drive in the computer, or a partition on a larger drive with msdos, put the files there. Documentation is included in the tarball, also, a copy of the Rapidweather Remaster CD is needed also.
Servers? (Score:2, Insightful)
That said, I want a laptop with one of these.
832 Gigs (Score:2)
the marketing dept has picked a name for it: (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
where are holographic drives? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Preinstalled? (Score:3, Funny)
100 MB/second ... .why limit it? (Score:2)
That way you'd get 200 - 400 MB/sec, halfway to or completely saturating your SATA bus. You don't get any real penalties, as you only get write-faults on the flash, and you've already included hardware to handle that. Besides, fitting 4B into 80B or 1B into 20B still gives you the same ratio, so it's not even going to wreck havok on wear l
Re: (Score:2)
If you need to ask the price ... (Score:4, Insightful)
... then you can't afford it, yet. Wait a couple years and pick them up in the discount bin at Walmart.
That (Score:2)
20,000 I/O operations per second??? (Score:2)
Doesn't that mean you can burn out the flash memory in about two minutes because of the limited number of write cycles?
...
Ok, I'm kidding. Wear leveling. [wikipedia.org] But it was just too obvious of a /. thing to not post it. At least I didn't make an In Soviet Russia joke. Right?
Re: (Score:2)
832Gigabit? Maybe? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah but... (Score:2)
Yeah, but will it run on Vista? [u3.com]
ducks
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, you wouldn't want to use the flash drives in a DB server that is write-heavy, and go through drives like Kleenex.
Re:nothing to see here... (Score:5, Funny)
Can't... resist...
1999 called... they want their flash pricing back.
Or, if you'd like, I'd be willing to sell you some 32Mb flash cards for, shall we say, $100 a piece?
(Sorry.)
Re:nothing to see here... (Score:4, Funny)
This is a good point and you are right to be cautious. Obviously there will be massive technological challenges to overcome in order to move past the current state of the art, which is loads of flash connected to an SATA interface, to this new paradigm of having shitloads of flash connected to an SATA interface.
I'm not an expert, but I'm thinking perhaps they can start by adding more flash?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Funny)
F-22 Raptor: so expensive that it's practically invisible!
Re:Sorry (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I thought flash went bad over time (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So if I use one of these to record the nightly news every day in UNcompressed high definition, it will wear out in just over 273 years in the worst case, or last nearly 2738 years in the best case. It's more likely to be stolen as primitive relic in that time frame :-)
Re: (Score:2)
but if these drives/chips are solid state with no moving parts what is there to "wear out" ? can this be fixed or is it a design flaw ?
I'm not a solid-state expert or anything, but as far as I know it is an inherent limitation of the technology, so it is not something that can be fixed without moving to another technology (and there are several future technologies waiting in the wings which don't seem to have this issue, eg. MRAM [wikipedia.org]). Instead of trying to explain it poorly myself, I'll just steal a whole chunk out of this 'Flash Quality' summary [adtron.com] [PDF]:
Write Endurance
The one common issue of concern to most media designers is write endurance. Media write integrity
of a flash device now greatly exceeds that of a magnetic disk drive; however this comparison is rarely
acknowledged.
Data is stored on a flash device by the injection and depletion of a charge on a floating gate. Each time
a write or erase operation occurs, there is an infinitesimal breakdown of the oxide layer on the floating
gate that holds the data bit charge. This phenomenon doesn't occur in a read operation. This slow
breakdown eventually degrades the cell where it does not allow an exchange of a charge and can no
longer be erased or written to. In early years of flash technology "Write Endurance" was limited to
only a few thousand cycles but over the years semiconductor manufacturers have improved this
technology where typical limits of a flash cell endurance now vary between 300,000 and 2 million
erase/write cycles depending on the technology.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Often it is a combination of factors like having backup space (Sell a 120gig HD as a 100gig HD) and load leveling which makes sure that you aren't always writing to the same memory location.
So while it is still an issue, it has largely been addressed. I wouldn't use it on anything that is write-heavy, but for most situations you won't notice much of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)