Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Data Storage Intel

Intel SSD Roadmap Points To 2TB Drives Arriving In 2014 183

MojoKid writes "A leaked Intel roadmap for solid state storage technology suggests the company is pushing ahead with its plans to introduce new high-end drives based on cutting-edge NAND flash. It's significant for Intel to be adopting 20nm NAND in its highest-end data center products, because of the challenges smaller NAND nodes present in terms of data retention and reliability. Intel introduced 20nm NAND lower in the product stack over a year ago, but apparently has waited till now to bring 20nm to the highest end. Reportedly, next year, Intel will debut three new drive families — the SSD Pro 2500 Series (codenamed Temple Star), the DC P3500 Series (Pleasantdale) and the DC P3700 Series (Fultondale). The Temple Star family uses the M.2 and M.25 form factors, which are meant to replace the older mSATA form factor for ultrabooks and tablets. The M.2 standard allows more space on PCBs for actual NAND storage and can interface with PCIe, SATA, and USB 3.0-attached storage in the same design. The new high-end enterprise drives, meanwhile, will hit 2TB (up from 800GB), ship in 2.5" and add-in card form factors, and offer vastly improved performance. The current DC S3700 series offers 500MBps writes and 460MBps reads. The DC P3700 will increase this to 2800MBps read and 1700MBps writes. The primary difference between the DC P3500 and DC P3700 families appears to be that the P3700 family will use Intel's High Endurance Technology (HET) MLC, while the DC P3500 family sticks with traditional MLC."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel SSD Roadmap Points To 2TB Drives Arriving In 2014

Comments Filter:
  • by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Saturday December 07, 2013 @12:38PM (#45626977)

    I tried to find out for a large customer how long the current enterprise SSDs live, but Intel declined to comment. Through the grapevine I have heard of people doing complete replacements every 6 months to prevent failures in production environments, after they learned the hard way that these are not as reliable or long-lived as many people think. Especially small-write endurance seems to be pretty bad.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I've used them at a Global Top 100 website for several years with significantly less failures than any of the SAS drives they replaced.

      We installed roughly 500 Intel SSDs across several different workloads, databases, webservers, etc.. In the last two years, we had 1-2 failures. For the record, when SSDs fail usually they just go readonly. When spinning rust fails you usually lose all your data. Statistically speaking, a 24-drive SAS array is going to have more frequent failures than a 4-drive SSD array, a

      • by jedidiah ( 1196 )

        > I've used them at a Global Top 100 website

        Doesn't mean squat really. That doesn't really tell us anything about the mix of IO operations you're doing or how that compares to what the other guy is doing.

        "website"? Big deal...

  • Looks like the first announced 2242 M.2 drive larger than 128GB, but it's still only 180GB. It'd be really nice to be able to put a 256GB drive where a cache drive normally sits, run the OS and programs from there, and keep a spinning rust (spinning glass, now perpendicular recording is standard) drive in the 2.5" space for media storage. Though by the time 256GB 2242 drives come onto the market, 256GB will probably feel overly restrictive anyway.
  • and the mac pro will be stuck at 1TB max 256 min for a year or more with the same price for that time as well.

  • As Dr FrankNfurter says in RHPS [imdb.com] "I didn't build him for YOU!!!" It's amusing whenever new datacenter/server technology gets posted on /. that half the posts evaluate the proposed product in terms of how affordable/practical/useful it would be to them in their little client desktop or notebook. All of these Intel drives are intended for server (or at least technical workstation ) use, so they need to be evaluated by ROI they give a business doing high-throughput work. If you think they have great stats b

  • by citizenr ( 871508 ) on Saturday December 07, 2013 @02:55PM (#45627935) Homepage

    P3500 = 374TB for 2TB model = 2 days of continuous writing and drive dies = mlc
    P3700 = 50 days of continuous writing = slc

    while old Samsung 830 routinely did >1PB with 256GB model.

    No, you wont write 20GB per day, those are not home use drives, they go into servers and get killed by bcache.

  • I've upgraded a number of customer machines from HDDs to SSDs and the performance boost is profound, no doubt, and Intel is one of the best performers.

    But what's kept me from upgrading my own machine is: encryption support.

    The use of hardware computed compression in Intel and other Sandforce SSDs is reportedly at odds with software-based OTF (on the fly) encryption options like TrueCrypt because encrypted data is incompressible, so such benefits are lost. It will probably still be faster than an HDD, but n

    • My work laptop uses encryption and was upgraded from an HDD to an SSD about a year ago. The performance upgrade was definitely worth it, and everyone else that got the upgrade agrees. I'm not sure which type of encryption it uses, but it is the kind where you have to type in the password before it boots or lets you do anything.

      I also upgraded from an HDD to a non-encrypted SSD in one of my home computers and I would say the performance increase was about the same.
    • What you're looking for is called the eDrive standard. It lets the OS interface with the SSD in such a way as to allow Bitlocker and other whole drive encryption methods while using the SSD controller to do the encryption.

    • Many SSDs don't rely on compression to store their data. I've never bought one that did, and as far as I am aware, the problems you are describing were solved a long time ago. The laptops at my office (which are SSDs) are all encrypted currently using sophos full disk encryption, and we are soon moving to bitlocker for it instead (not sure exactly why other than sophos in general just sucks).

  • I notice that flash is currently goign for about 50 cents a GB and disk about 10 cents. Flahs has been falling faster than disk, but disk still falls too.
    • Out first departmental computer in the 1970s has a ten megabyte disk for $15K. And it was the size of a washing machine.
    • by dougmc ( 70836 )

      I notice that flash is currently goign for about 50 cents a GB and disk about 10 cents.

      The $0.50/GB for flash is for the very cheapest SSDs available, and only when they're on a good sale. More likely is $0.75/GB on the low and, and it goes up from there.

      As for hard drive prices, the lowest is a good deal cheaper -- you can find 3 TB external drives for around $100 now if you wait for a sale, so that's $0.03/GB. Of course, the prices go up from there, and enterprise level drives are a whole lot more.

      (One thing I don't understand, is now external drives are cheaper than internal drives. The

      • The $0.50/GB for flash is for the very cheapest SSDs available, and only when they're on a good sale. More likely is $0.75/GB on the low and, and it goes up from there.

        The Samsung 840 EVO is regularly available at $0.55-$0.60/GB for the 1TB model. And while it uses TLC (with a SLC-based cache to improve endurance), it isn't generally considered a "low end" product - 840 EVO got quite good reviews from various hardware sites.

        • Hmmm.. Most of the reviews I saw of the 840 EVO said they kind of blew and to buy the 840 PRO instead which was a much better product.

Usage: fortune -P [] -a [xsz] [Q: [file]] [rKe9] -v6[+] dataspec ... inputdir