• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    62 months ago

    It will probably be a choice of quieter, faster, expensive vs loud, high capacity, pretty cheap.

    Unless we start with 3.5" SSDs (pls), HDDs will always be storage kings.
    Imagine 3.5" SSDs with 3-4 layer sandwiched PCBs…And inexpensive NAND…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      32 months ago

      Why is 3.5" preferable? You can always use a 2.5" to 3.5" adapter, and even 2.5" casing is mostly empty anyway

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        More volume for more NAND-PCBs

        and even 2.5" casing is mostly empty anyway

        Does this count for the higher capacity drives (e.g. >2TB)? Preferably TLC?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Proud owner of 1TB Samsung 860 Evo.

          Pretty much yes, it counts :D

          Moreover, iirc, there are 64TB 2,5" SSDs and 100TB 3,5" available for enterprise users, and 8TB M.2 SSDs on consumer market. Space is really not a constraint.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I believe the 100TB SSD is the one LTT showcased a few years ago?
            My problem with M.2 and high capacity is them vharging an arm and a leg for it. The cheapest I can find on the quick side is a WD black 8TB for 698,99€ with tax.
            You know how much storage space I can buy from 700€ in spinning rust? Quadruple the space of the single stick of nand.
            Surprisingly a SATA TLC SSD is even more expensive at 814,93€ (Kingston DC600M). But SAS will cost you your whole arm.

            The constraint may not be the size but the cost certainly is.
            And if they put lower capacity NAND on the PCBs we could reduce costs