Slashdot Mirror


Intel's Braidwood Could Crush SSD Market

Lucas123 writes "Intel is planning to launch its native flash memory module, code named Braidwood, in the first or second quarter of 2010. The inexpensive NAND flash will reside directly on a computer's motherboard as cache for all I/O and it will offer performance increases and other benefits similar to that of adding a solid-state disk drive to the system. A new report states that by achieving SSD performance without the high cost, Braidwood will essentially erode the SSD market, which, ironically, includes Intel's two popular SSD models. 'Intel has got a very good [SSD] product. But, they view additional layers of NAND technology in PCs as inevitable. They don't think SSDs are likely to take over 100% of the PC market, but they do think Braidwood could find itself in 100% of PCs,' the report's author said."

9 of 271 comments (clear)

  1. The writing's on the wall. by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sooner or later, no moving parts beats moving parts. The magnetic disk makers have done an amazing job so far, but eventually they're going to lose out to solid-state.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:The writing's on the wall. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just goes to show how warped a professional's perspective really is. Standard consumer with 4TB of data? Really?

    2. Re:The writing's on the wall. by camperdave · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Consumer electronics store shelves are packed with terabyte sized hard drives. 4TB may be a little ahead of the curve, but not by much.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  2. Re:Bullshit by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Random I/O is essentially uncacheable.

    I'm sure that would come as a great surprise to anyone who ever implemented a virtual memory system.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  3. Re:Not so sure by Dogtanian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't take the flash to the next PC as i can do with the SSD.

    Not really a big deal; if it becomes commonplace, most PCs will eventually have it (or something like it) as standard anyway and you won't be bothered about it.

    --
    "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
  4. Re:Not so sure by Z00L00K · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whoever defined parent as troll must be weird.

    That said - I'm more worrying about the consideration about exhausted flash on the motherboard. Have all avenues actually been considered here, or is that a built-in best before date that new motherboards will have?

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  5. Re:Bullshit by John_Booty · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Random I/O is essentially uncacheable.

    I'm sure that would come as a great surprise to anyone who ever implemented a virtual memory system.

    -jcr

    You're both right.

    The problem here is that "random I/O" can have at least two subtly different meanings. In the very old days they talked about random I/O as opposed to sequential (ie, tape) I/O. In that sense, yes, random I/O is often extremely cacheable, as you say. That's why virtual memory works, as system files, drivers, commonly-used applications, and so forth are accessed much more often than other daa.

    "Random I/O" can also refer to I/O that does not follow any real pattern - ie, a 50GB database in which all records are accessed about equally as often. This kind of I/O is not really cacheable, practically speaking. Unless you can cache the entire thing.

    What's the correct terminology for the second kind of random I/O? Random I/O with very low locality?

    --

    OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
  6. Re:Not so sure by toppavak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Didn't they already try this with their turbocache stuff? I seem to recall the general consensus being that it doesn't really offer any remarkable benefits. Regardless of how fast the cache is, eventually you run apps or open files that can't live on it 24x7 and you're going to revert to magnetic HD performance limits. This might improve some battery life and performance for some apps, but its not going to give you the across-the-board speed and battery life boosts that SSDs do. While this would certainly result in a better experience for the average computer user, I feel like its going to be relegated as a middle-ground between HDDs and SDDs, augmenting the low end, but by no means obsoleting the high-end.

  7. What nonsense by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is this the latest FUD? That if a company brings out a successful product that's priced cheaply it'll "erode the market"?

    How did the :"market" become so sacred that it must be preserved at all costs by keeping prices high? It's really funny the crap that'll come out of an MBA's mouth. He'll be all for "free markets" until someone comes along with a better product and then he'll start to squeal that the "market" is under siege.

    Good for Intel.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.