Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Releases First 2TB Consumer SSD For Laptops
Lucas123 writes: Samsung has released what it is calling the world's first 2.5-in consumer-grade, multi-terabyte SSD, and it's issuing the new drive a 10-year warranty. With up to 2TB of capacity, the new 850 Pro and 850 EVO SSDs double the maximum capacity of their predecessors. As with the previous 840 Pro and EVO models, Samsung used its 3D V-NAND technology, which stacks 32 layers of NAND atop one another in a microscopic skyscraper. Additionally, the drives take advantage of multi-level cell (MLC) and triple-level cell (TLC) (2- and 3-bit per cell) technology for even greater density. The 850 Pro, Samsung said, can manage up to 550MBps sequential read and 520MBps sequential write rates and up to 100,000 random I/Os per second (IOPS). The 850 EVO SSD has slightly lower performance with 540MBps and 520MBps sequential read/write rates and up to 90,000 random IOPS. The SSDs will range in capacity from 120GB to 2TB and in price from $99 to $999.
Finally we have a reasonably sized SSD... now it's just got to come down in price 80-90%
I suppose there are a few 5 pound laptops out there for power users that still use the 2.5" form factor, but they're disappearing rapidly. Things are moving fast in the SSD storage area and many are moving to the M.2 format. Though I suppose any increase in density is good as it means higher cap small format drives and cheaper options*.
*so that Microsoft and Apple can increase their profit margins on storage. The great thing about impossible to open PCs is that they can charge whatever the fuck they want for storage no matter how cheap it gets.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
We've been using Samsung drives in "non production" status servers, embedded servers, etc. and have had a terrible time of it. The first drives we bought a few years ago (840 Pro) were good, but we've seen Samsung SSDs run entirely through their write capacity (as reported by SMART) and then go dead when not even mounted! Turns out we aren't the only ones to get bit by buggy Samsung drives.
It also turns out that Samsung drives are even blacklisted in the Linux Kernel
I welcome Samsung's excellent cost/size value proposition! I just wish their drives were solid enough for our actual use.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
It's the first time that max SSD capacity is greater than HD in a given size.
Yes, I know there's a 2.5" 2TB HDD out there. But it's a 12mm height, and so cannot be used in any laptop that I know of, including my older thicker MacBook, which takes a 9.5mm height drive.
This Samsung is a 7mm height, and thus will fit in any laptop that takes a 2.5" drive of any kind.
"The price-per-gig on the EVO model comes out to around $0.40/GB, which is where SSD prices have more or less been stalled for a few years now."
Really? A few years?
The 850 EVO 500GB is currently $162 at Amazon (0.32/GB). In December, it was $252 (0.50/GB).
That's a nearly 40% decline in six months.
I'm getting 500GB SSDs today for what I was paying for 250GB drives a bit over a year ago.
This summary is well written. It is:
As a former professional technical writer, I am always on the look-out for good explanatory writing. I wanted to call it out here, especially since often we just complain when the summary's bad. When something's good, we're often silent. I suppose that's partly because when things are working, like the utility company, they don't attract attention and we just take them for granted. But writing like this is no accident.
Since TRIM is a standardized command, SSD vendors either need to support it, or like is done with the format command on IDE drives... do nothing, return a success value.
It is better to do nothing than to do it broken, and TRIM isn't exactly a new technology... it has been around for quite a few years now.
Doesn't matter whether they use security-by-obscurity or real hardware-driven or OS-driven encryption. The malware's running on top of the OS, which already has access to all the data on the drive (unless you're doing something fancy with multiple user logins, each of whom has differently-encrypted home directories, but even then, the malware can attack whoever's logged in right now.)
Drive encryption mainly helps you against stolen hardware, and not usually very much, because that would require an inconvenient user interface.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
First off, the problem is Linux is somehow triggering a bug in the TRIM implementation on Samsung SSDs.
We know Windows doesn't do it, as Windows users are probably the biggest consumer of Samsung SSDs and there isn't a mass loss of data problem from Windows users. (And from querying Windows 7 via the command line, Windows does use TRIM).
OS X may be using TRIM or not (depends on whether you're talking Apple-approved SSDs which are OEM versions, or third party user installed SSDs replacing the hard drive that was shipped). It's possible OS X may use TRIM in a way that it doesn't trigger the bug. Or maybe it does it less aggressively than Linux, so the bug incidence is far lower and no one noticed it yet.
All we know is that Linux definitely triggers the TRIM bug, OS X and Windows doesn't, yet (but there are no guarantees that Apple or Microsoft won't change the way Windows 10 or El Capitan does TRIM which WILL expose the bug).
The bug is in TRIM. That's all, if you don't use TRIM, it'll be fine. Maybe even using fstrim periodically is OK over using discard mode.
1) He's overwritten the entire drive 8 times in 33 days. That's not a "consumer" workload. .25% of its claimed and documented life cycle, being overwritten every 4 days for over a month. If he wasn't okay with replacing the drive after 500 days or a year and a half, then he should have researched better, or bought the next size up in drive capacity, which would have cut the wear in half. It's more likely, though that the drive will last around 5 years, even under these write loads, according to independent testing by anandtech and others.
2) 177 isn't a percentage. It's how often it's had to overwrite the data. 8 times. Which matches the data written.
3) Samsung claims 2,000 P/E cycles (the number represented in SMART 177). Independent testing has shown closer to 6,000 P/E cycles. That means that it's at
If you don't understand what SMART is, does, or means, please don't talk about it as though you do. Other people might see your confident ignorance and believe you instead of doing their own research.
Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
Since TRIM is a standardized command, SSD vendors either need to support it, or like is done with the format command on IDE drives... do nothing, return a success value.
They do support the TRIM command.
The "bug" is how TRIM and command queuing interact (specifically a race condition labeling the wrong logical sectors RZAT/DRAT) I put "bug" in quotes because the specification specifically says that TRIM is a non-queued command. Windows/NTFS makes sure that the queue is empty before issuing a TRIM. Linux/EXT4 does not.
Ideally the drives should make sure that their queue is empty themselves, but it likely takes a tortured reading of the specification to think that compliant drives will make sure that their queue is empty.
"His name was James Damore."