Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Unveils V-NAND High Performance SSDs, Fast NVMe Card At 5.5GB Per Second
MojoKid writes: Sometimes it's the enterprise sector that gets dibs on the coolest technology, and so it goes with a trio of TCO-optimized, high-performance solid state drives from Samsung that were just announced, all three of which are based on three-dimensional (3D) Vertical NAND (V-NAND) flash memory technology. The fastest of bunch can read data at up to 5,500 megabytes per second. That's the rated sequential read speed of Samsung's PM1725, a half-height, half-length (HHHL) PCIe card-type NVMe SSD. Other rated specs include a random read speed of up to 1,000,000 IOPS, random write performance of up to 120,000 IOPS, and sequential writes topping out at 1,800MB/s. The PM1725 comes in just two beastly storage capacities, 3.2TB and 6.4TB, the latter of which is rated to handle five drive writes per day (32TB) for five years. Samsung also introduced two other 3D V-NAND products, the PM1633 and PM953. The PM1633 is a 2.5-inch 12Gb/s SAS SSD that will be offered in 480GB, 960GB, 1.92TB, and 3.84TB capacities. As for the PM953, it's an update to the SM951 and is available in M.2 and 2.5-inch form factors at capacities up to 1.92TB.
Imagine a beowulf cluster of 4TB SSD
Imagine a beowulf cluster of ancient redundant slashdot memes, written on scrap lumber and jammed up your ass.
$10k is extremely cheap when you are looking at speeding up a multi-TB database with a 100+ queries per second 24/7.
The only alternative without a performance hit, would be battery backed RAM. 4TB of battery backed RAM would cost about four times as much.
That's dirt cheap. You have to realize what it's used for. It's built for speed, not storage capacity.
What matters here is the IOPS per $.
Your 2 TB spinning HD fro $100 might seem cheap, but it only gets some 200 IOPS. So lets say 2 IOPS per dollar.
These puppies can do some 480k IOPS in a 75/25 read/write workload, which gives us 48 IOPS per dollar.
So it is in fact 24 times cheaper than a regular HD.
Then consider electricity, cooling, floor space, floor weight etc.
-- Another senseless waste of fine bytes.
So $ 9,500 for the 3.84TB one? That's insane.
This, or a whole rack of short stroked mechanical HDD to achieve the same IOPS performance, and a dedicated runner to keep replacing the failed HDD as you go along, along with the extra power and cooling requirements to boot. Seems like a bargain to me.