Slashdot Mirror


SSDs Approaching Price Parity With HDDs (computerworld.com)

Lucas123 writes: Hard disk drive per-gigabyte pricing has remained relatively stagnant over the past three years, and prices are expected to be completely flat over at least the next two, allowing SSDs to significantly close the cost gap, according to a new report. The report, from DRAMeXchange, stated that this marks the fourth straight quarter that the SSD price decline has exceeded 10%. Over the past three years, SSDs have dropped from 31 to 13 cents per gig annually. In contrast, from 2012 to 2015, per gigabyte pricing for HDDs dropped just one cent per year from 9 cents in 2012 to 6 cents this year. However, through 2017, the per-gigabyte price of HDDs is expected to remain flat: 6 cents per gigabyte. Consumer SSDs were on average were selling for 99 cents a gigabyte in 2012. From 2013 to 2015, the price dropped from 68 cents to 39 cents per gig, meaning the average 1TB SSD sells for about $390 today. Next year, SSD prices will decline to 24 cents per gig and in 2017, they're expected to drop to 17 cents per gig. That means a 1TB SSD on average would retail for $170, though online prices are often much lower than average vendor retail prices. DRAMeXchange also stated that SSDs are expected to be in 31% of new consumer laptops next year, and by 2017 they'll be in 41%.

8 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. "approaching" by fche · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... not in the sense that they are close, only that they're getting less far. Current retail price for TBish HDDs is on the order of $0.06/GB; TFA for SSD is $0.39/GB, about six times as much.

    1. Re:"approaching" by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Poorly written story too, just quoting numbers left, right, and centre.

      And would it fucking kill them to put a graph there? this line is the price per gig for HDD and this line is for SSD. See, they are getting closer. That's the article.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
  2. Re:It's time to let the HDD's go. by AbRASiON · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't tell if you're joking or not, but this is a huge Apples / Oranges comparison if ever I've seen one.
    In 18 months your link would be as foolish as someone advocating a tape drive, instead of a hard disk for a desktop computer.

    Also: nothing stopping you using magnetic disks, I have 6 of them in my house operating right now - but 0 of them in my laptop, PS4, PS4, desktop, HTPC.

  3. Re:A factor of 3 by 2017 is not "parity" at all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Morons that work for a magazine that sells advert space as its business model. Or in today's world, a clickbait site.

  4. Wait, that's not right! by sabbede · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Over the past three years, SSDs have dropped from 31 to 13 cents per gig annually.

    How exactly does it drop from 31 to 13 cents every year? Does the price go back up every Jan 1st?

  5. Re:It's time to let the HDD's go. by jedidiah · · Score: 1, Insightful

    A 256G drive won't even hold my Steam folder and I'm a Linux user.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  6. Before SSDs can replace HDs by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Big Switchover will occur when, and only when, we can get SSDs to fail read-only.

  7. Re:It's time to let the HDD's go. by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    $200 for only 1 TB of storage is far from impressive.

    I think you're missing a major point here. SSD owners do not simply gain the benefit of "storage". The access speed is the important part. Read/Write speeds increase in proportion to drive size on platter drives. Cache helps a bit with this. Increasing the number of heads helps a bit. But that's the major problem. I switched to SSD years ago and I would never, ever own a platter drive again simply because I couldn't take the slow access speed. Storage capacity is fixed by simply buying more SSD drives. Yes it means I have to keep track of what I put where but that's not a big deal.

    So if you go around quoting a 5TB drive at $200 as if it was a "good thing" I still wouldn't touch it. I can just imagine how long it would take me to manipulate TB's of data on that drive, let alone copy sizeable chunks to/from that drive. Like someone else said, it would be comparing apples to oranges, or a boat to an airplane. Yeah, you can fit a lot of cargo on a ship, if you don't mind the 2-3 weeks it takes to get to your destination. Or you could pay more and make many, many plane trips in 1/10th of the time.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.