Slashdot Mirror
Laptop SSD Capacity To Remain Flat As NAND Flash Dearth Causes Prices To Rise (computerworld.com)
Lucas123 writes from a report via Computerworld: Laptop manufacturers aren't likely to offer higher capacity standard SSDs in their machines this year as a shortage of NAND flash is pushing prices higher this year. At the same time, nearly half of all laptops shipped this year will have SSDs versus HDDs, according to a new report from DRAMeXchange. The contract prices for multi-level cell (MLC) SSDs supplied to the PC manufacturing industry for those laptops are projected to go up by 12% to 16% compared with the final quarter of 2016; prices of triple-level cell (TLC) SSDs are expected to rise by 10% to 16% sequentially. "The tight NAND flash supply and sharp price hikes for SSDs will likely discourage PC-[manufacturers] from raising storage capacity," said Alan Chen, a senior research manager of DRAMeXchange. "Therefore, the storage specifications for mainstream PC [...] SSDs are expected to remain in the 128GB and 256GB [range]."
They're still using 5400 RPM HDDs in their low-end-yet-too-expensive Macs.
#DeleteFacebook
Is it more reasonable to assume that the markets have legitimately drained the supply, or that the whole industry is keeping a lid on it? SSDs seem to have become nigh ubiquitous on the convertible laptop/tablets, and an extremely common upgrade for even low-end laptops... Also, older news on this (i see things dating from Q4'16) offered the suggestion that relief might be coming by now. https://www.theregister.co.uk/...
At any rate, let's just hope that as many manufacturers as possible survive as long as possible to avoid establishing one of them as the WD of NAND. Hopefully things will stay competitive for a while longer.
There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
I've had SSD's exclusively for 8 years now. No failures. Of course I never bought OCZ pieces of shit.
When any hard drive fails you can lose everything immediately and all at once. That's why you have backups. You have backups, right?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
SSD's are great. I usually buy cheap refurb and fairly low-end laptops for personal use, and putting a cheap SSD in them is a cost-effective way to get them to perform fairly well.
All drives are ticking time bombs, that's why you need backups if you don't want to lose data and RAID if availability is important.
HDDs suddenly fail sometimes. And although it is a less common failure mode than on SSDs, you can't rely on auditory clues. Also, you are unlikely to ever hit the wear limit on SSDs with a normal workstation or gamer type usage. Something else will break before that.
When I first started to buy SSD's for my school, I tried to do some research and quickly became confused about the differences between TLC, MLC, and SLC. I found various sites like this one that gave a good overview, but I didn't find very many that really analyzed the performance differences.
I settled on the Kingston V300 series of disks, an MLC unit that seemed to get decent reviews. It's been treating us well, but I always wonder whether the MLC was worth the extra money over the UV400, a slightly cheaper TLC variant.
Has anyone ever used both MLC and TLC drives and care to comment about whether the differences in performance justify the cost?
lucky you. I have had multiple failures. 1 Sandisk, 1 Intel and 3 fucking Samsung EVO's (which I will never buy again). never tried OCZ but hard to imagine they are worse than Samsung and of course I have backups.
The price of a Mac includes an Xcode license. If you don't need Xcode, consider buying something other than a Mac.
Well, today's 5400 RPM drives are not the same as yesterday's. Increased density makes them much faster than they used to be
An increase in density increases throughput, not latency. It still takes the same amount of time (up to 60000÷5400 = 11 ms) to spin a particular sector toward the head, plus however long it took the head to move to the appropriate cylinder.
All drives are ticking time bombs, that's why you need backups if you don't want to lose data and RAID if availability is important.
Amusingly late last year I had that exact same discussion with my wife about her 12 month old Mac, explaining that all drives eventually fail. She laughed saying she has never had a problem and said I was just doing my usual anti apple thing, so I shrugged and let her have her way. She was in tears the following weak when her drive did fail and she lost a heap of photos and I got some suspicious looks wondering if somehow I had something to do with it. I avoided the "I told you so" line and simply got the drive replaced and showed her how to backup to my RAID backed storage server which also does scheduled backups.
right. i had to get up in the morning at ten oâ(TM)clock at night half an hour before i went to bed, drink a cup of sulfuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day using mud to make the circuit, and pay the mud owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our dad and our mother would kill us and dance about on our graves singing hallelujah.
_ _ _ Go for the eyes Boo! GO FOR THE EYES!
I find it almost unbelievable that people are still sold computers with old-fashioned HDDs. At the coffee machine, a secretary told me they bought a spanking new iMac. "But it's so slow", she asked, "is that normal?"
I told her to bring it back and get a model with an SSD. She didn't know what it was. I find it unbelievable that salespersons still sell this shit to consumers.
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
I had similar issues, except I stopped buying SSD after too many failures on totally different machines. Several Kingston, several Patriot, several Trancend, one Mushkin. Sure, none of the highly praised Samsungs. This was - of course - over 5 years ago, so I suspect they really had issues by being too new. Early adopter tax. I fell for it again. It put me off from SSDs for a long time. It's not that I lost any data, but the time lost was significant.
Only in November last year, I've gave them a try again. I got myself a Crucial MX300 275G which had excellent capacity/price ratio back then (something like 75EUR). I decided to give it a hard time and do LUKS full disk encryption. Since I had no problem with it, I decided to upgrade another laptop but the prices had soared significantly. Decided for a 128GB AData SU800. It also will be full disk encrypted. Installed it yesterday, can't say how reliable it is.
Neither of these machine will hold any significant data, because all SSD failures I had in the past were basically "sudden refusal to work at all". One day they worked, the other day: dead.
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
The other AC was saying there's something wrong with the house's power lines, not each individual computer's power supply. A house can have poor quality wiring or lots of noise on the line. I'm not really sure how you get line noise, but from my experience from using devices that communicate through the power sockets, you can certainly have sockets in a house that are worse than others.
Server grade at least give you some clues.
I am extremely skeptical about that. "Server grade" and "enterprise grade" are mainly marketing terms used to sell the same drives at triple the price. Several large scale longitudinal studies, by Google, Backblaze, and others, have found no reliability advantage to using "server grade" drives.
Why do people make this so hard? Replacing platters? Controllers? JUST BACK UP THE DATA.
Geez.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Your 120GB HDD is currently 100GB due to OS and other pre-installed shit.
To boot, IOPS on a network-attached drive is Marianas Trench low, pretty much any modern game will suffer from performance issues.
Star Citizen alone when it launches will be 100GB. X-Plane 9 clocks in at 70GB install. Most open world games clock in starting at ~40GB now days, so at best you get three to install before you're right out of space with your 120GB drive.
Let me look at my steam library... I don't even have a hundredth of my collection installed, and yet my 500GB games drive is nearly full.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.