Friday, March 3rd 2023

300 TB SSDs Could Arrive as Soon as 2026, Claims Pure Storage

Pure Storage, a maker of various storage solutions and custom enterprise-grade SSDs, claims the company will produce SSDs with up to 300 TBs of capacity by 2026. In an interview with Pure Storage CTO Alex McMullan, Blocks & Files got exclusive information that the company targets SSD capacities of up to 300 TBs in 2026. Pure Storage creates proprietary Direct Flash Modules (DFM) SSDs which use 3D NAND chips controlled by a custom SSD controller, are used in the FlashArray systems, and run on a custom FlashBlade operating system. This level of customization allows Pure Storage to create SSD drives with remarkable capacities in the future as the 3D NAND technology advances.

In the coming years, 3D NAND flash manufacturers will switch from the current 200-layer chips to the 400/500-layer chips, driving storage density to new highs. As manufacturers update their technology, so does Pure with its DFM cards that use regular U.2 NVMe connectors in a custom ruler-style format made explicitly for Pure FlashArray systems. Compared to upcoming HDDs that Toshiba and Seagate will use, Pure Storage DFM SSDs will have much higher capacities and read/write speeds, especially as higher-density 3D NAND arrives. You can see the comparison of Pure's estimates for the future 300 TB SSDs with future HDD technology.
Source: Blocks and Files
Add your own comment

33 Comments on 300 TB SSDs Could Arrive as Soon as 2026, Claims Pure Storage

#2
chrcoluk
For enterprise market its possible yeah, as they will be willing to pay for it. Consumer is almost stagnated on capacities though.
Posted on Reply
#3
Prima.Vera
CrackongAnd costs 30k USD?
Most likely.
Unless the prices will go down significantly, there's no point.
I personally look for an 8 or 10TB SSD, with the price of a HDD...
Posted on Reply
#4
Space Lynx
Astronaut
would be nice if the breakthrough in tech was just so good, companies were just like, we had no idea it was this easy and cheap to make, and we all just have 300 TB SSD's as the new normal for like $250 or something.

I know that won't happen, just a funny thought haha
Posted on Reply
#5
AnarchoPrimitiv
Personally, I'd much rather have a marked improvement in random r/w's than capacity...realize this is an enterprise thing, but with respect to consumer storage, that's where I'd like to see the primary advancement.
Posted on Reply
#6
AnotherReader
AnarchoPrimitivPersonally, I'd much rather have a marked improvement in random r/w's than capacity...realize this is an enterprise thing, but with respect to consumer storage, that's where I'd like to see the primary advancement.
That's a limitation of NAND flash; if we went back to SLC, then you could get better random reads, but that would reduce capacity dramatically.
Posted on Reply
#7
bonehead123
AnotherReaderThat's a limitation of NAND flash; if we went back to SLC, then you could get better random reads, but that would reduce capacity dramatically.
Have faith man.... the techno-gods will surely figure out a way to overcome these hurdles, it may take a while, but still...
Posted on Reply
#10
Dimitriman
The SSD capacity bar has barely moved in the past 5 years... and 4TB is still waaay outside most people's budgets. Somehow I think this news is only relevant for enterprises / data centers.
Posted on Reply
#11
enb141
DimitrimanThe SSD capacity bar has barely moved in the past 5 years... and 4TB is still waaay outside most people's budgets. Somehow I think this news is only relevant for enterprises / data centers.
Yeah, 300TB SSD in 2026 means $100,000, that's pretty much doable right now if you buy 5 PCIe cards that can hold 8 SSD each, right now you can achieve 320 TB, of course is expensive but doable.

As you said, SSD haven't moved in centuries, SSD had a good improvement at their beginning but 5 years ago, they didn't improved in pretty much nothing.
Posted on Reply
#12
caroline!
AnotherReaderThat's a limitation of NAND flash; if we went back to SLC, then you could get better random reads, but that would reduce capacity dramatically.
A small price to pay for salvation.

I'd rather have a 256GB SLC than a 1TB QLC.
Posted on Reply
#13
JAB Creations
400-layer versus 200-layer; sounds like we'll finally see 16TB NVMe drives. :)
Posted on Reply
#14
evernessince
JAB Creations400-layer versus 200-layer; sounds like we'll finally see 16TB NVMe drives. :)
We already have 16TB NVMe SSD drives in the 22110 M.2 format.

400 layer should allow 32TB 2280 drives. Of course you can get that right now in the 2.5" and E1.S / E1.L formats.
enb141Yeah, 300TB SSD in 2026 means $100,000, that's pretty much doable right now if you buy 5 PCIe cards that can hold 8 SSD each, right now you can achieve 320 TB, of course is expensive but doable.

As you said, SSD haven't moved in centuries, SSD had a good improvement at their beginning but 5 years ago, they didn't improved in pretty much nothing.
Yep, most likely 80 - 110K just based on pricing of current 30.72TB SSDs and factoring in the cost of 10 of those plus a markup for being the highest capacity. The problem for SSDs has been the pricing of higher capacity models tends to increase quickly.
Posted on Reply
#15
Octavean
Dimitriman4TB is still waaay outside most people's budgets.
Not so sure about that given some of the sample systems around these forums. The less expensive 4TB SSD's are about ~$200 USD and change. So ~$50+ a TB for a 4TB SSD doesn't seem all that bad IMO. A lot of people can swing that. Now, 8TB SSDs for the great unwashed masses might be pushing it. Those are just under ~$600 USD to start.
Posted on Reply
#16
TheoneandonlyMrK
That'll be nice.

Though with this news I expect games to hit a TB by 2024 now
Posted on Reply
#17
kapone32
Can I just have 8 or 16 TB in 2023 please?
Posted on Reply
#18
enb141
kapone32Can I just have 8 or 16 TB in 2023 please?
Yes you can, affordable, but as Hard Drive.
Posted on Reply
#19
wheresmycar
300TB?

Forget enterprise solutions, if likely, i'm still hoping one day we'll have decent consumer 4TB SSDs for ~£150 or 8TB for around the £300 mark. Or am i being too wishful?
Posted on Reply
#20
kapone32
enb141Yes you can, affordable, but as Hard Drive.
Too bad HDD was like 7 years ago and not in my current array.
Posted on Reply
#21
TheoneandonlyMrK
wheresmycar300TB?

Forget enterprise solutions, if likely, i'm still hoping one day we'll have decent consumer 4TB SSDs for ~£150 or 8TB for around the £300 mark. Or am i being too wishful?
Very noice.

Agreed:).


I mean in reality they often need a third of their space clear to maintain pace. So to me 4=3, 8=6 useable.

And yes It's Friday ffff it, I said one ratio then another day, it's vague but about ish :/ :)
Posted on Reply
#22
nomdeplume
Hot diggity dang, a chart that nearly reaches full vertical rise before charted timeline is concluded!

Posted on Reply
#23
FiRe
SSD sizes have stagnated for a while in both 2.5" and M.2 variants
Posted on Reply
#24
wheresmycar
TheoneandonlyMrKVery noice.

Agreed:).


I mean in reality they often need a third of their space clear to maintain pace. So to me 4=3, 8=6 useable.

And yes It's Friday ffff it, I said one ratio then another day, it's vague but about ish :/ :)
I don't even know what the recommended partition is... i just part-off 10% on all my SATA/NVME SSDs (the quality stuff). Maybe the poorer quality and less performance units demand a greater ratio
Posted on Reply
#25
Octavean
nomdeplumeHot diggity dang, a chart that nearly reaches full vertical rise before charted timeline is concluded!

Bish, bash, bosh; asymptote!!!
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 21st, 2024 11:39 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts