Corsair Shatters SSD Affordability Barrier

[Mussels]

Still well over $2/GB, and after MIR. This isn't "shattering" anything by a long shot.

compared to last years prices, it shattering.

 

[Thrackan]

compared to last years prices, it shattering.

I couldn't agree Moore A year in computer hardware terms is half a lifetime.

 

[scaminatrix]

You can do without pagefile. But you need loads of RAM.

This is what I'm saying. Why would I buy a ton of RAM, have to buy a new mobo to support it and most likely CPU/s, when I could just buy 1 of these?
12 - 16 GB of RAM probably won't do it as my project files vary from 25 - 50 GB of imported media.
25 - 50 GB of RAM to avoid using a pagefile is NOT cost effective for me.
1 of these to use as a pagefile is.

 

[Mussels]

having tons of ram doesnt mean shit, if the files are IN ram. SSD's are faster to load from, so they're better than HDD's to load files from when they arent in ram.

 

[TechnicalFreak]

Is this offer only for residents in the US, or does it apply to countries in the EU? Because over here, if you want more than 1 of them SSD disks you have to have a thick wallet..

 

[brandonwh64]

Is this drive already out for sale?

 

[Fourstaff]

Is this drive already out for sale?

Corsair Nova CSSD-V32GB2-BRKT 2.5" 32GB SATA II In...

All gone

 

[brandonwh64]

70mb sequential? doesn't that suck?

 

[Shyska]

This is what I'm saying. Why would I buy a ton of RAM, have to buy a new mobo to support it and most likely CPU/s, when I could just buy 1 of these?
12 - 16 GB of RAM probably won't do it as my project files vary from 25 - 50 GB of imported media.
25 - 50 GB of RAM to avoid using a pagefile is NOT cost effective for me.
1 of these to use as a pagefile is.

You lost my point here.
No matter what you have for pagefile, it will be many thousand times slower than RAM anyway, so no big difference. The goal is to stay instructions away from pagefile as much as possible.

But if you have 50GB of data to load to RAM at once, than

 

[Frick]

You lost my point here.
No matter what you have for pagefile, it will be many thousand times slower than RAM anyway, so no big difference. The goal is to stay instructions away from pagefile as much as possible.

But if you have 50GB of data to load to RAM at once, than

When you're working with HD movies you fill out the ram pretty fast.

And as for filling up a netbook, ya well they're not meant to be a desktop replacement anyway so that's really a personal reference. I've had the laptop in sig for a year now, and i still have about 25GB free.

 

[Shyska]

When you're working with HD movies you fill out the ram pretty fast.

And as for filling up a netbook, ya well they're not meant to be a desktop replacement anyway so that's really a personal reference. I've had the laptop in sig for a year now, and i still have about 40GB free.

We'll I don't work with video, so can't argue that.

Still
If you need to go from town A to town B. You usually drive motorway and some 120km/h. If you run out of gas, there is no real difference if you push your car at 0.01km/h or 0.02km/h

P.S. seems like we are getting off topic here...

 

[xu^]

when u can buy a 1tb ssd for a similar price of a normal hdd is when i'll buy an ssd , until then , they can charge what they like , cos im not buying

 

[n-ster]

perfect for the access time... some of you guys don't understand what a difference SSDs can make in general performance of the computer... Also, this is a gen 2 drive, not a gen 1, so TRIM!

 

[RejZoR]

having tons of ram doesnt mean shit, if the files are IN ram. SSD's are faster to load from, so they're better than HDD's to load files from when they arent in ram.

The only problem here is that we are talking about 32GB drive. USELESSSSSSSSS

 

[Mussels]

The only problem here is that we are talking about 32GB drive. USELESSSSSSSSS

no it isnt. i'd love one of these for an OS drive, with a mechanical drive for everything else. makes the system quieter when just web surfing, and makes it snappier too.

 

[Papahyooie]

All you people naysaying on using this as a pagefile drive, youre not taking into account the fact that no matter how much ram you have, you could have 128 gb of ram, and windows will still actively use a pagefile. It's simply built-in and can't be changed. Not to mention the programs being used are likely built to use it. And it doesn't matter how much ram you have, the files are going to have to be stored eventually when the computer is shut down. And video editing would be a perfect niche for these drives. The files could be saved and read from the drive, then when either finished or backed up, would be moved to a mechanical HD.

 

[Thrackan]

All you people naysaying on using this as a pagefile drive, youre not taking into account the fact that no matter how much ram you have, you could have 128 gb of ram, and windows will still actively use a pagefile. It's simply built-in and can't be changed. Not to mention the programs being used are likely built to use it. And it doesn't matter how much ram you have, the files are going to have to be stored eventually when the computer is shut down. And video editing would be a perfect niche for these drives. The files could be saved and read from the drive, then when either finished or backed up, would be moved to a mechanical HD.

The page file can be disabled and removed. Currently running without one.

 

[scaminatrix]

You lost my point here.
No matter what you have for pagefile, it will be many thousand times slower than RAM anyway, so no big difference. The goal is to stay instructions away from pagefile as much as possible.

But if you have 50GB of data to load to RAM at once, than

No, I get your point. I know L3>L2>L1>RAM>HDD. It's beginner's stuff.
And your other point... I said that I didn't want to waste a 640GB HDD on a pagefile. If this SSD comes to UK in the same price region as the 640GB WDCB 6GB/s, then I'd rather have the SSD. I'd be stupid not to.
I can stash it up in my PC case easier than a HDD, it's quieter, it won't make me feel like I'm wasting 600GB, etc. It's not just the performance factor, these appeal to ME for a lot of reasons.
I've got a Silverstone Raven 2 and I've run out of space for HDD's. Had to order an Evercool Armour to make use to the 5.25" bays, with a total of 6 HDD's in there but not enough space for more... SSD's to the rescue!
But, as brandonwh64 pointed out, that write speed does look a bit gammy.

My point to RejZoR is that it's impossible for ME to avoid a pagefile without an extra £1000 spare.
Or I could just get 1 of these drives and save £900.
That reason alone makes this drive far from useless for ME

Where's TIGR when you need him? This is his area of expertise!

 

[Shyska]

scaminatrix, you should try and see what is your RAM hit rate. I suspect that your pagefile is not used that much if the PC is not crawling.

Use perfmon (just type to start bar) and add counter memory->Pages/sec. This will show you memory hard faults (when data needs to be retrieved from pagefile rather than cache). There are also counters that will show you real pagefile usage.

And it's L1>L2>L3>RAM>HDD

All I'm saying is that there is a common misunderstanding that a pagefile should be put on a fastest storage available. As in fact there is very little difference if it is on a 200MB/s drive or on a 50MB/s. There will be no noticeable difference for the user - if the hard fault rate is high, the system will crawl anyway.
So at the end - use the fastest store for useful stuff like OS files, program files or even documents first. And only then, if there is still space available, pagefile.

 

[scaminatrix]

And it's L1>L2>L3>RAM>HDD

:facepalm: @ me. Can't beleive I just did that! Been drinking a bit...

I know, I understand, we're just on slightly different wavelengths. Even if I get no performance gain, I can stick this SSD nicely away in my case and maybe actually have some room for my card reader. There's more than one reason I'm considering getting 1/2 of these!

 

[Shyska]

Sure, I would love one too

 

[TIGR]

"Affordable" is a relative term. At ~$2.16 per GB, they're 43 times more expensive than the $0.05 per GB I usually pay for HDDs. Read/write speed has no impact on my perception of this SSD's value, since, with RAID 0, a few HDDs can whoop this SSD in that area while still being $0.05 per GB. For $0.10 per GB, I can have completely redundant data storage with RAID 1. Or, with RAID 10, completely redundant storage and higher read/write speeds.

Then there's noise, power consumption, and heat. The difference between any decent HDD and an SSD will be going from "very quiet" to silent, and 5-10w of power consumption per HDD, and a couple degrees of heat dumped into the case per HDD. The degree to which these things matter will vary from system to system and user to user, but to me, a couple degrees, several watts, and the elimination of an already-quiet noise from the computer is not worth paying even double the price per GB, much less 43 times. And of course, most systems out there that have SSDs will still have an HDD as well, because most of us have more data to store than we can fit on any SSD we can afford.

Which leaves us with latency, the SSD's "killer feature." It makes things "feel snappy." Very nice, but can latency alone increase your gaming FPS, multimedia conversion/encoding/rendering performance, data compression rate, encryption/decryption/file copying speed, or any other kind of performance other than making things that already only take a few seconds, take a few milliseconds?

I have no doubt that SSDs are the future of data storage. I like them and the way they make a system feel. I've used them in dozens of builds and the customers loved them. Their performance and price have both improved drastically over the past few years. I look forward to saying good-bye to HDDs more than I can put into words. And I believe they are priced about as low as they reasonably can be, given today's raw NAND flash memory costs.

But "affordable?" Maybe compared to some other SSDs. But in the cases of myself personally as well as the majority of my customers, these do not offer anything needed, much less at a price that makes them what I'd consider a "cost-effective alternative" to HDDs (single or in one type of RAID or another, as appropriate to the situation).

More power to those for whom these are a good choice; I'm just sharing my own perspective because to me, "affordable" does not apply.

 

[zithe]

Corsair Nova CSSD-V32GB2-BRKT 2.5" 32GB SATA II In...

Surprise, surprise!

The only problem here is that we are talking about 32GB drive. USELESSSSSSSSS

3x32 for 240 in raid 0 or a single 96gb for 250? You don't usually use a high capacity drive for your OS, and you're not going to get better price/performance than this for a while.

 

[Papahyooie]

The page file can be disabled and removed. Currently running without one.

There's several threads here and elsewhere about that. You tell windows not to use one, it's likely still using one. If you did manage to completely get rid of it (which is possible, but not simply through the normal method of changing your pagefile size to 0) then you are actually crippling many programs that are designed to use it (including windows.)

 

[RejZoR]

no it isnt. i'd love one of these for an OS drive, with a mechanical drive for everything else. makes the system quieter when just web surfing, and makes it snappier too.

What, 20 sec less on boot time? It's not like i'd have to reboot my system every 30 minutes. Cold boot takes less than 60 seconds anyway. Quieter? I hardly ever hear it and pretty much anything starts up in a fraction of a second. I don't see any point in wasting money on useless SSD. I'd rather buy fast HDD. And i did.