When will we see 3.5" SSD

[pjkenned]

so in comparison yes the SSD is virtually no power, but there's still plenty of power going through... something like 3W or so.

3W is really nothing especially given the surface area. You are talking Atom like power consumption with orders of magnitude more surface area. It isn't that they generate no heat, its just that they generate so little that unless you locate your SSD inside an easy bake oven, it isn't really an issue.

Compared to the farm of Savvio 15k.1's... there is little heat coming from these things.

 

[taltamir]

SSDs have been tested and show miniscule differences in temperature... sure they generate heat, but they don't generate NOTICEABLE amounts of heat... less then 0.1 of a degree IIRC.

 

[Yellowbeard]

Agreed on the heat. That's why I had no qualms about mounting an SSD to the top of a PSU.

 

[ScorcherDarkly]

Here ya go:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news...sus-series-ssd-bring-1tb-solid-state-storage/

 

[LokutusofBorg]

... The benefit of 3.5" SSD would be simply to save space in your case and not need an adaptor to make a 2.5" fit in your 3.5" case.

LOL. What? /boggle

 

[semo]

Here ya go:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news...sus-series-ssd-bring-1tb-solid-state-storage/

OCZ Colossus are 3.5".at that price you might as well go with a PCIe SSD 1tb-solid-state-storage/[/url]

were colossus drives not available in the US until now? I've seen them around for months

 

[jvroig]

I almost laughed out loud when I saw this thread again after the Colossus made the news recently.

People here mostly told the OP that it wasn't going to happen, there's no need for it, etc. Evidently, OCZ didn't get the memo

Of course, the reason is not really that OCZ needed more space, as I understood it. They just targeted the desktop market and wanted to spare the desktop customers the trouble of having to buy an adapter or zip ties or whatever other clever contraption. I guess the OP did get what he wanted.

 

[rcpratt]

People have known about the Colossus for at least 4 months, it's really not news. Nor is anything but the 128GB model going to sell much.

 

[jvroig]

People have known about the Colossus for at least 4 months, it's really not news.

Of course. What I meant when I said "made the news recently" is when a recent article in DT and similar tech sites talked about it.

Nor is anything but the 128GB model going to sell much.

Probably correct, but I hope not. I always hope that early adopters would be plenty, so that interest and R&D in the latest tech (in this case SSDs, particularly large capacity SSDs) would increase. Otherwise, it may take much more time to mature and reach mainstream status and pricing.

 

[pjkenned]

I still fail to see why a Colossus is a good deal for the price. If you have one SATA II connection and a set of internally Raid 0 drives on that cable, you are going to have max read throughput constrained by that single SATA II link.

If you have 2 drives in Raid 0, each more or less constrained by a single SATA II lane bandwidth (Indilinx, Samsung, and Intel drives are pretty close now) then in theory two 2.5" drives in raid 0 are going to have more available bandwidth... oh and the 3.5" single drive will take up more space than the 2x 2.5" drives.

The stranger thing is the Colossus costs more than two drives (assuming you shop for 2.5" drives) in many cases...

 

[taltamir]

I almost laughed out loud when I saw this thread again after the Colossus made the news recently.

People here mostly told the OP that it wasn't going to happen, there's no need for it, etc. Evidently, OCZ didn't get the memo

Of course, the reason is not really that OCZ needed more space, as I understood it. They just targeted the desktop market and wanted to spare the desktop customers the trouble of having to buy an adapter or zip ties or whatever other clever contraption. I guess the OP did get what he wanted.

I would say they did need the space... but that is because of the multi controller design (and multiple PCB on the 4x version).
A single controller + max miniaturization would fit in a 2.5
4 controllers + 4 ram units + 3 raid0 controllers + lots of chips that are NOT as space efficient as they CAN be (to save costs) = needs a 3.5 case to fit.

And I don't think people expected a multi controller design, it makes more sense to just buy multiple drives and raid0 them.