Read more.And we learn that Samsung has captured 41 per cent of the global SSD market in 2015.
Read more.And we learn that Samsung has captured 41 per cent of the global SSD market in 2015.
I hope PCI/E storage will drop in prices too.
I hope everything drops in price too. Then we would be better consumers.
Probably due in some small part to good marketing by Samsung. Remember the old "no one ever got fired for buying IBM" cliche? Well I'm hearing the same kind of stuff for Samsung's SSD's - despite the problems with the 840EVO. Kind of strange since I would have thought Crucial would have also got a similarly "good" reputation.In other SSD news today The Korea Herald noted that Samsung controls 41 per cent of the SSD market at this time.
Speaking of the EVO - it's coming up to the five-year anniversary for my current rig - so am I okay to replace my current 840EVO's with the 850EVO? That is, any problems with them yet? As in the nature of things I find I "need" larger SSD's so I'll be repurposing my 840's for a Linux rig. (And I'm too much of a cheapskate to want to fork out for 850PRO's)
Why replace, the 840s are still great drives.
Intel had the chance in the beginning to build and keep a grip on the SSD market BUT Intel did what they always do when they think they can dominate the market.
They slow down development and progress try to milk dry the existing technology as long as they could. Because of this Samsung over run them.
Intel should learn a thing or two from Samsung, if you push development and actually compete against your self with new products and constantly pushing the tech limit you give people new intensive to spend money upgrading.
My four last SSD has been Samsung, 830, 840 Pro, 850 Pro and now 950 Pro. I used Intel SSD before that and would have still today if they done what Samsung did.
Look at the PC market, Intel are complaining about the never ending down curve and still hope people will start upgrading their cpus even though there is only are small incremental upgrade for each generation.
Why upgrade if you not getting a big boost in performance, i still run a i7-2600K and it rocks, why upgrade to Skylake.
They will not start a main stream upgrade boost until they unleash hexa and octa core in the main stream performance segment.
I will absolutely not go socket 2011 because this was only created by Intel to try to milk money from people wanting more performance with deep pockets and keep the main stream with small upgrades and max quad core only.
It would be interesting if Samsung bought AMD and applied their SSD business/development strategy to AMD CPUs anfd GPUs. Would probably give Intel real competition that AMD fail to do.
Now Intel has a chance with its new memory technology 3D Xpoint, lets see if they can do it right this time.
But one thing i know is that Samsung is already partnering up with others to fight Intels new memory tech so the window of opportunity is not big for Intel to take back the SSD market, 3 years at most.
If they try to do 3D Xpoint in server market only and keep it from main stream they will see them self over run once again by Samsung or any other big player moving into the future with new memory tech.
Last edited by fynxer; 30-11-2015 at 11:01 PM.
Small correction here - I'm currently looking at a socket 2011 (actually 2011-v3) and they definitely aren't "max quad core only" - the Haswell-E parts start at hexacore (5920k/5930k) and run to octacore (5960k). On the other hand if you're looking at Xeon 2011-v3 parts then there's only two quad core parts, the rest are 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 18 cores. Although you'd need very, very, very deep pockets to get that 18 core!
Hmm, while Samsung undoubtedly has experience in semiconductors and mobile processors (Exynos), I'm not sure that this would necessarily transfer to server and desktop processors, and definitely got reservations that graphics designs would benefit from the input of "skills". On the other hand, as you say, a bit more marketing savvy and "urgency" wouldn't go amiss - especially for the desktop parts!
Like you though, I'm a bit nonplussed as to why Intel decided not to compete in the consumer SSD market - surely a downgraded version of their "enterprise" products would do? In the meantime, Samsung gets my SSD-buying pound/dollar (and will probably continue to do so).
Oh, and congratulations on your first Hexus post - welcome!
By saying 2011 i included v3 since it is a development of 2011. Also i was not clear enuf that i meant that 2011-v3 is high end, it is created by Intel to make more money from those who got deeper pockets, every thing in the 2011-v3 segment have a considerable higher profit margin for Intel than the socket 1151, that is why 2011-v3 only has a small percentage in the gaming market, according to Steam less than 5% has 6 cores or more. Info from: "Steam Hardware & Software Survey: October 2015"
Majority of gamers 95% run the main stream performance segment like socket 1150/1151/1156 and AMDs sockets, when hexa and octa core hits this segment from Intel gamers will go into an upgrade frenzy for sure.
From the info leaking there is buzz that Intel is working on at least an hexa core version for Carby Lake to be sure to be able to counter AMD Zen if it is a success. I just hope AMD goes out with an powerful Octa core with Zen for main stream gamers to finally put real pressure on Intel. I can almost guarantee that if it where not for AMD Zen coming 2016 we would not have seen an Hexa Core in Intels main stream performance segment for another couple years.
What i am also hearing is that if you want to get the new Carby Lake Hexa core cpu you absolutely have to buy a new motherboard with 200 series chipset, Hexa core will not run on 100 series chipset only Carby Lake quad/dual core. Well Intel is not stupid, they know games will go into an upgrade frenzy for Hexa core so they make sure you have to upgrade your motherboard also to maximize their profit. I just hope Intel fixes the shortcoming of the 100 series chipset with the new 200 series so i can maximize my value when upgrading.
By saying 2011 i included v3 since it is a development of 2011. Also i was not clear enuf that i meant that 2011-v3 is high end, it is created by Intel to make more money from those who got deeper pockets, every thing in the 2011-v3 segment have a considerable higher profit margin for Intel than the socket 1151, that is why 2011-v3 only has a small percentage in the gaming market, according to Steam less than 5% has 6 cores or more. Info from: "Steam Hardware & Software Survey: October 2015"
Majority of gamers 95% run the main stream performance segment like socket 1150/1151/1156 and AMDs sockets, when hexa and octa core hits this segment from Intel gamers will go into an upgrade frenzy for sure.
From the info leaking there is buzz that Intel is working on at least an hexa core version for Carby Lake to be sure to be able to counter AMD Zen if it is a success. I just hope AMD goes out with an powerful Octa core with Zen for main stream gamers to finally put real pressure on Intel. I can almost guarantee that if it where not for AMD Zen coming 2016 we would not have seen an Hexa Core in Intels main stream performance segment for another couple years.
What i am also hearing is that if you want to get the new Carby Lake Hexa core cpu you absolutely have to buy a new motherboard with 200 series chipset, Hexa core will not run on 100 series chipset only Carby Lake quad/dual core. Well Intel is not stupid, they know games will go into an upgrade frenzy for Hexa core so they make sure you have to upgrade your motherboard also to maximize their profit. I just hope Intel fixes the shortcoming of the 100 series chipset with the new 200 series so i can maximize my value when upgrading.
The 840 EVO's had major issues on launch (they could dig themselves into a hole with stupidly poor speeds once full). There's still this weird angle pushed of them being "the best" ssd's regardless.
What issues have there been with Crucial or Sandisk based SSD's? Now point out on a spec sheet why the Samsungs are better...
Not attacking personally, I just have a high disregard for the mindset (same goes for any brand. Nvidia, Intel, whatever. These are all just companies selling a product. They don't care about you, you're just money to them). Sandisk (ultra 2) 1TB's were being sold for £150 over the weekend. The £184 for a similar 1TB Samsung (850 evo) was more popular. That's nearly 20% more expensive...
..only when a 1Tb SSD costs less than £100 will we truly be in the age of the SSD.
Yes. Exactly my thoughts. For now it's pretty dumb that you can buy four 250GB SSD for less than one 1TB version.
I sense some price-fix in general. Every now and then some vendor decide to cut prices and every other manufacturer follows suit if they want to be in the game. And after brief period of calm again same thing happens just with different brand. And again and again. It's not like we never witnessed price fixing before.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)