Intel reveals high-density 3D NAND in partnership with Micron

Quote:

---

Potential for 2mm-thick 1TB SSDs.

---

Read more.

Quote:

---

For the mobile market Intel expects to be able to produce 1TB SSDs boasting a thickness of just two millimetres.

---

Haven't Intel been watching the furore over overly-thin iPhone6+ bending? What the eff is it these days with seemingly everyone believing that "thinner is better". And don't get me started on size 0 models...

Anyway before I rant myself into apoplexy - if Intel can produce a 1TB 2mm thick SSD then why not produce an SSD at 6mm thick (so thinner than the standard 7mm) but with 3TB capacity. I bet that there'd be a lot more market for that 3TB "monster" - although perhaps not at the prices that Intel charge for their SSDs (last time I looked they were top of the heap as regards price).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crossy

Quote:

---

For the mobile market Intel expects to be able to produce 1TB SSDs boasting a thickness of just two millimetres.

---

Haven't Intel been watching the furore over overly-thin iPhone6+ bending? What the eff is it these days with seemingly everyone believing that "thinner is better". And don't get me started on size 0 models...

Anyway before I rant myself into apoplexy - if Intel can produce a 1TB 2mm thick SSD then why not produce an SSD at 6mm thick (so thinner than the standard 7mm) but with 3TB capacity. I bet that there'd be a lot more market for that 3TB "monster" - although perhaps not at the prices that Intel charge for their SSDs (last time I looked they were top of the heap as regards price).

---

Pretty sure that means the actual chip is 2mm. The actual device wouldn't be necessarily that thin. Notice below that it says ">10TB in a SSD".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crossy

Haven't Intel been watching the furore over overly-thin iPhone6+ bending? What the eff is it these days with seemingly everyone believing that "thinner is better"

---

Thinner IS better for components, how thick and reinforced the casing that goes around it is independent of the internals (obviously it can't be thinner than the parts within). Besides, the batteries are typically the bulkiest parts. I feel like this'll be good for tablets and convertibles.

hmmmmm me and my colleagues had the intel SSD, the funny thing is that in not full year of using all bout one died (9/10). I am not planning to buy next Intel ssd, i just dont trust their disks anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CustardInc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crossy

Haven't Intel been watching the furore over overly-thin iPhone6+ bending? What the eff is it these days with seemingly everyone believing that "thinner is better"

---

Thinner IS better for components, how thick and reinforced the casing that goes around it is independent of the internals (obviously it can't be thinner than the parts within). Besides, the batteries are typically the bulkiest parts. I feel like this'll be good for tablets and convertibles.

---

The casing thickness is probably inversely related to the component size, actually. Thinner components means a case the same size can be thicker, as there's more room inside.

The new ones will compare about the same when they run into that bottleneck called SATA3.

There's nothing really new about Intel teaming up with Micron for NAND flash development and production considering they've had a joint venture since 2006 appropriately named IM Flash.

I'm with crossy though. Enough with all that "thin and slim" nonsense. I'd much rather have a cheap 2.5" SSD with 1 TB+ to replace my aging (spinning) disks.

I shall look forward to the day when I can have six of those bad boys in my NUC or BRIXs.