Read more.Claims it's the world's largest capacity SAS SSD currently shipping.
Read more.Claims it's the world's largest capacity SAS SSD currently shipping.
Don't suppose Samsung would be willing to offer you a few of these for a potential competition?
Seriously though, if only I had the superfluous cash, I'd love to replace my 4x 3TB drives (2 in PC, 2 in D-Link NAS) with either of the larger two of those drives.
@Mark Tyson: just to confirm, is that 15.36TB (decimal) or TiB (binary)? Doesn't make much difference, just curious. I'm presuming it's probably decimal, as with all other drives I've ever seen.
Would just be able to fit my Star Citizen install on that
Jon
COSTS as much as a series of Titan Z's in Quad SLI setup with a questionable life span.
I've been waiting for higher capacity SSD's to become available and affordable but the recent Google SSD data seems to suggest that age rather than usage of SSD's is the biggest factor in failure. That's not good news for long term backup requirements.
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
It's targeting the enterprise. Most of the smart storage players now have flash aware storage systems that can handle some of the flash disadvantages.
I predict silly capacity all flash storage arrays being on sale in the not too distant future. i.e. in excess of 6 PB per rack and about 45 Million IOPS. There will be big data stickers all over said rack as well I suspect.
"In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."
I'm curious as to when the whole TB and TiB thing became a thing because I grew up always knowing that a (prefix: kilo, mega, giga, tera, etc...)byte was 1024^X bytes I had never heard of said "binary" notation until just last year. Also I have never met a person in real life who does computer programming ever reference a 1024^X amount of bytes in the "binary" notation I have only seen them use the standard notation of KB, MB, GB, TB, etc... but still meant 1024^X.
Really? I've seen this problem discussed for decades.
The problem is that hard drive manufacturers use the correct definition of MB, GB, TB etc. but then operating systems report data sizes in MiB, GiB and TiB etc. but label them as MB, GB, TB etc.
It's why a lot of people always complain that they buy a certain size hard drive and find it's smaller when formatted.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)