SSD prices will continue to tumble in 2019 says report

[HEXUS]

In 2018 NAND flash prices halved, in 2019 we may see a larger drop, says Adata boss.

Read more.

[Moonister]

next article - SSD price fixing prior to 2018

[Iota]

Wake me up when I can get enough SSD storage capacity at a decent price to store all of my games and other related media.

[Ttaskmaster]

Wake me up when I can get enough SSD storage capacity at a decent price to store all of my games and other related media.

Define decent price and specify how much storage?

There's a WD combo pack comprising one 1Tb and one 500GB for £130... is that good?
Scrub that - I fell for the trap!!

I assume that, like me, you'd look to have games on one SSD, movies and music on another, photos and files on another, etc?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Define decent price and specify how much storage?
There's a WD combo pack comprising one 1Tb and one 500GB for £130... is that good?

I assume that, like me, you'd look to have games on one SSD, movies and music on another, photos and files on another, etc?

Where did you see that??

[philehidiot]

I'm looking at 100GB remaining on my primary drive and wondering if it's worth consolidating all steam games and so on onto one 1TB high spec M.2 drive. But to be honest I'll probably just delete a few games that I don't play to make room (EDIT - make room for any newer ones). I think the prices of the decent 500GB drives are now thoroughly acceptable and 1TB is getting there. the MP510 is under £120 now at 500GB.

Given the advantages of an SSD I think that you'd be utterly insane not to use one for your system disc and regularly used programs. Including games as the level load times are VASTLY quicker. Beyond this, if you have music / film collection in the terabytes then obviously it's not going to be vulnerable to the deficiencies of a HDD and so cheap high volume storage makes sense. If you're a creative working with large files then an SSD or even Optane might be down your street.

If you have loads more games installed than you can afford SSD space then you can install games on different drives even under Steam. Regularly used or more modern games with bigger textures, etc on the SSD whereas less used and older games on the HDD. There's a balance to be had but you're losing out if you're avoiding an SSD purely because you can't fit everything on one.

[Ttaskmaster]

Where did you see that??

Never mind. I just had a closer look, having previously just skimmed the list for an idea of general SSD prices.

It was very cunningly worded and photographed to imply both were SSDs... when the 1TB is actually an HDD.

I knew there was a reason I hated Western Digital...!!

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Never mind. I just had a closer look, having previously just skimmed the list for an idea of general SSD prices.

It was very cunningly worded and photographed to imply both were SSDs... when the 1TB is actually an HDD.

I knew there was a reason I hated Western Digital...!!

It depends - if it is reasonably priced it might be still a decent deal.

[The Hand]

Considering the number of EBuyer sales emails and Amazon suggestions for SSDs I've recieved recently, I'm thinking they have been worried about the price dropping for a while. Desperate to shift stock etc.

[DevDrake]

good, now do something with RAM.

[Iota]

Define decent price and specify how much storage?

....[snip]

I assume that, like me, you'd look to have games on one SSD, movies and music on another, photos and files on another, etc?

I think it's more the overall capacity of the drives at a "decent" price range, for me I think around £30-50 per 1TB is where I start thinking about it, however it entirely depends on the overall SSD itself. Closest I've seen is the Crucial MX500 which has suitable trade offs, but it's still too expensive for the capacity. Especially when you can get a decent NAS drive with 10TB for similar price to capacity ratios.

Minimum I'd need is 6TB for games without having to uninstall / reinstall games depending on what I want to play, so 10TB is the region I'd be looking at capacity wise. I don't have an issue with slightly smaller capacity drives and using a Raid array to increase performance for games, but it's simply the cost that is inhibiting currently. I'd go with spinning rust... but I've got used to faster speeds now.

[mers]

Am I missing something? SSD's should have been cheaper from the off. I cannot believe it's more expensive to produce an SSD than a mechanical one , assembly and internal parts alone should make a mechanical drive dearer on a production basis. It's not new tech now ,we've had them for years.I put an SDD in my seldom used laptop and gave it a new lease of life , nice thank you. As far as my PC goe's , yes, as a system drive ,not a storage. Least with mechanical drives you normally get warnings as to when a failure may be possible and possibly recover. As far as I understand with an SSD , gone is gone , no warning. Hence I make system back up's to other mechanical drives , Dvd's or sticks.I think the price of SSD's have been inflated for years and the manufacturers have been loving it.

[philehidiot]

Iota, Do you not have an SSD for the OS? Obviously it wouldn't be sensible to stick a games library on SSD at that volume but I would never ever go back to a HDD for the system disc (or is that a system chip now?) as the responsiveness is just so much better. You don't even need a particularly good one - that Crucial MX isn't bad and will certainly be enough to provide a decent improvement.

I honestly believe that consumer level SSDs are the biggest improvement to PC performance to have emerged in the past 10 years.

[terrence81]

Cool
If you ask me they might be even for free

[Iota]

Do you not have an SSD for the OS? Obviously it wouldn't be sensible to stick a games library on SSD at that volume but I would never ever go back to a HDD for the system disc (or is that a system chip now?) as the responsiveness is just so much better. You don't even need a particularly good one - that Crucial MX isn't bad and will certainly be enough to provide a decent improvement.

I honestly believe that consumer level SSDs are the biggest improvement to PC performance to have emerged in the past 10 years.

Actually I have 4 in Raid 0 for the OS, I do backups and tbh drive failures don't really worry me (I've run Raid 0 for years prior to SSDs). I would stick a games library on SSDs, without hesitation if the price was comparable to a decent NAS drive. As to the Crucial, I have zero issue with the Micron produced drives, it's what is in my system now. That particular drive has decent reviews as well however at £140 for 1TB it just doesn't stack up to the capacity to be had with NAS drives at a much lower price point.

Sacrificing performance for price isn't really something I'm inclined to do.

Least with mechanical drives you normally get warnings as to when a failure may be possible and possibly recover. As far as I understand with an SSD , gone is gone , no warning.

I see this written a lot, I have to ask, do you not use anything to monitor drives that are S.M.A.R.T. capable? Even in Raid you still get to see the drive information (my SSDs are currently at 90% wear after 6-7 years of use and combined about 28TB of writes overall). It's not like it's really anything different to HDDs, which can fall foul to mechanical failures and bad sectors. Only thing is you're more likely to be able to recover information from a HDD, where the SSD simply doesn't work period after a power cycle once failed from what I've read.

[Griffinix]

I've actually been thinking of getting a 960GB Corsair MP 510. Does it really matter if the operating system and a bunch of other stuff are on the same partition on an SSD?