Comments Locked

18 Comments

Back to Article

  • imaheadcase - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    What is the deal with these coming to consumers? Just price?

    Since no price is listed, I assume its out of reach for most people..

    I had no idea these had such high capacity.
  • Kristian Vättö - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    It's an enterprise SSD. There is no price because it will ship through server OEMs (e.g. Dell and IBM), so ultimately pricing is up to the OEMs.
  • person5e9@gmail.com - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    I think Dell and IBM are VARs in this case. The OEM is HGST. And Anandtech could post the price to VARs, just like they post the volume pricing of CPUs.
  • hlmcompany - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    If the likes of Dell, IBM, etc. integrate this product into their servers, then they are the OEM. They would also carry the warranty, not HGST.
  • Kristian Vättö - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    I guess it's a matter of how you want to put it. Technically Dell and IBM could be seen as VARs but generally I see the term OEM used quite a lot, probably more than it should (of course, in this case, Dell and IBM are server OEMs, not SSD OEMs).

    HGST hasn't published any price (even for VARs/OEMs), which is fairly normal in the SSD market. Usually there are only a handful of OEM customers, whereas Intel CPUs are used by a countless number of OEMs and SIs.
  • mmrezaie - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    still I think it should be cheaper than intel's solution. latency is higher and scalability is worst.
  • djepson - Saturday, August 23, 2014 - link

    Not true
  • imaheadcase - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    I understand that, but people get hands on OEM stuff all the time and use it. Still does not answer if a market is for consumers any time soon.
  • djepson - Saturday, August 23, 2014 - link

    We priced the cards lower than the FlashmaxII and we do offer them to end users as well as OEMs and SI's. dan.jepson@hgst.com. Cheers
  • OreoCookie - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    I'd assume they won't be cheap.
  • djepson - Saturday, August 23, 2014 - link

    Less expensive than a SAN
  • mgl888 - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    2.7GB/s seems slow for a 32 channel design. Using 8GB dies, they'd have to have ~4 dies per channel, which should be enough to saturate an 100MHz ONFI DDR channel. Let's assume 200MB/s per channel - that's 6.4GB/s. They're able to achieve less than half of that?
  • extide - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    You're getting bits and bytes messed up. 200MB/sec is only 0.2GB/sec :)
  • mgl888 - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    Um.. no I'm not. 200MB/s = 0.2GB/s, and x32 channels - that's 6.4GB/s.
  • FaaR - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    There's obviously some internal inefficiencies that preclude this product working near theoretical max... Most people will probably be quite happy with almost 3GB/s disk I/O... :)

    What surprises me is the rather high power dissipation, 25W is some serious wattage; especially for that tiny little passive heatsink. Surely forced aircooling will be a requirement to stop this thing literally frying itself into expensive silicon scrap.
  • FunBunny2 - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    Anyone remember an SSD with such pitiful RW IOPS relative to RR IOPS????
  • extide - Monday, August 18, 2014 - link

    Interesting that they are shipping an FPGA based design. I wonder if it is Xylinx or Alterra.
  • Alex Smith - Tuesday, June 23, 2015 - link

    "Samsung's XS1715 (which we will be reviewing soon!)"

    I can't seem to find a review, and it's been almost a year...?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now