for prices, http://www.pcper.com/news/Storage/Samsung-SSD-EVO-suggested-pricing-revealed
Samsung lifts lid on 1.6TB flash whopper spaffing data at 3GB/s
Samsung has developed its first NVMe-connected 3,000MB/s solid-state drive (SSD). And it is extending its three-bit-per-cell range of flash storage with a 1TB whopper. NVMe stands for Non-Volatile Memory Express, and is a standardised protocol for applications to access data stored on PCIe-connected SSDs via a software driver …
-
-
-
-
Thursday 18th July 2013 17:32 GMT Sandtitz
Obvious troll is obvious
Oh yes, the wonderful world of Amiga and the zealot users. Apparently paying less is stupid these days.
The PC has always had DMA channels. That was when "Commodore" actually meant either PET2001 or VIC-20.
Amiga users really had to donate livers and pay through the nose to have equipment that was pretty much standard on PC's back then - real time clock, hard drives, even a secondary disk drive was much more expensive than the PC equivalent. Not to mention the paltry 512kB memory standard on A1000/A500.
I should know, I too was on the Commodore bandwagon back then.
-
Thursday 18th July 2013 18:43 GMT JEDIDIAH
Re: Obvious troll is obvious
You're on crack. Simply on crack. There was no point in time where Amiga kit was more expensive than PC kit.
When half a meg was "paltry", you would be hard pressed to find more on a clone. If you did manage to find a better equipped (upgraded) clone, then it likely wasn't cheap either.
It took PC gear a long time to catch up to Amiga and everyone else. It took PC operating systems even longer.
What memory you had on an Amiga you could use without any hacks or shenanigans.
-
-
-
-
-
Thursday 18th July 2013 20:12 GMT jcrb
And the write performance is?
Not even mentioned.
Not even sequential write numbers?
Going to guess that means they are so horrific that they would rather leave us guessing than even just quote sequential write bandwidth much less random IOPs.
Mixed performance numbers? Yeah I'm guessing those might not be so great either
-
-
Friday 19th July 2013 01:50 GMT jcrb
Re: And the write performance of the XS1715 is?
Not even mentioned for the XS1715
Not even sequential write numbers for the XS1715
Going to guess that means they are so horrific that they would rather leave us guessing than even just quote sequential write bandwidth much less random IOPs for the XS1715
Mixed performance numbers? Yeah I'm guessing those might not be so great either for the XS1715
There I fixed my post... happy now?
-
-
Friday 19th July 2013 04:38 GMT Anonymous Coward
"The Korean biz claims 740,000 random read IOPS for this NVMe product, not quite matching the 750,000 of Micron's P320h and P420m."
Oh yes, those extra 1% random read IOs - and who knows how each manufacturer measures those. Samsung's claims are essentially matching those of Micron, not "not quite matching".