News KingMax goes after OCZ with sub-£1000 1TB SSD

KingMax has launched a 1TB 2.5in SSD in Japan which retails for under £1,000.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2012/05/07/kingmax-sub-1000-1tb-ssd/1

 

Coming from a place where counterfeit products like this are rife, and where flash drives and memory cards are sold (badly) formatted to WAY above their actual capacity (a 256MB pen drive configured and formatted to appear as a 32GB drive, for instance), I'd have to say "Seems Legit" on this one.

 

this is Japan...
not China...

 

as a system drive, its lifespan would be around 4 yrs, so yeah, great value....NOT

 

Based on what?

 

based on the fact that ssd's performance gets worse over time as the read/write cycle takes its toll......ssd's only have a limited number of writes.....iv got optical drives from 1999 that still work, still protecting data, I doubt you would be able to say that about ssd's 12yrs from now....unless its been switched off for that period...

 

I am not sure your lifespan figures are correct, and to be honest it looks like its very dependant on the drive.

If you have a look at this thread http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?271063-SSD-Write-Endurance-25nm-Vs-34nm there has been some extensive testing of ssd writes and most modern SSDs seem to start to fail after ~250-500TB of write data, with the Corsair Force 3 managing over 1000TB!

As one user posts, even with an average of 20GB written to the drive everyday, that would still translate to only 36TB of data written over 5 years. Therefore, even the worst drives are surely going to outlast any system build.

I am no expert on this but based on what I have read your assumpotion of SSDs seems to be incorrect unless you can show me otherwise?

 

But you've taken a known fact (That flash memory can only re-write a certain number of times) and extrapolated that to a figure (4 years) without demonstrating you have uses sound logic to make this connection.

Basically, show us your math along with your sources, and obviously don't forget to include the over provisioning figures in your calculations.

 

the failure rate for flash will probably be higher than the service life. Not to mention mechanical drives do suffer from mechanical failures which are sudden at catastrophic

 

really !, id like to see you counter my case with the same credentials, which you havnt, you just posted a link, try harder next time

 

1st and 2nd generation ssd's are already starting to fail, iv lost count how many iv had to replace in the last 3 months alone, my reps are going mental with the cost, although, those drives were involved in audio and video streaming, probably doing around 200gb per day, still, id expect an optical drive to last at least twice as long as an ssd in that situation, im going from what happens in my life, not a flow chart in lab conditions...ssd's are improving, but not nearly as much as I would expect, the only thing that my company likes em for, is the speed, but the failure rate and the cost is a major flaw....and sticking to the article, a 1tb ssd just makes no sense given the price, especially given the performance that iv seen over the last 3 yrs.

 

do the math, even if the drive lasts 8 yrs, (which it wont), thats £175 per yr your paying for your storage, an optical drive is TEN times cheaper, it used to be the fact I had to replace RAM modules before hdd's, thats not the case anymore......which is quite ironic...