bit-tech.net

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

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

KingMax's new 1TB SSD, pictured by Japanese tech blog Akiba PC Hotline, comes in at less than half the price of OCZ's new Octane - albeit at half the throughput, too.

If you're in the market for a 1TB 2.5in solid-state drive (SSD) but can't stretch to OCZ's new £2,000 Octane, you might want to think about a trip to Japan where KingMax has launched the first sub-£1,000 1TB 2.5in SSD.

Spotted by local tech blog Akiba PC Hotline, KingMax's drive isn't quite as impressive as OCZ's Octane: sequential read and write speeds are given as 250MB/s and 200MB/s respectively, compared to the 460MB/s and 330MB/s of the Octane.

The drive is still comfortably faster than a 2.5in mechanical drive, however, and a serious upgrade for users who need improved performance but are unwilling to sacrifice on the capacity front.

Full details of the type of flash memory used in the device have not yet been released by KingMax, but the drive itself is a standard 2.5in form factor measuring 7mm thick - making it suitable for installation in a laptop as a replacement for an existing spinning-platter drive.

Unlike OCZ's Octane, which is currently available for pre-order at just shy of £2,000, it's also surprisingly affordable: at ¥119,800 retail, the KingMax 1TB SSD costs the equivalent of just £930 excluding taxes. While that's significantly more expensive than a traditional magnetic drive - the Toshiba MK1059GSM 2.5in 5,400RPM 1TB mechanical drive, by contrast, costs under £100 for the same capacity - it's proof that SSD pricing is on a downward trend.

If your appetite has been whetted, we've got one last piece of bad news: thus far, KingMax hasn't indicated that it has any plans to launch the device outside Japan, meaning you'll have to factor in the cost of a return plane ticket if you want to get your hands on 1TB of solid-state goodness.

11 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Anakha 7th May 2012, 19:53 Quote
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.
SaNdCrAwLeR 7th May 2012, 20:51 Quote
this is Japan...
not China...
misterd77 7th May 2012, 22:20 Quote
as a system drive, its lifespan would be around 4 yrs, so yeah, great value....NOT
mclean007 8th May 2012, 07:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mingemuncher
as a system drive, its lifespan would be around 4 yrs, so yeah, great value....NOT
Based on what?
misterd77 8th May 2012, 09:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mclean007
Quote:
Originally Posted by mingemuncher
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...
KiNETiK 8th May 2012, 09:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mingemuncher
as a system drive, its lifespan would be around 4 yrs, so yeah, great value....NOT

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?
Guinevere 8th May 2012, 10:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mingemuncher
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.....

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.
metarinka 9th May 2012, 18:57 Quote
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
misterd77 13th May 2012, 08:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinevere
Quote:
Originally Posted by mingemuncher
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.....

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.

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
misterd77 13th May 2012, 09:14 Quote
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.
misterd77 13th May 2012, 09:21 Quote
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...
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums