TMS unveils 2.5GB/s 900GB PCI Express SSD

TMS unveils 2.5GB/s 900GB PCI Express SSD

The RamSan-70 boasts sustained read rates of 2.5GB/s and up to 1,200,000 IOPS - but you'll have to dig deep if you want one in your system.

For the storage fan with money to burn, Texas Memory Systems (TMS) has announced what it claims is the world's fastest PCI Express-connected flash-powered solid-state drive: the RamSan-70.

Using 685GB of single-level cell (SLC) NAND flash parts - of which 450GB is usable, with the rest given over to overprovisioning and RAID parity storage for reliability and performance purposes - alongside a hefty on-board PowerPC CPU, TMS claims that its RamSan-70 can hit 2,500MB/s sustained read with between 300K-1,200K read input/output operations per second (IOPS) and 220K-440K write IOPS, along with a write latency of 30 microseconds. This bandwidth is sustained through an 8x PCI Express 2.0 connection to the host.

TMS claims it's the fastest flash-based SSD around, and it's hard to argue: rival products like the OCZ RevoDrive 3 max out at around 1,000MB/s read and 130,000 write IOPS to the RamSan-70's 2,500MB/s and 440,000 write IOPS. With figures like that, the RamSan-70 is likely to prove popular with IO-heavy enterprise users with deep pockets - and doubly so with the inclusion of integrated RAID-5 support to maintain data integrity should a single chip fail, on-board ECC error-checking and the availability of an optional mezzanine card which doubles the usable capacity to 900GB/s.

Before you get excited, however, there's one key point in TMS's marketing: the RamSan-70 is a professional product for professional users. Its use of SLC NAND flash, rather than the cheaper multi-level cell (MLC), means stunning performance but at a serious cost. Although an official selling price isn't available, we're going to conservatively put this in the box marked 'after our numbers come up on the Lottery.'

More information, and a link to request a quote should you have a significantly larger budget than ours, is available on the official website.


Discuss in the forums Reply
Showerhead 1st August 2012, 16:46 Quote
Nope purely Nvidia cards for Physx.
Blarte 1st August 2012, 16:47 Quote
was worth the ask.. never mind. Ta Showers
Harlequin 1st August 2012, 16:47 Quote
a spare gtx 580 oO
TaRkA DaHl 1st August 2012, 18:50 Quote
Would you count "l will take that SPARE 580 off your hands" as sarky? As I am really willing to help clear some desk space for you. I'm that nice.
GoodBytes 1st August 2012, 19:39 Quote
Even if you COULD, the Intel graphic solution won't be able to handle it. Well it would be CPU based really, as Intel graphic solution is still depending on the CPU, and doesn't have a dedicated processor like Nvidia's or AMD. While it will work, you are better off purchasing a 25-35$ Nvidia GPU for this. You are most likely going to get more performance over Intel's.. IF it worked on Intel.
Elton 1st August 2012, 19:59 Quote
The problem with PhysX is the fact that it's hobbled for CPUs. If not it would be great. The best alternative? Grab a GT430 or something similar and offload physX on that. But it's debatable if that's even worth it.

Just SLI those 580s!
Harlequin 1st August 2012, 21:25 Quote

theres 23 titles which use gpu accerlated physx

18 of them are games

and only 2 released in the last 18 months.
rollo 1st August 2012, 22:07 Quote
mafia 2 looks awesome with physics but its a huge performance hit for what it does.
Teelzebub 1st August 2012, 23:02 Quote
Originally Posted by Elton
The problem with PhysX is the fact that it's hobbled for CPUs. If not it would be great. The best alternative? Grab a GT430 or something similar and offload physX on that. But it's debatable if that's even worth it.

Just SLI those 580s!

This, A 580 for PhysX is sooo OTT
Blarte 2nd August 2012, 10:44 Quote
I still have one of the first physx cards in my desk draw. a BFG Aegia card (think thats how its spelt)
Parge 2nd August 2012, 11:32 Quote
Yeah, an 8800GT would do for PhysX, a 580 GTX for PhysX is a total waste.
Instagib 2nd August 2012, 11:38 Quote
Buuutt, leaving a gtx580 unused is a total waste too!
Deders 2nd August 2012, 17:40 Quote
For a few of the newer games an 8800GT would give you a decrease, Fermi cores are much more efficient with these calculations. I've done a few benchmarks to prove it with my old 9800GTX+ slotted alongside my current 560TI.

I know Arkham Asylum would dynamically drop GPU Physx calculations on the fly if it didn't have enough shaders to calculate them on, I'd expect Arkham City to do the same.

Having powerful enough Physx card would make for smoother gameplay so long as the main graphics card can still maintain full PCIe bandwidth or has a lot of memory so it doesn't need to swap data and textures to and from off the system memory.

I used to find it handy to divide my graphics power in my old SLI system if I needed to dedicate one of the cards to Physx calculations.

I'm not saying that a 580 is the ideal solution but if you already have one with a PSU able to handle it (not that Physx calculations draw much power compared to the main GPU) and you play games with PhysX enough then it might be worth putting it in.
Harlequin 2nd August 2012, 17:46 Quote
IIRC in mafia 2 , you really wanted at peast a 9800GTX for physx , ideally a GTX 260
Deders 2nd August 2012, 18:07 Quote
I think Mafia II was one of the games that slowed down when I tried my 9800GTX+ alongside my 560TI

Edit: either that or the minor improvement wasn't worth taking up half my PCIe bandwidth for.
Blarte 3rd August 2012, 10:36 Quote
I have a Asus GeneZ68 with a slightly oc'd 2600k around 4.2 ghtz Will be picking up a 690 today and of the 580, Using a 1000w modular PSU (think its a Corsair one, I forget) SSD and two mechanical HDD, a Pump (laing D5vario) and 9 fans

I am assuming the 1000w will be sufficient for running the two GPU's ..ah well if its not I'll see later I guess huh
Blarte 3rd August 2012, 11:03 Quote 793w answered my own query ..
Deders 3rd August 2012, 12:59 Quote
You might find it's possible to configure the card to use 1 of the gpu's on the 690 for Physx when you need to.
bulldogjeff 4th August 2012, 09:38 Quote
Originally Posted by Parge
Yeah, an 8800GT would do for PhysX, a 580 GTX for PhysX is a total waste.

He did have a GTX8800, but it's now
Elton 4th August 2012, 19:19 Quote
I would just sell the GTX580. I'm pretty sure you could offload PhysX to one of the 690s while in SLi.
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