[HN Gopher] WD announces enterprise 128TB SSD
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       WD announces enterprise 128TB SSD
        
       Author : doener
       Score  : 88 points
       Date   : 2024-08-06 18:00 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.tomshardware.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.tomshardware.com)
        
       | ComputerGuru wrote:
       | No price announced?
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | I think this probably falls under "if you have to ask, you
         | can't afford it".
        
           | yieldcrv wrote:
           | aka a boomer scam
           | 
           | everything has a market price
        
         | baruch wrote:
         | I believe pricing (in quantity, these usually do not sell by
         | single pieces) is around 6 cents a Gig so about $7680. I could
         | very well be wrong though, it's been a while since I heard
         | pricing of DC SSDs.
        
           | hypeatei wrote:
           | To be honest, that doesn't seem unreasonable. Obviously it's
           | steep for a homelab project but I could see small-medium
           | sized businesses buying that for on-prem needs.
        
             | Dylan16807 wrote:
             | It's much better than not unreasonable. If that price is
             | accurate it's competitive with consumer drives. The big
             | clouds would charge you 6 cents per gigabyte _per quarter_.
             | Add on RAID and you still break even after four months.
        
           | sumtechguy wrote:
           | the 128 also looks to be in proof of concept stage. The rest
           | of the articles seem to be for consumer being 8/16TB SSD
           | drives and 30TB spinning. With 64 being the the data center
           | sizes for this set of announcements.
        
         | elorant wrote:
         | You can get a 30TB nvme at about $3k. So that's probably four
         | times that? I would guess around $15k.
        
       | kelsey98765431 wrote:
       | These are for making raid systems with higher speed for graphing
       | systems, possibly for high speed swap memory for frontier model
       | cpu inference.
        
         | 1-6 wrote:
         | If it's for raid system, I would be less reserved about QLC.
        
       | radicality wrote:
       | Link to press release (since the link in the article is a
       | tracking link):
       | 
       | https://www.westerndigital.com/company/newsroom/press-releas...
        
       | porphyra wrote:
       | I really want a denser SSD to store my photo collection. My
       | current small form factor PC has two NVME PCIe slots and no room
       | for SATA drives. I have two 4 TB SSDs in there right now and it
       | seems that consumer SSDs basically cap out at 4 TB. I would
       | really love to get about 16 TB in my computer.
        
         | tracker1 wrote:
         | You can get 8tb drives, but they're well over 2x the cost of
         | 4tb drives. An external USB drive or multi-drive enclosure may
         | be more prudent though.
         | 
         | https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0CTTL9R7Z/
        
         | Coolbeanstoo wrote:
         | I'd like to find some good quality but slow nvmes, I dont need
         | super high speed for media serving but getting a lot of storage
         | (4x4tb/2x8tb ~) is much more expensive than hard drives. Itd be
         | nice to have a silent home server
        
           | Dylan16807 wrote:
           | Good quality has a baseline level of speed which is pretty
           | fast. There's not much you can cut at that point.
           | 
           | But cheap SSDs got down to 2x the price of hard drives last
           | year. Even after prices stabilized, they're at 3x. Flash
           | catching up relatively soon seems likely. Flash matching the
           | current price of hard drives seems even more likely.
        
             | Coolbeanstoo wrote:
             | Interesting, thanks. I'm quite hopeful to be hard drive
             | free at some point in my NAS
        
         | aeyes wrote:
         | 8TB: https://sabrent.com/products/sb-rktq-8tb
         | 
         | But your aren't going to like the price.
        
           | bornfreddy wrote:
           | Spoiler alert - price is $800 (regular price $2000).
        
             | blackeyeblitzar wrote:
             | That is not as bad as I expected
        
         | lldb wrote:
         | I use the Intel P4510 (8TB) and have been super impressed with
         | the performance. I also have some older WD SN200's that are
         | excellent MLC flash. You do need some active cooling for these
         | types of drives such as in the path of a fan.
         | 
         | As for controller I've had good luck with this one:
         | https://www.aliexpress.com/item/2255800570197081.html
        
         | milkshakes wrote:
         | https://nimbusdata.com/products/exadrive/specifications/
        
           | moffkalast wrote:
           | Funny.
        
           | rangerelf wrote:
           | OP did say "no room for SATA drives", those SSDs are SATA.
           | That said ... I do have room for a couple of SATA drives :-)
        
         | CommieBobDole wrote:
         | I'm using these (Samsung 970 QVO) as the data drive in a couple
         | of workstations right now. Not the fastest SSD for a number of
         | reasons, but still a lot faster than a mechanical drive.
         | 
         | https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B089C3TZL9/
         | 
         | Oddly, these were ~$300 when I bought them at the end of 2023,
         | but the price has now doubled.
        
           | ls612 wrote:
           | I'm looking forward to the next NAND price crash in a year or
           | two, hopefully we will start to see 16TB client SSDs hit the
           | market then.
        
         | darksaints wrote:
         | I'd love to find a M2-only NAS in a very low profile form
         | factor. I live in a small apartment and prefer small
         | electronics that can hide in a cabinet, but it seems like all
         | of the NAS enclosures that I've ever seen recommended are
         | fucking huge.
        
           | projektfu wrote:
           | https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0C5HW6W9Y
           | 
           | This would give 3 M.2 slots and high speed ethernet.
           | 
           | https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07N1HC88M
           | 
           | Something like this can be used to upgrade a dual-3.5" SATA
           | NAS into a 8x-M.2 NAS (assuming the cooling and everything
           | work appropriately).
           | 
           | Just some ideas.
        
           | bpfrh wrote:
           | There ie the rockchip CM3588 NAS Kit but it is a non
           | mainstream CPU which cost between 200-300EUR:
           | 
           | https://wiki.friendlyelec.com/wiki/index.php/CM3588_NAS_Kit
           | 
           | there is also the asustor nas:
           | https://www.asustor.com/de/product?p_id=80
           | 
           | If you just need a single nvme SSD you could also buy a
           | banana pi 3 Router:
           | 
           | https://wiki.banana-pi.org/Banana_Pi_BPI-R3
           | 
           | Edit: forgot links and product
        
           | zamadatix wrote:
           | I have the Flashstor 12 Pro. As the name suggests it's 12 m.2
           | nvme bays and it's pretty darn small considering.
           | 
           | Pros:
           | 
           | - It does what it says on the tin and I have 12 nvme drives
           | in a ZFS pool
           | 
           | - It has 10G ethernet built in.
           | 
           | - It's pretty small, especially compared to most HDD focused
           | NAS systems.
           | 
           | - It's just an x86 PC and you can blast the factory OS away
           | to install your OS of choice without issue.
           | 
           | Cons:
           | 
           | - Each drive only gets a 3.0 x1 connection. It's honestly not
           | much of a problem though as 1 GB/s per drive is still a ton
           | of bandwidth after 12 drives.
           | 
           | - The built in ethernet is RJ45 instead of SFP+. Not the end
           | of the world, just less power efficient.
           | 
           | - No PCIe expansion slots for anything but m.2 2280 drives.
           | 
           | - Single RAM slot so no dual channel and no large amounts of
           | RAM. 32 GB works fine (I think Intel says the processor is
           | only rated for 16). I can't remember if I tried 48 and it
           | failed or if I never bothered. Either way 32 GB can be a bit
           | small if you're really wanting to load it up with 4 TB or 8
           | TB drives and features like ZFS deduplication.
           | 
           | - The single built in fan could have been silent had they
           | made any reasonable design choice around it. Instead I had to
           | externally mount a noctua fan (to the same screw holes, just
           | the inside is not a standard mount) and feed it power via a
           | USB adapter. Works damn silent and cool now though.
           | 
           | - CPU (4 core Intel Celeron N5105) is very weak and the
           | actual performance limitation for most any setup with this
           | box.
           | 
           | I don't regret getting it, it's a solid choice given the
           | relative lack of premade options in this segment, but the
           | follow up NAS build was just me getting a motherboard/CPU
           | with lots of PCIe lanes and loading up 4 way switches. You
           | can do that via buying used Epyc servers on Ebay
           | (loud/chunky) or just building a low end consumer class
           | "workstation" (things like x8 x8 from the CPU instead of x16
           | for the assumed GPU) and PCIe to x4 switches (not the
           | splitter cards which assume the motherboard has bifurcation
           | and lanes available but actual switches). If you go the Epyc
           | route you don't have to get switches and you can go back to
           | cheaper splitters. I went the latter via some PCIe switch
           | cards off Aliexpress. Performance and scaling of this one was
           | better of course, but so was cost. Since I did all of this
           | prices for m.2 drives have actually went up quite a bit so
           | I'm glad I did it when I did.
           | 
           | What I would not recommend is anything non-x86 (older Ampere
           | servers have lanes at not sky high prices but better to just
           | go used Epyc at that point and get more CPU perf for the same
           | dollar. SBCs are... a poor choice for a NAS on most every
           | account but hacking factor). I'd also not recommend the
           | Flashstor 6 as it only has 2.5 GBe connectivity and at that
           | point what's the value in paying extra to do this all in
           | flash.
        
           | Eric_WVGG wrote:
           | There's a lot of really cool options in the replies here, but
           | I think I'm at my limit on the number of tech hobbies I can
           | manage. Really just waiting for a consumer grade Synology SSD
           | NAS.
        
           | walterbell wrote:
           | ODROID H4 Plus Intel N97 SBC (with in-band ECC) has an option
           | for 4xM.2 via PCIe bifurcation,
           | https://www.hardkernel.com/blog-2/new-m-2-card-for-the-
           | odroi...
        
         | peterburkimsher wrote:
         | I've got a PNY XLR8 CS3140 8TB PCIe 4.0 NVMe M.2 SSD with an
         | M.2 adaptor in my MacBook Pro 2014, and it works well.
         | 
         | I also have an external one for backup purposes, and it works
         | well in a Thunderbolt enclosure but has been a little
         | unreliable (random disconnects) in a USB-C enclosure.
        
       | doublepg23 wrote:
       | Anyone in the industry able to tell me where WD sits in the flash
       | space? I use WD for my HDDs pretty exclusively but had assumed
       | their SSD offerings were mostly white label drives they slapped
       | their name on, are they a real competitor in the space?
        
         | jsheard wrote:
         | WD is the real deal, they design their own SSD controller
         | silicon in-house.
         | 
         | They acquired Sandisk and HGST so there's a lot of expertise
         | under their roof.
        
           | magicalhippo wrote:
           | > they design their own SSD controller silicon in-house
           | 
           | And they've been leaning into RISC-V[1] due to this.
           | 
           | [1]: https://blog.westerndigital.com/risc-v-swerv-core-open-
           | sourc...
        
         | wmf wrote:
         | WD SN850(X) is pretty much the best consumer SSD.
        
       | markhahn wrote:
       | how big is the market of people who have money to burn?
       | 
       | or is it that some people mistakenly believe that bigger devices
       | are more cost-effective?
       | 
       | this part of the release is interesting:
       | https://documents.westerndigital.com/content/dam/doc-library...
        
         | choilive wrote:
         | This is targeted for enterprise/cloud/hyperscale customers and
         | density is often a big deal in those applications. I know that
         | 61.44TB SSD have been selling very well exactly for this
         | reason.
        
         | wmf wrote:
         | Drive bays cost money so in some cases it could be cheaper to
         | use a smaller number of more expensive drives.
        
         | jandrewrogers wrote:
         | There are applications and workloads where storage density is a
         | key consideration, and the set of data models isn't that small
         | as a subset of the market. Networked storage is not a
         | substitute for NVMe when working with very large storage
         | volumes due to the poor storage bandwidth. For some workloads
         | you also cannot substitute a single high-density server with
         | multiple low-density servers for effectively the same reason
         | (low bandwidth to remote storage). For these workloads, ultra-
         | high density storage can definitely be cost effective within
         | reason.
         | 
         | It bears keeping in mind that most popular open source software
         | is not designed to be effective for storage densities anywhere
         | near this high. If you are working with data at this density
         | then you are likely using one of the closed source storage
         | engines designed to work at this scale running straight off of
         | the raw block device.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-08-06 23:01 UTC)