Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

The Blu-Ray Disc VS The SSD

Tags:
  • SSD
  • Storage
  • Blu-ray
Last response: in Storage
Share
April 6, 2010 3:14:38 AM

Personally BD Discs are great if we could have 50-128GB worth of rewritable storage in them. Also, until scratch proof plastic becomes readily available the longitivety is still in question for BD discs when compared to an SSD, the only thing going against SSD's currently are the high prices while a 25-50gb BD isnt nearly as much.

Which would you go for in terms of storage?

More about : blu ray disc ssd

Best solution

a c 128 G Storage
April 6, 2010 3:24:30 AM

Depends on type of storage ....archival versus backup versus library....but for general use, an NAS makes the most sense.
Share
a c 127 G Storage
April 6, 2010 4:30:13 AM

Comparing optical WORN-media to NAND solid state drive doesn't make much sense to me. And i don't think blu-ray has that much future; as its basically a product from Sony where every company depends on Sony. The size of optical media and the costs have also gotten worse since the CD. Where in the past 700MB was a big deal when disks were 1-2GB in size; now you have 2TB disks where 24GB sounds tiny; and it is by comparison.

Networking might also lessen the need for removable storage, and optical media are not really reliable anyway.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 415 G Storage
April 6, 2010 4:50:54 AM

I can't imagine an scenario where someone would be making a choice between SSD and Blu-ray. They are two totally different storage solutions aimed at applications 180 degrees apart.

SSDs are high-cost, high-performance premium drives.

Blu-ray are removable optical media whose value beyond playing Hollywood products is IMHO questionable because they are essentially as expensive as hard drives.

I can see how one might choose them for archival storage, but on a dollar per Terabyte basis a hard drive dock and dual redundant bare hard drives have a similar cost and are a LOT more convenient.

SSDs are a really poor choice for archival use because they're extremely expensive and the data is stored as static charges which can dissipate after 10 years or so.
m
0
l
April 8, 2010 2:34:03 AM

sminlal said:
I can't imagine an scenario where someone would be making a choice between SSD and Blu-ray. They are two totally different storage solutions aimed at applications 180 degrees apart.

SSDs are high-cost, high-performance premium drives.

Blu-ray are removable optical media whose value beyond playing Hollywood products is IMHO questionable because they are essentially as expensive as hard drives.

I can see how one might choose them for archival storage, but on a dollar per Terabyte basis a hard drive dock and dual redundant bare hard drives have a similar cost and are a LOT more convenient.

SSDs are a really poor choice for archival use because they're extremely expensive and the data is stored as static charges which can dissipate after 10 years or so.

Well you are forgetting the point as well as BD discs will utilize the next gen movies with HD support AND even 3rd party gimmiks like 3d vision all storeg in that large 50-80gig BD... I am sure ppl wont have 2-4SSDs with such little storage for all their 1080p HD movies in BD format.... for entertainment and video, BD is still more accessable and sold more commonly in stores than HDD's and SSDs.

Thus BD is still a viable storage medium if you dont want to store these files on SSDs which arent even past the 300gb threshold currently in terms of max storage. Thats like what? 20-30 BD movies only? I already have 12 BD movies and BD is still expencive, what happens when bd becomes mainstream and are sold for $12.99-14.99 a piece? SSDs will be 500-1tb by then but it still wont be enought to store your bd collection of 100plus movies by that time as I have more than 100dvds. Its all relative.
m
0
l
a c 415 G Storage
April 8, 2010 3:20:16 AM

I'm not disagreeing with you - when I said "Hollywood products" I meant movies and the like. In my mind that's clearly the prime use for BD discs.

But I'm really not understanding why you keep dragging SSDs into the picture. They're the most expensive form of disc-like storage right now, and their high performance (which is what you pay the big bucks for) is irrelevant for playing movies.

Surely the biggest competitor to BD for storing HD movies isn't SSDs, but rather hard drives?
m
0
l
April 29, 2010 5:35:26 AM

sminlal said:
I can't imagine an scenario where someone would be making a choice between SSD and Blu-ray. They are two totally different storage solutions aimed at applications 180 degrees apart.

SSDs are high-cost, high-performance premium drives.

Blu-ray are removable optical media whose value beyond playing Hollywood products is IMHO questionable because they are essentially as expensive as hard drives.

I can see how one might choose them for archival storage, but on a dollar per Terabyte basis a hard drive dock and dual redundant bare hard drives have a similar cost and are a LOT more convenient.

SSDs are a really poor choice for archival use because they're extremely expensive and the data is stored as static charges which can dissipate after 10 years or so.

You really think static discharges can dissipate the sotrage(info, data) in the SSD? Would lets say an x-ray or an electrical shock destroy a portable SSD? Can it ruin a DVD, cd or BD disc as well? I am not being sarcastic, I want to know because I can imagine using both as storage mediums to back up all the files and music/videos/games Ive stored throughout the years....
m
0
l
a c 415 G Storage
April 29, 2010 6:00:51 AM

> You really think static discharges can dissipate the sotrage(info, data) in the SSD?

Yes, see pages 21 + 22 of: http://download.micron.com/pdf/presentations/events/fla...


> Would lets say an x-ray or an electrical shock destroy a portable SSD?

I don't know about x-rays, although I wouldn't doubt it. Any device made from integrated circuits can be destroyed fairly easily by electrical shocks. That's why static protection is so important.


> Can it ruin a DVD, cd or BD disc as well?

Optical discs aren't affected by static or (AFAIK) x-rays. But they are vulnerable to oxidation and the organic dye layer in write-once ("-R") discs does degrade over time.
m
0
l
June 29, 2010 2:28:48 AM

Best answer selected by liquidsnake718.
m
0
l
June 14, 2013 9:39:23 AM

I have two ssd Intel 330 120s in a raid 0 and it great for loading your OS, programs and had decent write speeds, but if wanted to keep my data backed up in the sense of achieving which I do I use blu ray disc for that purpose. I know that flash drives are fast and are coming down in price, but I personally still have a couple cons to that. Dollar for dollar a blu ray in bulk quantities can be as low as 70 cents a disk and a standard blu ray can store about roughly 22.5(not 25) gigs of data. I just got a Verbatim Store and Go USB 3.0 16 gig flash on sale at Microcenter for $15. I'll admit the read time on that flash drive through a USB 3.0 is fast, but the write time is still horrible. Let's do some math here at 70 cents a blu ray disk for 22.5 gig that's less 4 cents a gig. At $15 for a fast 16 gig flash drive that's a little under a dollar per gig. I can actually burn a backup disk at 10x with the brand I use and verify too a lot faster than I could backup data with a flash drive. Now my flash drive through a USB 3.0 port can read data faster and than my blu ray drive can, it's like 110 megs per second vs 40 megs per second.If you want your storage to be rewritable then go with an external hard drive, I've seen 1 terabytes for around $70, which isn't bad. Even internal spindle drives are coming down in price again.

SSD drives for performance and currently used programs, flash drives for fast performance that's easy to carry around and blu rays for long term archieve storage.

JMO and others may disagree.
m
0
l
!