Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

OCZ Intros New 3.5-inch "Colossus" SSD

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 33 comments

SSD’s are fast becoming a viable option, and with prices dropping pretty steadily, more folks are opting to go SSD rather than HDD.

In keeping with this, OCZ today announced a 3.5-inch SSD dubbed Colossus. To be made available in the next two months you’re looking at 512 GB and 1 TB versions of the device. As for aesthetics, we're sorta diggin' the whole industrial look. All that aside, there’s nothing about pricing out there so we don’t know how much one of these things is going to set you back, but how much would you be willing to fork out?

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
  • 1 Hide
    njalterio , June 3, 2009 12:37 PM
    I would not pay more than $300 for the best SSD. For that much money I could get a 300 GB Velociraptor and a 1 TB drive, which would also be a quite a bit more capacity. Wouldn't be quite as fast, but for what I do its more than fast enough.
  • 5 Hide
    Tindytim , June 3, 2009 12:51 PM
    I was wondering why I didn't see any 3.5" SDDs. Makes sense to me.

    Although, I never really wanted a SSD that large considering I'd only install my OS and some apps on it.
  • 2 Hide
    Pei-chen , June 3, 2009 12:57 PM
    I wouldn't pay more than $200 for any single piece of hardware in my computer so better keep this below $200 (fat chance). OCZ will ask for $1k+ for this.
  • Display all 33 comments.
  • -3 Hide
    awaken688 , June 3, 2009 1:24 PM
    Glad to see they are getting there with the 3.5" drives. Also glad to see the sizes increase. For professional photo stuff, I am loving having fast hard drives speeds, especially for LR to fetch all its previews and stuff. I'd have to see the speeds, but if it is 2x as fast as a standard drive, I'd drop $200 on the 512GB model. Maybe $250. It is just trade-offs. The increase in system performance would have to be better spent than getting a $100 faster processor or video card.
  • 1 Hide
    awaken688 , June 3, 2009 1:24 PM
    Glad to see they are getting there with the 3.5" drives. Also glad to see the sizes increase. For professional photo stuff, I am loving having fast hard drives speeds, especially for LR to fetch all its previews and stuff. I'd have to see the speeds, but if it is 2x as fast as a standard drive, I'd drop $200 on the 512GB model. Maybe $250. It is just trade-offs. The increase in system performance would have to be better spent than getting a $100 faster processor or video card.
  • -1 Hide
    mirkos , June 3, 2009 1:29 PM
    I believe that the average user wouldn't pay more than double whatever a usual drive cost. E.g. If a 200G disc cost 100$ He would pay 200$ for a SSD 200G. It's really nice to have high speed SSD but the cost must be relevant to the capacity and what most users can afford or are willing to pay.

    The good thing is that more SSD are coming out and the price are dropping. Soon we will be able to buy affordable 256GB SSD for OS and programs and we will have a second or external disc for data.

    Stay tunned!!!!
  • 0 Hide
    BorisChechev , June 3, 2009 2:26 PM
    How much would I pay? Maybe $300 if it got good reviews. But this drive isn't being made for me. I'm sure the server-farm people with corporate budgets are loving this device.
  • 0 Hide
    spanspace , June 3, 2009 2:38 PM
    I wont by an SSD till they come down the what the HD pricing structure is now. Memory is so cheap right now its ridiculous they are charging so much.
  • 0 Hide
    sublifer , June 3, 2009 2:39 PM
    Maybe $150 for the 512GB drive, but I'd like to say that I'd wait until it was $70 or so before I bought one but I know I'd probably buy it at 150 anyways. I just hope it has the Barefoot controller or better... no more lemon controllers!
  • 4 Hide
    scooterlibby , June 3, 2009 2:51 PM
    I'm no expert, but I guess my answer would depend on whether it's SLC and what memory controller they are using. Aren't those some critical issues that should be covered?
  • 1 Hide
    grieve , June 3, 2009 3:06 PM
    There just isn't enough information in this article to get excited or even comment on...

    -3.5-inch SSD dubbed Colossus
    -512 GB and 1 TB versions
    -available in the next two months
  • 2 Hide
    razzb3d , June 3, 2009 3:09 PM
    mirkosI believe that the average user wouldn't pay more than double whatever a usual drive cost. E.g. If a 200G disc cost 100$ He would pay 200$ for a SSD 200G. It's really nice to have high speed SSD but the cost must be relevant to the capacity and what most users can afford or are willing to pay. The good thing is that more SSD are coming out and the price are dropping. Soon we will be able to buy affordable 256GB SSD for OS and programs and we will have a second or external disc for data.Stay tunned!!!!



    I wouldnt pay double for an SSD. 50% more, yes. 100% more... no way.
  • 1 Hide
    jacobdrj , June 3, 2009 3:16 PM
    For my desktop, Raptors will do. I have a RAID 0 of 2x74 in my main rig, and RAID 0 of 3x36 in my secondary rig. All 5 of those drives combined cost me less than $200. Speeds have been great. I have a SSD in my laptop, and for what I do, it is the only way to go. Vertex 60. Why? Because cost-benefit, it was the best. I need my lappy to turn on and off fast. I need it to be durable and I can't wait for Office to start, even 15 seconds... It does the job.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , June 3, 2009 3:16 PM
    I do a lot of music production using extremely large sample libraries. Streaming these libraries direct from disk has always required very fast drives with the lowest access times so SSD's are a significant leap forward for the audio production industry.

    The same is true for musicians that use their samplers/sample libraries in a live situation.

    I wouldn't have any problem paying $1.00-$1.50 per Gigabyte. This may sound like a lot, but it is actually only a small portion of the overall cost of putting together a production quality Digital Audio Workstation (DAW).
  • 0 Hide
    Tindytim , June 3, 2009 3:27 PM
    mirkosI believe that the average user wouldn't pay more than double whatever a usual drive cost. E.g. If a 200G disc cost 100$ He would pay 200$ for a SSD 200G. It's really nice to have high speed SSD but the cost must be relevant to the capacity and what most users can afford or are willing to pay.

    I wouldn't buy an SSD for capacity, I'd buy one for performance, some multiplicative idea by capacity is silly, since capacity isn't the main attraction.
  • -1 Hide
    scryer_360 , June 3, 2009 4:19 PM
    For 512gig and 1 terabyte capacities..... Maybe $512 and $1024? $1 per gig is actually rather good for an SSD.
  • 0 Hide
    blackened144 , June 3, 2009 4:22 PM
    TindytimI wouldn't buy an SSD for capacity, I'd buy one for performance, some multiplicative idea by capacity is silly, since capacity isn't the main attraction.

    You are correct. I already have more than enough storage with my 2x400GB raid0 and 2x500gb raid0 arrays. My OS drive, just recently died, another 400gb drive. Rather than put another 7200 drive in I worked out a deal with a customer that got me 2 30gb Vertex drives for the price of one. These things in raid0 absolutely kill the Velociraptor.
  • 0 Hide
    jeverson , June 3, 2009 4:27 PM
    OK... a Western Digital VelociRaptor 300GB is $230 at Newegg... I would buy 2 for RAID0... so $460 gets me 600GB of pretty fast traditional storage... or i could get 2 Western Digital Caviar Black 500GB for $140 ($70 each) in RAID0 and the is 1TB of pretty darn fast storage... so for the VelociRaptor I am paying $0.77 per GB and for the Caviar Black I am paying $0.14 per GB... so I guess i would be willing to pay $0.90 - $1.00 per GB for the SSD as long as it is at least twice as fast as the VelociRaptor setup. After all it is new and new = $$$. Also I don't think I would need a bigger drive than 500Gb for my primary drive as I have had a 320Gb drive for years and i have tons of media and games installed and still have plenty of room.
  • 0 Hide
    Kill@dor , June 3, 2009 4:35 PM
    My 7200rpm 500GB Western Digital's are still kicking...even my 160GB IDE Western too ^_^. Prices need to be relaxed for anything new in the 500GB area i think...
  • 2 Hide
    TheZander , June 3, 2009 4:49 PM
    This is just evolutionary. This is where tech is headed, and it's going at a decent pace. I wouldn't buy one myself, but for server/workstation apps this will be perfect for some, again depending on price. But for performance, reliability, AND capacity, some are more than willing to pay a premium. These drives are a step in the right direction, and another stage of the progress we're making on solid state technology.

    Kudos to OCZ for bringing the field one step further. While not practical for most of us, someday these might be. I've heard the "Oh, for half that I can buy two Velociraptors and put them in RAID 0 for almost as much performance!!!" Yeah, you can, but we gotta start somewhere. Remember back when Zip disks and drivers were all the rage? Flash memory is really where things are headed, and the more mainstream it becomes, and the more they manufacture, the cheaper the unit cost is going to be. This has happened in the TV market, computer monitor market, video card market, processor market, and in other areas. Now we're seeing huge advances and development in the storage market.
Display more comments