Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Report: SSD Market Revenues Will More Than Double in 2013

By - Source: iSuppli | B 25 comments

The SSD market is expected to equal 40-percent of the HDD market by 2016.

As both SSD prices and form factors get smaller, it's no surprise that SSD market revenue will more than double in 2013. In this year alone, worldwide shipments are expected to reach 83 million units sold, up from 39 million in 2012. By 2016, per-year shipments should reach 239 million units, equaling 40-percent of the HDD market.

According to an IHS iSuppli Storage Space Market Brief from information and analytics provider IHS, the increase in 2013 will be the result of renewed "Ultrabook hopes" as Intel's form factor is expected to pick up steam thanks to Windows 8, Intel's Haswell architecture, and cheaper touchscreen technology.

"The fate of the SSD business is closely tied to the market for Ultrabooks and other ultrathin PCs that use cache drives," said Ryan Chien, analyst for memory and storage at IHS. "While SSD shipments rose by 124 percent last year, growth actually fell short of expectations because ultrabook sales faltered due to poor marketing, high prices and a lack of appealing features. However, if sales of the new generation of ultrabooks take off this year as expected, the SSD market is set for robust growth."

Also driving SSD market growth in 2013 will be a reduction in the average price of NAND flash memory, the firm said. Not only are the lower prices attracting "deal-seeking consumer enthusiasts," but manufacturers who were previously reluctant to install the once-costly alternative to the typical HDD. Even the enterprise sector is flocking to SSDs thanks to rising capacities, cheaper prices and superior performance.

"As NAND rides out variable cost and scale curves in ever-more efficient manufacturing processes, such things as solid-state PCs, servers and storage arrays become more achievable and attainable," the firm said on Wednesday. "Recent developments around nonvolatile memories like STT-RAM and resistive RAM also hint at sustained performance improvements for SSDs beyond the drives’ current use of NAND flash memory."

The SSD data presented in IHS iSuppli's latest report covers traditional solid state drives in both the consumer and enterprise segments, as well as cache SSDs used to help speed up super-thin form factors using HDDs for storage and program installations.

 

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

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
  • 3 Hide
    TheBigTroll , January 23, 2013 9:32 PM
    we all know this is going to happen, eventually replacing hard drives in the future. but that would have to wait.
  • 3 Hide
    dudewitbow , January 23, 2013 9:34 PM
    Im assumign its due to:

    Increase of mobility wants, droping $/gb ratio as well as more stable and reliable drives being pushed out.
  • 5 Hide
    A Bad Day , January 23, 2013 9:42 PM
    There should also be a push on the laptop manufacturers to adopt mSATA ports for laptops that only have one 2.5" hard drive cage. I don't like being forced to choose between a HDD+DVD, SSD+HDD, or a SSD+DVD laptop.
  • Display all 25 comments.
  • -7 Hide
    vern72 , January 23, 2013 10:18 PM
    I'm not even going to look at an SSD until I can get one that can handle millions of rewrites.
  • 4 Hide
    phamhlam , January 23, 2013 10:26 PM
    vern72I'm not even going to look at an SSD until I can get one that can handle millions of rewrites.


    Well, You will be missing out. I had a SSD that been running 2 years strong and no problems. It has been so worth it. I always tell people that the problems with most computers is that they don't have a SSD.
  • 5 Hide
    guerrero , January 23, 2013 11:02 PM
    just get me a 256GB SSD under $100 haha ;P
  • 3 Hide
    anort3 , January 23, 2013 11:52 PM
    Quote:
    Well, You will be missing out. I had a SSD that been running 2 years strong and no problems. It has been so worth it. I always tell people that the problems with most computers is that they don't have a SSD.



    Agreed. I paid over $250 for my 120GB Vertex 2 just about two and a half years ago and not only don't regret it, I consider it money well spent.
  • 2 Hide
    A Bad Day , January 24, 2013 12:13 AM
    vern72I'm not even going to look at an SSD until I can get one that can handle millions of rewrites.


    Consumer HDDs usually have a head crash, motor failure, or some other mechanical failure long by the time current SSDs wear out.
  • 4 Hide
    A Bad Day , January 24, 2013 12:15 AM
    EDIT: Three laptops in my lifetime failed within 3-5 years of operation because the hard drives broke somehow. One of them had a head crash, another one probably had a burnt out motor.

    I'd rather have a gradually slowing SSD than a sudden HDD failure anyways.
  • 3 Hide
    anxiousinfusion , January 24, 2013 12:21 AM
    vern72I'm not even going to look at an SSD until I can get one that can handle millions of rewrites.


    Do you plan on using the same computer for many decades?
  • 4 Hide
    warmon6 , January 24, 2013 1:18 AM
    vern72I'm not even going to look at an SSD until I can get one that can handle millions of rewrites.


    If you said this back in 08/09 time frame, people might agreed with you....

    Although in this day in age, SSD can really handle the a lot of stuff now and the number of reasons for not having an SSD is getting smaller as the years go by.

    In 09, most people recommend only most frequently used programs (that didn't write a lot) and the OS to be on the drive. (didn't help that affordable ssd's were only like 16/32GB in size and the only one you could trust was Intel....)

    Now, there getting large enough that they can handle (a decent amount of) games, and other programs that write a decent amount and these have been lasting for at least 2 to 3 without any major signs of slowing/wearing down.

    When they hit 5 to 6 year's, your probably already looking at something new so it wont really matter to much if it heavily slowed down (which even for hdd, after 5 years, most people looking for a new drive to run at least the OS. )

    Heck, about the only reasons not to have an SSD is pretty much specific to the task you need and most of the task that I can think of is not really limited to the the write cycle of the ssd. The main limit is the drive capacity.

    Which even that reason is starting to get smaller. About 2 years ago, 120GB was $200 to 300. Now, you can get one for $100. Watch in the next year or 2 when 256GB's will be in that range.

    Waiting for write cycle to reach your expectation is not a valid excuse for the majority of people anymore.

    Unless you run a specific program that writes a ton to the drive, most likely a drive will last at least 3 to 5 years before needing a change (for the common person, the drives will last longer than that).
  • 2 Hide
    warmon6 , January 24, 2013 1:21 AM
    A Bad Day I'd rather have a gradually slowing SSD than a sudden HDD failure anyways.


    Amen to that! +1
  • 3 Hide
    CaedenV , January 24, 2013 1:22 AM
    vern72I'm not even going to look at an SSD until I can get one that can handle millions of rewrites.

    SSDs have about as much write endurance as a typical HDD, what tends to die is the controller, not the nand, and if you buy a good quality drive then that is not much of an issue.

    Also, with every successive generation of SSDs write endurance goes DOWN not up. Moving to TLC, and smaller dies only makes it harder to write more information, so you are going to have to wait an awfully looooooong time before you are going to see those kinds of writes available. And as stated before, you don't get that kind of write endurance even on consumer and pro-sumer HDDs anyways.

    The best you can do is get a drive that is slightly bigger than your needs and you will not have an issue running through writes. Use the SSD as your OS/Program disc, and if you have something that has some heavy writes then buy a cheap SSD specifically for that purpose and just burn through it. If you are doing something that write intensive then you should be paid enough that the extra productivity provided by an SSD will more than pay for the material costs.
  • 2 Hide
    CaedenV , January 24, 2013 1:23 AM
    vern72I'm not even going to look at an SSD until I can get one that can handle millions of rewrites.

    Sucks for you, I like that Adobe Premere opens in 5 secconds instead of 50+
  • 0 Hide
    mapesdhs , January 24, 2013 1:51 AM

    Strange, in recent weeks in the UK it seems like SSD prices have
    been rising. For example, the Samsung 830 256GB dropped as low as
    130 UKP, but now it's typically more like 150 to 160. Likewise,
    similar 'quality' SSDs (Vertex4, that sort of thing) all appear to
    have risen a bit, while what had been a steady decline in 60/64GB
    and 120/128GB prices last autumn has ground to a halt or reversed.

    I wonder, are companies not bothering to drop prices at the moment
    because they simply don't need to? ie. the demand is there to soak
    up products at current prices.

    I also notice that supplies of older products dry up suspiciously
    fast when newer models come out. I want to buy a couple of 830 256s,
    they're more than enough for me, yet in just the space of barely a
    month since the 840 launch it appears numerous sites now list the
    830 as "discontinued", or just no longer in stock with no expected
    restock date, or the price has gone way up to 175+.

    I tried looking at 64/64GB models this week. Some sites suddenly
    have very few available, or a narrow brand choice, and the prices
    are barely any less than 120/128 models, eg. 62 UKP for a 64GB vs.
    80 UKP for the 128GB quivalent - very silly.

    To me this smells like the beginning of the proverbial supply &
    demand effect kicking in as regards pricing, a bit like the way
    normal HDD makers have reliased they don't need to sell 1TB disks
    as cheap as they did before the Thai floods (I remember getting
    some for only 36 each at one point). If this is indeed the year of
    a huge surge in demand for SSDs, then we may not see that much of
    a move on pricing in absolute terms at all. Either that or, as new
    models come out, they will simply replace older models at the same
    price points while stocks of older models quickly vanish via
    controlled supply, instead of one at least being able to buy older
    models for less for a while.

    I've done a lot of SSD price hunting this past week. It really does
    feel quite different to what was happening to prices about 3 or 4
    months ago. Many sites just have a whole list of products which are
    not in stock, or with weird/inconsistent pricing (or both).

    Anyone notice this elsewhere? Or is it just the UK?


    A good example of how annoying this can be is when considering an
    SSD upgrade for an older system that just has SATA2. My own tests
    show that newer SATA3 models offer little extra in performance (for
    obvious reasons) than older models which are perhaps more optimised
    for SATA2 links. Thus, for example, upgrading my gf's PC, I've been
    looking for a 120GB Vertex2E as it works nicely on SATA2 systems,
    but it's either not available now, or the prices are crazy, eg. on
    one site the V2E 120GB is 75, vs. just 80 for a Samsung 840. Surely
    the V2E should be much less by now. One may as well buy a Sandisk
    Extreme or Agility3 (I'd rather not; I like the V2Es). By contrast,
    just a few weeks ago I was able to buy some V2E 120s for 52 each, a
    price which seems a lot more logical given the current product range.

    I was hoping good model 240/256GB prices would drop below 100 UKP
    before the Spring, but if demand is indeed going up a lot then I
    can't see that happening. Pity.


    My price searches typically cover about 30+ different UK suppliers,
    and not just the most well known such as Scan, Aria, DABS, etc. Others
    include (ie. sites I trust, in no particular order) Ballicom, techdna,
    trustedhardware, Microdirect, tekheads, lambdatek, novatech (the source
    of my V2E/120 splash a while ago), ebuyer (source of the 830 256s when
    they'd dropped to 130 UKP), Amazon (source for some V2E 120 MAX IOPS
    when they dropped to only 80 each), overclock.co.uk, technextday,
    ikatek, CCL, Eclipse, Redstore, etc. NB: make good use of Google if you
    find a company you've not heard of before; check trustpilot, webutation,
    and other sites that have meta-info & reviews about online shopping
    sites (search for the web site name with words such as 'review',
    'rating', 'scam', 'trusted', etc.)

    Ian.

  • 1 Hide
    InvalidError , January 24, 2013 2:10 AM
    A Bad DayConsumer HDDs usually have a head crash, motor failure, or some other mechanical failure long by the time current SSDs wear out.

    I have a bunch of ~10 years old consumer-grade drives (mostly Maxtor and WD) that are still in working order after 50000+ (over 5 years worth) power-on hours... most of those were from back when standard warranties were 5-years.

    All my failed drives died somewhere between the first year and second year mark. None of those that have made it beyond that have failed yet and that includes a misbalanced Seagate drive that sounds like a lawnmower which I never expected to survive more than a few days before self-destructing from excessive vibrations.

    Google published a paper about HDD failures across their computer park that comes to a similar conclusion: drives that are destined to fail will usually fail early (first year or so), the rest will most likely last for a long while as long as exposure to vibrations and temperatures outside the 25-40C range is minimized. The most reliable indicator of impending failure they have found is reallocated sector count where drives tend to have substantially higher failure rates over the next few months from the first remapped sector.
  • 0 Hide
    A Bad Day , January 24, 2013 2:43 AM
    InvalidErrorI have a bunch of ~10 years old consumer-grade drives (mostly Maxtor and WD) that are still in working order after 50000+ (over 5 years worth) power-on hours... most of those were from back when standard warranties were 5-years.All my failed drives died somewhere between the first year and second year mark.


    My 11 year old desktop's no-brand 32 GB HDD still works.

    Though for obvious reasons, we don't use the desktop much anymore. An 11" laptop that my dad bought a few months ago is superior to the old desktop in every way possible, except for being a worse paper weight (lol).
  • 0 Hide
    mapesdhs , January 24, 2013 6:07 AM

    *yawn*

    I have 549MB SCSI disks still working after 20 years. :D  Think I have some even older units aswell,
    though I'm not sure about my 20MB doorstop SCSI drive... (measures 9" x 6" x 3.5") Really ought
    to test it sometime, would be a giggle if it's still ok after almost 30 years.

    Ian.

  • 0 Hide
    dishayu , January 24, 2013 9:39 AM
    anort3Agreed. I paid over $250 for my 120GB Vertex 2 just about two and a half years ago and not only don't regret it, I consider it money well spent.

    85$ for a 128GB Plextor M5, best money ever spent on a computer upgrade. :D 
  • 0 Hide
    redgarl , January 24, 2013 10:38 AM
    SSD are now a must. I don't think they can match the capacity of the standard hard drive though.

    I purchased my Vertex for 200$ and I thought it was a steal at that time >:p 
Display more comments