New Flash Specs Double Transfer Speeds of SSDs

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Kevin Parrish
Contributor

Kevin Parrish has over a decade of experience as a writer, editor, and product tester. His work focused on computer hardware, networking equipment, smartphones, tablets, gaming consoles, and other internet-connected devices. His work has appeared in Tom's Hardware, Tom's Guide, Maximum PC, Digital Trends, Android Authority, How-To Geek, Lifewire, and others.

  • cmartin011
    oh boy! oh wait are they not pushing more than 400 MB/sec already? sata 3 already MAX out for the most part. Are they trying every thing in there will to keep this at steady tip toeing pace or what wtf!
    Reply
  • mosu
    I wonder why most motherboards, even enthusiast/gamer type don't have at least one X4 PCI-Ex slot, but came with 4 and 5 X16 PCI-Ex.
    Reply
  • kilo_17
    Now they just need to fall way down in price
    Reply
  • XD_dued
    mosuI wonder why most motherboards, even enthusiast/gamer type don't have at least one X4 PCI-Ex slot, but came with 4 and 5 X16 PCI-Ex.
    well...you could just plug the x4 cards into the x16 slots. Why limit the board's potential?
    Reply
  • xambron
    Better to hold out on SSD until they're larger, cheaper, and close to the standard.
    Reply
  • quovatis
    Say what? I thought current speeds are already 350 - 400 mb/s
    Reply
  • vork
    cmartin011oh boy! oh wait are they not pushing more than 400 MB/sec already? sata 3 already MAX out for the most part.
    I assume the 400 MB/s is per channel, the new Intel 510 SSD for example has 8 channels, so you can do the math on that one :)
    Reply
  • LordConrad
    XD_duedwell...you could just plug the x4 cards into the x16 slots. Why limit the board's potential?The board's potential is already limited. How many of those x16 slots do you think actually work at x16 speeds? The answer is one or two, unless you have a really high-end motherboard.
    Reply
  • Supertrek32
    SSD manufacturers should really start focusing on increasing the capacity and lowering the cost. These types of speeds are cool and all, but completely pointless for most applications.

    The only major application that would really see a benefit from is image/video processing. Trying to capture uncompressed video is the only process which can typically actually max out a connection other than backups. Backups can be automated and run during down-time, though, so that's not much of any issue.

    Of course... Uncompressed video takes up something like 400GB and hour for 720p.... Yay! So I wonder just how many of these drives you'd need, and how many thousands it would cost.

    Super-fast read/writes don't mean much if there isn't enough space to read/write the information. It's simply not practical.

    Now IOSpeed... That can be useful for servers, no doubt, but this doesn't seem to be an improvement in that regard.

    I won't say this is a completely pointless advancement of the technology, it will become relevant some day, but the research is improving the wrong things.
    Reply
  • If you read the whole article, you'd see that this new standard is supposed to reduce costs as well.
    Reply