Storage

12:30 PM
Jim O'Reilly
Jim O'Reilly
Commentary
Connect Directly
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

SSD Prices In A Free Fall

With the prices of solid-state drives expected to reach parity with hard-disk drives next year, are HDDs doomed?

Hard-disk drive vendors point to the higher price of solid-state drives as a reason to keep on buying hard drives, but as Bob Dylan sang, "The Times They Are a -Changin'." The advent of 3D NAND has become a game-changer for the storage industry by increasing SSD capacity and dropping SSD prices.

By packing 32 or 64 times the capacity per die, 3D NAND will allow SSDs to increase capacity well beyond hard drive sizes. SanDisk, for example, plans 8 TB drives this year, and 16 TB drives in 2016. At the same time, vendors across the flash industry are able to back off two process node levels and  obtain excellent die yields.

The result of the density increase is clear: This year, SSDs will nearly catch up to HDD in capacity. Meanwhile, hard drives appear to be stuck at 10 TB capacity, and the technology to move beyond that size is going to be expensive once it's perfected. HDD capacity curves already were flattening, and the next steps are likely to take some time.

This all means that SSDs will surpass HDDs in capacity in 2016. There’s even serious talk of 30 TB solid-state drives in 2018.

So what about SSD price points? In 2014, prices for high-end consumer SSDs dropped below enterprise-class HDD, and continued to drop in 2015. A terabyte SSD can be had for around $300. Moreover, this is before 3D NAND begins to further cut prices. By the end of 2016, it’s a safe bet that price parity will be close, if not already achieved, between consumer SSDs and the bulk SATA drives.

This will put pressure on hard-disk drive  makers to lower prices, but, frankly, they’ve used up most of the tricks to reduce cost and are already at single-digit margins for bulk SATA drives, so they don’t have much wriggle room.

With parity achieved in capacity and price, one has to ask whether HDDs will still be needed.  SSDs are blindingly fast in comparison. Typically, large consumer SSDs are 5x the streaming performance and 5000x the random read/write rate. With low operating power and very low standby power, SSDs are ideal for large archives, too.

Additionally, wear-out isn’t an issue with SSDs. Those two node uplifts in the manufacturing process add literally years to the device life, and the economics of 3D NAND allow for extra over-provisioning, making the write life of the drive well beyond its time in a data center. This is especially true for archived storage, where writing is at a much lower rate.

There clearly is an inflexion point in the use of hard drives coming. Once parity is achieved, the transition to SSDs will become a tsunami. This transition is already well along for so-called enterprise drives. With price and capacity already matched or exceeded by SSDs, 7200 RPM and faster HDDs will quickly fall out of favor.

As in any transition, there will be points of resistance. After-market HDD spares will continue to be sold, though upgrades and replacements will increasingly use SSDs, especially in servers. The volume reductions in HDDs will probably lead to some major fire sales, though. These will all delay the day the last HDD ships, but do not expect a tape-like extended demise, with 30 years of predictions of the end of tape countered by ongoing increases in tape capacity. SSDs and HDDs basically do the same thing and there’s no reason to have both.

Speaking of tape, the SSD archive appliance likely will cause the demise of that hallowed medium. Today’s interest is more for rapid access to data, as demonstrated by Google’s Nearline cloud storage and Amazon Glacier. An SSD basis provides the desired low power with instant-on performance. Tape-based Glacier takes two hours to recover the first blocks of data.

Likewise, DVD-type archive storage will need a magic trick or two to remain in the race. A terabyte of DVDs will cost more than a terabyte SSD and that isn’t including the DVD library unit.

If you were told that a BMW and a golf-cart were the same price, which would you buy? That’s going to be the dilemma facing buyers sometime in 2016, with SSD and HDD. I think I know your answer!

PS: We may have a similar discussion in 2021, when ReRAM, PCM or some other solid-state solution, mounts a challenge to flash memory. 

Jim O'Reilly was Vice President of Engineering at Germane Systems, where he created ruggedized servers and storage for the US submarine fleet. He has also held senior management positions at SGI/Rackable and Verari; was CEO at startups Scalant and CDS; headed operations at PC ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
AdelM712
50%
50%
AdelM712,
User Rank: Apprentice
6/22/2015 | 4:04:47 PM
Well written article Jim
Well written article Jim, I pretty much agree with everything you wrote. Even hard drive manufactuers will silently agree. Any hard drive manufacturer who thinks differently will be doomed. In 10-15 years hard drives will not pay an important role anymore. Hard drive manufacturer need to be prepared for this now and not in 10 years.
AdelM712
50%
50%
AdelM712,
User Rank: Apprentice
6/22/2015 | 3:56:05 PM
Re: SSD speed and durability?
"And it insures that hard drives will always have a purpose - for backups and archives of data"

If you seriously think that hard drives play an important role in 20 years, then you're seriously fooling yourself. You also seem to forget that mechanical drives are really reaching their limits.
joreilly925
50%
50%
joreilly925,
User Rank: Author
6/22/2015 | 12:32:20 PM
Re: NO Price parity before 2020
That's a long essay, Howard. I'll address just a couple of the major points.

First, your last statement. 

"Consumer SSDS cost 10 times what enterprise disks do per GB today". That's true...but they cost 20x just 8 months ago, and that was before 3D NAND. Even with the old rate of change, we'd see just 2.5:1 by the end of 2016, assuming the curve didn't change. The impact of 3D NAND will drive the improvement faster,

Moreover, as you've pointed out. SSD doesn't need to achieve parity to win. The performance benefits are so storng that users will pay a premium in many use cases. Also, with much lower power use, there is a TCO saving to be added to the equation. Power savings work out at around $8/drive-year, so add another $40 to the 5-year TCO balance and the hard-drive doesn't look so good.

The other point is that you seem to conflate interface protocol with drive class. That $600 drive was a so-called "enterprise HDD" with SAs interface. SAS "enterprise" drives are cheaper, but who needs SAS? The SATA SSD screamingly out-performs that SAS drive, even though SAS might get 5% more performance. Further, if the SSD is the same price as that SATA "enterprise" HDD, see the previous paragraph.
joreilly925
50%
50%
joreilly925,
User Rank: Author
6/22/2015 | 12:18:05 PM
Re: SSD speed and durability?
Of course durability is an issue. It is in all computer gear. The myth is that SSd will fail overnight - that just isn't rue in real life.

Carnegie-Mellon and Facebook just published an exhaustive study on failure rates in the Facebook population of PCIe Flash cards that describes a failure model for those devices. It's a good pioneering effort to understand the mechanisms at work and to improve the product, but there are already signs that later generations are doing better than older product.

It was interesting that the next article I read said "Apple recalling hard drives from 2012 and 2013". This is a common event that didn't figure in the hard-drive bathtub curve model. I suspect, as do many, that the floods in Thailand had a wider impact than we thought, and that quality stndards may have lapsed for a while after the restart.

Effects like these require a more subtle approach to archiving than backing up the data and tossing it in a drawer. Multiple replicas are needed, with strong error and failure correction. This applies to tape too, though it's actually harder to do there..
joreilly925
50%
50%
joreilly925,
User Rank: Author
6/22/2015 | 12:08:12 PM
Re: Don't sell tape short
Is tape the best solution?

The photo approach actually doesn't fit modern usage too well. Facebook figures that most of its photos over 12 month old are archivable, but how do you explain to a user that you have to wait an hour to retrieve that 5 year old photo? Ideally, the archive is cheap and low-power, but able to turn on and deliver data fast....Tape doesn't fit the bill.

The issue of cost is important today, too. LTO cartridgesw aren't much chepaer than hard drives, measured on a dollar/terabyte basis. When you amortize the cost of a petabyte tape library across that, disk is cheaper! Demounting tapes and sending them to the salt mine costs money, so the saving for tape is marginal.
hhallikainen934
50%
50%
hhallikainen934,
User Rank: Apprentice
6/22/2015 | 11:21:04 AM
Re: SSD speed and durability?
Thanks for the comment! How many erase/write cycles can a flash cell survive? A flash device I use a lot (M25P16) is rated at 100,000 erase/program cycles. I do not believe magnetic drives have any such limitation. In most use cases, however, we may never write a sector 100,000 times, so this would not be an issue. It all depends on how the drive is being used. But, if there is indeed a limit like this, I don't believe durability is a myth. On write speed (again, looking at the chip I'm most familiar with), a sector erase time is up to 3 seconds with a typical time of 800ms. You can, of course, buffer write data during this time, but you does seem that you hit a speed limit due to sector erase time.

Harold
Mynet
100%
0%
Mynet,
User Rank: Ninja
6/22/2015 | 7:45:35 AM
Re: Don't sell tape short
"Yes, a lot of data needs to be quickly accessed, but most of it doesn't. Audio and video recordings for secuirty purposes, accountability records and historic data that may one day useful but for now is redundant, all of that long term data needs to go somewhere. Tape is perfect for that. '

Whoopty, I don't think there is any drastic change in read and write speed. But to an extent, it can cater the growing storage requirement and place to hold it (in terms of size).
Mynet
100%
0%
Mynet,
User Rank: Ninja
6/22/2015 | 7:41:13 AM
Less space more data
"By packing 32 or 64 times the capacity per die, 3D NAND will allow SSDs to increase capacity well beyond hard drive sizes. SanDisk, for example, plans 8 TB drives this year, and 16 TB drives in 2016. At the same time, vendors across the flash industry are able to back off two process node levels and obtain excellent die yields."

Jim, this is amazing!! I think the main intention is more storage at less space. Am eager to know whether the data representation technology is changing or still deal with old way of writing bits per sector.
Whoopty
50%
50%
Whoopty,
User Rank: Moderator
6/22/2015 | 6:48:55 AM
Don't sell tape short
While SSDs always seemed the way of the future, simply by the fact that they don't have any moving parts and are a lot more durable therefore, I wouldn't write off tape just yet. IBM's recent progressions with the technology make it much cheaper and offer huge storage capacities. 

Yes, a lot of data needs to be quickly accessed, but most of it doesn't. Audio and video recordings for secuirty purposes, accountability records and historic data that may one day useful but for now is redundant, all of that long term data needs to go somewhere. Tape is perfect for that. 
Brian.Dean
50%
50%
Brian.Dean,
User Rank: Ninja
6/21/2015 | 3:37:03 PM
Re: Not Enough Production Capacity..perhaps ever.
@Paul, you made an interesting point. At the one hand, it could turn out that as soon as price parity is achieved, HHD's production will exponentially decrease and SSD's production will exponentially increase. On the other hand, as you mentioned the growing demand of data storage in the world due to mobile devices, IoT devices, video storage/streaming and a greater number of individuals connecting to the internet, both HHD and SSD might need to exponentially grow to meet world demand.
Page 1 / 3   >   >>
Slideshows
Cartoon
White Papers
Register for Network Computing Newsletters
Current Issue
Video
Twitter Feed