BiTMICRO introduces 832GB SSD for CES 2008

The folks at BiTMICRO are about to blow some doors off of the SSD truck with a new product they'll be showing at CES this year. According to a press release, the company is introducing a new, 2.5-inch solid-state drive with a whopping 832GB of NAND flash goodness. The SATA II (3Gbps) drive is a new addition to the company's E-Disk Altima line, and utilizes a technology the company calls multi-level cell (or MLC) memory, which apparently doubles the number of bits stored per memory cell when compared with single-level cell (SLC) NAND. The drives are expected to ship Q3 2008 in capacities ranging from 32GB to 832GB -- and you can be sure we'll be staring intently at them (and asking for demo units) as soon as CES rolls around.

[Via Macrumors forums]

[mig @ Jan 4th 2008 12:21PM]

wat.

[Hung @ Jan 4th 2008 12:50PM]

The problem is that it uses MLC. MLC is cheaper than SLC because it seriously sacrifices performance. Durability is decreased to 10% of SLC and read/write rates are about halved. In addition, because it is inherently more taxing to read/write, error frequency increases.

This defeats the purpose of having an SSD. I'm sure that BITMICRO has some innovation that they aren't telling everyone, but it could just be a promotional ploy. Either way, I'd be wary of any MLC products, whether it be SSD, CF, or even microSDs.

Sorry to rain on your parades.

[Zach @ Jan 4th 2008 2:59PM]

thats a big step forward!

(inserts link to lame blog here)

[xfr @ Jan 4th 2008 3:19PM]

The 832GB number is bogus.

The manufacturer's site says:
2.5-inch: 8 to 416 GB*
* Up to 64 GB at 8.5 mm height

You see - no mention of 832GB.
And i can't help but wonder if 64GB is 8,5 mm thick, is the 416GB disk that the manufacturer IS talking about, 55mm thick??? Come on, click the link on the article i dare you.

[Jonathan Keim @ Jan 4th 2008 12:22PM]

Now that's what I'm talking about! :-)

[paragraph @ Jan 4th 2008 12:34PM]

Exactly what I was thinking,

The cost is probably outrageous, so when it comes down under $100 call me :-P

[applefreak @ Jan 4th 2008 1:29PM]

here, here... to both of you

[Chebwa @ Jan 4th 2008 1:35PM]

Under $100.

Good God that could be quite a while.

[dj-kenpo @ Jan 4th 2008 2:17PM]

chewba, probably not. flash drops so fast these days.

[Chebwa @ Jan 4th 2008 3:49PM]

@dj-kepno:

This is how much 128GB costs.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609245

It may drop fast, but not that fast, man. I say again... it culd be a while. A long while.

[Br0 @ Jan 4th 2008 12:23PM]

I read the article 3 times to make sure I wasnt doing it wrong. that is a ridiculous amount of storage.

[CarpeD1em500 @ Jan 4th 2008 12:30PM]

haha try 5+ times...

I love technology! You can always count on it to get bigger / better / faster

[Br0 @ Jan 4th 2008 12:40PM]

Dont forget harder and stronger ;]

[podphreak @ Jan 4th 2008 2:55PM]

well they work it harder, make it better, move it faster , which makes them stronger. right?

[Mobius_1 @ Jan 4th 2008 9:15PM]

I can't wait much longer!!!

[Velorium @ Jan 5th 2008 3:25PM]

/The/ best thing about this is that that song /just/ came on shuffle as I read the comment. Amazing, haha.

[Humperdink @ Jan 4th 2008 12:23PM]

What does it cost? $10,000?

[Jason @ Jan 4th 2008 12:25PM]

1 bazillion dollars and 3 Hawaiian islands. And not the crappy ones, the GOOD ONES.

[tamoghno @ Jan 4th 2008 12:25PM]

how many laptops(maybe alienware) i would be able to buy with its price ?

[Zelatio @ Jan 4th 2008 12:27PM]

Mulitple Alienware? Try multipe Falcon-Northwest Laptops.

[tamoghno @ Jan 4th 2008 12:32PM]

damn ! i really did not knew about the company before, shame on me !

[DjurS @ Jan 4th 2008 12:47PM]

Alienware > Falcon NW

Alienware offers SLi 8800GTX,, Falcon NW only offers SLi 8700

[Zelatio @ Jan 4th 2008 12:54PM]

That may be, but FNW still beats them in the "Outrageously Expensive" category.

[SteveMB @ Jan 4th 2008 5:48PM]

How about one of those overpriced Macs? Those things are expensive!

[RichardBronosky @ Jan 5th 2008 12:59PM]

@SteveMB

Please post links to a lesser priced "Name Brand" PC with equal or greater specs (including CPU cache, bus speed, memory speed, etc.) than a Mac. I bet you cannot find 2, probably not any.

The reason Macs "seem" more expensive is that they only have 3 models in each category (with a few exceptions). Models being 1. The absolute latest technology, 2. One step below that, 3. One more step below that. Categories being Pro Desktop, Consumer Desktop, Mini Desktop, Pro Notebook, Consumer Notebook, and iPod (which has recently expanded beyond the 3 - Classic, Mini, Shuffle). That's the business model. And it works http://finance.google.com/finance?chdnp=0&chdd=1&chds=1&chdv=1&chvs=maximized&chdeh=0&chfdeh=0&chdet=1199555325000&chddm=492269&q=NASDAQ:AAPL

Other companies like Dell continue to sell 3-5 year old technology which gives the illusion of greater value. If you want the same kind of bargains with Apple, you have to go through a retailer like Small Dog. Apple is a hard nosed company, who cares very little about freedom. They design an exquisite user experience and deliver their vision for what computing should be. It's unique and many people love. If you don't, they are not going to change for you, or make it easy for you to change it for yourself. The phrase "how do you like them apples" does not apply, because nobody cares how you like 'em.

[Josh @ Jan 5th 2008 5:23PM]

While i do love Apple computers, and while they certainly tend to have the latest processors, their laptops consistently have lots of RAM and their style is second to none, they do not excel at providing good platforms with high end graphics cards - something i expect if i'm shelling out that kind of money. Presumably this will gradually change - the MacBook Pro is getting better for instance - but for now they are not considered "high-end" in one of the most important areas. This is arguably unimportant for an OS like OSX and for the general needs of Apple consumers, but for those who want the best, Apple sometimes doesn't cut it.

[Peter @ Jan 4th 2008 12:31PM]

832Gb in a SSD? Eh... I'm holding out for a TB.

(BTW, I'll be so greatful if I can get 64GB in my MacBook Slim next week!)

[manny @ Jan 4th 2008 12:39PM]

The question is what the read/write speeds are. Until now the only suitable SSD solution was with SLC, since MLCs read/write were too slow.

[pquistgard @ Jan 4th 2008 12:35PM]

Holy Cow!

[qbix @ Jan 4th 2008 12:39PM]

If available and cheap enough, I think I'll build my next system with four 64GB SSD drives in RAID 0. The Witcher should load a lot faster that way (and all my other games for that matter).

[dj-kenpo @ Jan 4th 2008 2:19PM]

screw faster, the benefit is they'll be silent!

[kal326 @ Jan 4th 2008 12:40PM]

Now just need a few of those in a raid....a very big and extreme expensive raid array..

[Homeboy @ Jan 4th 2008 12:40PM]

...............and it's 2.5 inches as well. I would happily give up my HP Pavilion for that hard drive.

[paragraph @ Jan 4th 2008 12:47PM]

But what would you use it for without a comptuer :-P

Also, this thing probably costs as much as the Apature Science's Portal Generating Device, as you know that costs more all of the organs in subject's home town!

[Senor_Tom @ Jan 4th 2008 1:32PM]

a portal reference! :D
the first of mamy to come i hope.

[Skullfighter @ Jan 8th 2008 9:17PM]

@Paragraph
You had me rolling with that one!

[John @ Jan 4th 2008 12:42PM]

How much?! how much?!

...no, you were right not to tell us.

[dj-kenpo @ Jan 4th 2008 2:21PM]

for some reason I just read your comment in a dr zoidburg voice.

too much futurama.

I keep rereading it though in the same voice....

[John @ Jan 5th 2008 8:52PM]

lol!

You can -never- have enough futurama.

[wickedpheonix @ Jan 4th 2008 12:46PM]

are we sure it's not eight 32 GB drives? Where TH do they get the number 832 from?

Other than that, suhweeet..... just make that $150 and I'll buy a couple :D

[paragraph @ Jan 4th 2008 12:49PM]

832 / 32 = 26

It Divides evenly, so it's possible they have 26 32gb chips in there :-P (honestly, i don't know how small chips are, and the capacity, but i do know it's not shenanigans worthy)

[bl0nde @ Jan 4th 2008 12:46PM]

If anyone did not geekgasm instantly upon reading the article title, they have no place to be on engadget.

[Will H. @ Jan 4th 2008 3:09PM]

woot, cause i had one of those uber uber geek moments upon reading that headline.

'teh future is niiiiigh!'

[Karl Viklund @ Jan 4th 2008 12:47PM]

There are already HDDs at 1 TB so this is not that impressive. Just allot of chips stacked together. Make them smaller though is more impressive.

And I bet they won't tell you how many read and writes you get before a specific area is unusable again... And, how much is it? ^^ Get me this at the price of a 1 TB disk and I buy it!

[DonatoM3 @ Jan 4th 2008 1:20PM]

Sure 1tb in a 3.5" form factor I haven't seen any in a 2.5" form factor yet.

[Homeboy @ Jan 4th 2008 1:37PM]

By the time one of those hard drives have exceeded their read/write cycles your IBM hard drives will have failed and died at least a 100 times.

[Duane Young @ Jan 4th 2008 12:50PM]

Sweet Zombie Jon Stewart!

I was expecting a slow progression in SSD size, but, dayum. So for the price of one of those I could afford multiple backup laptops and a french maid to carry said backups around with me?

[Superevil @ Jan 4th 2008 12:51PM]

I guess it's time to put the house up for sale.

[PEZ @ Jan 4th 2008 12:53PM]

It isnt a rediculous amount of storage, its just a lot of FLASH. Not to mention a ridiculous price.

[bob sakamano @ Jan 4th 2008 1:15PM]

can we add this to the things we want included on the macbook pro ultraportable for $1500?!?!?!?!?