Not really possible until they release ssd of that size - which is a long away off and prohibitively expensive.I need now 16 tb with ssd speed for work.
32 tb with ssd speed would be better for work.
I can’t disagree. I’ve not needed to go beyond a 2-bay array and 2TB.That's an insane set up. Best of luck getting it up and going.
OWC has a decently fast Thunderbolt SSD RAID that goes up to 16 TB. You can daisy chain two and with their software RAID solution get a single 32 TB drive. As mentioned, it costs quite a bit. $4379.00 for 16 TB so $8758.00 for 32 TB.I need now 16 tb with ssd speed for work.
32 tb with ssd speed would be better for work.
OWC is Apple level expensive but they make good stuff. They bought SoftRAID and kept it alive which makes them good guys in my book.@jdb8167 That’s a better solution than my quick find.
The largest SSD drives available that I have seen are 8TB (Samsung 870 QVO, and VectoTech Rapid) so you would need to do some type of raid array. As mentioned they are not inexpensive.
OWC is great for niche stuff like that. You’ll pay a pretty penny, but that’s the sandbox we’ve all chosen to play in.@jdb8167 That’s a better solution than my quick find — not quite as cheap but much smaller, a little faster, and drives already installed.
The old MacBook Pro 16-inch has 8 tb ssd. I see no reason to buy less than 8 tb. Especially because it‘s Apple.
8 TB SSDs:
Micron MTFDDAK1T9TCB-1AR1ZABYY Solid State Drive 8TB
Samsung 870 QVO 8TB
8 TB M.2 NVMe SSDs:
Corsair MP400 8TB M.2 NVMe PCIe x4 Gen3 SSD
Sabrent Rocket Q 8TB M.2 NVMe PCIe
It would be easy for Apple to sell the MacBook Pro 16-inch with 2 x Samsung 870 QVO SSDs instead of only one SSD.
Apple could also sell 3 or 6 Corsair or Sabrent M.2 NVMe SSDs.
That's bonkers. Specialized software and hardware solutions are $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$We use 32TB SSD arrays in each of our 25 locations - connected via TB3 to our 2018 Mac Mini CTO / BTO setup as caching servers & user profile backups:
View attachment 1787835
That's bonkers. Specialized software and hardware solutions are $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
That's true. $8,500 spent over however many years is a drop in the bucket if you're using it for business.For a company, that's not really that much. Employees tend to cost way more than hardware (salaries, benefits, FICA, workers' comp, etc).
If an uber-fast SSD array will help efficiency, that more than pays for itself.
I can see an immediate need for this, even in a portable format like the OWC, for lots of video work. In the office, also for other huge data sets, like image recognition. The speed and ease of working with such equipment pays for itself in a very short amount of time. Nothing to be seen here, move onThat's bonkers. Specialized software and hardware solutions are $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Our organization spent well over $300K during the pandemic just to equip each of our sites (25) with the custom made caching Mac Mini (64GB, 6 core i7, 10Gbe), 32TB SSD storage, and a contract for an Apple engineer to write code for auto user profile backups on our DEP enrolled, MDM controlled iOS & Mac devices.That's true. $8,500 spent over however many years is a drop in the bucket if you're using it for business.
I would be very difficult to get "SSD speeds" out of any NAS. The only hope would be via 10Gbps ethernet. You'd be better off with a DAS RAID setup connected via TB3 or TB4.I have exactly that one. In a cradle coneccted via USB to my Mac mini. Works like charm.
But if more storage is required, I'd go for a NAS.
Yes, exactly. If the criterium is only "more storage", then a NAS is very nice. But if you want more storage at that same speed, you're looking at a very heavy investment in your network as well. It's feasible, because all media companies have very high performance storage networks, but expect major reductions of your bank account balance.I would be very difficult to get "SSD speeds" out of any NAS. The only hope would be via 10Gbps ethernet. You'd be better off with a DAS RAID setup connected via TB3 or TB4.
But then the network approach is somewhat future proof, subject to less potential risk, and is a sound investment due to easier maintenance and flexibility down the road. Matter of fact when someone comes with a "16-32TB" hot data requirement, I would first look at network solution due to the sheer volume and the associated backup needs that come with it. Prices of 10GbE network components are also getting into pro-/consumer friendly range lately.Yes, exactly. If the criterium is only "more storage", then a NAS is very nice. But if you want more storage at that same speed, you're looking at a very heavy investment in your network as well. It's feasible, because all media companies have very high performance storage networks, but expect major reductions of your bank account balance.