Do you think SATA is likely to be phased out within the next

Just what we need; more legacy hardware

>>58294129
SATA3 is more than enough for 99% of consumers

>>58294129
SATA 3.2/3.3 still better than USB.

>>58294129

I still see fucking serial if that's any indication of legacy hardware life

I'd be into some kind of SATA style PCI-E port

>>58294222
It's call External(Cabled) PCI Express

The SATA connector?
Nope, its turning in to a Thunderbolt like interface, basically PCI-Express over a SATA form factor. Same way that Thunderbolt 3 is a direct PCIE link over USB Type-C

Most interfaces are going to turn in to direct PCIE links as time goes, only difference will be the connecting form factor and voltage. Only a matter of time before we have NICs as direct PCIE links...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SATA_Express

>>58294201
USB 3.0 is 5gbps compared to SATA3's 6gbps

I wouldn't be surprised if we at some point see a USB 3.2 at 6 or 7gbps and motherboards just start shipping with that while everything else goes M.2

>>58294375
>Only a matter of time before we have NICs as direct PCIE links...

NICs will never be directly on the bus for security reasons, there will always be some kind of translation unless Intel/AMD make the smart decision to build a secure networking enclave into their processors.

As of now all NICs ARE on the PCI-E bus, the one on your motherboard just talks to the PCH on the DMI/OPI if you have a newer machine.

>>58294129
Yeah I don't even use SATA anymore, all M.2, fuck SATA and its ridiculous cables and shit.

>>58294129
>Do you think SATA is likely to be phased out within the next 10-15 years? It's really starting to show its age.
SATA3 still has plenty of bandwidth for mechanical hard drives, which is what it was designed for. Using SSD over SATA was only done because there wasn't yet a standard for SSDs when they first came to market.

SATA3 should last a while - probably until mechanical hard drives are no longer produced. I can't say for sure if that will happen in 10-15 years. There may be residual demand for compatible products.

Not really. 3.5in hard drives are still going to give the best compromise between storage density and price, which is what most people are after for the majority of their storage needs. Seeing as SATA3 can already handle multiple times what a modern hard drive's peak sequential is, unless there's a revolutionary breakthrough in spinning disc technology I don't see SATA going away any time soon. If SSDs ever reach price-capacity parity with spinnan dicks, then maybe I could imagine SATA being replaced entirely by m.2 connectors with a standardized connector for add-in backplanes that could house like 40 of the fuckers if mass storage is needed.

>>58294642
>Using SSD over SATA was only done because there wasn't yet a standard for SSDs when they first came to market.
Also, even the best PCIE ssd's don't have enough random read or write to saturate even SATA, and are only marginally better at it anyway so the only reason to go M.2 over SATA is if you really need a gargantuan amount of sequential r/w for your workflow.

>>58294944
>Also, even the best PCIE ssd's don't have enough random read or write to saturate even SATA, and are only marginally better at it anyway
Not to mention that they weren't bootable either.

>>58294129
10-15 years is a long time, especially when talking about computers.

We're already looking at a complete paradigm shift in the next decade in terms of cpu construction and production due to the limits of silicone, and by 2020 were looking at a huge leap in artificial intelligence and compression algorithms, so the need for high speed bandwidth of stored data may become superfluous.

Sata will probably stay a lot longer, but I can't say for sure 15 years from now. though, if anything it'll be either replaced with an optic variant, or be come a hybrid to support backwards compatibility.

File: c26.png (17KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 625x626px

>>58294511

File: ChromeBananaHoldBowl_l.jpg (15KB, 260x260px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 260x260px

>>58294944
>if you really need a gargantuan amount of sequential r/w for your workflow
This is like saying the only reason to go Core i7 over Core i5 is 'if you really need a gargantuan amount of CPU cycles in your workflow'. Sequential performance never hurts. If you can get your 50MB file in 0.05 seconds instead of 0.1 seconds, that's still an improvement and even a marginally noticeable one.
>>58294970
>weren't bootable
Okay? Well they are now...

If you like not having your computer pwned, you'll stay clear of SATA. Too much DMA access. Every manufacturer bar Intel has confirmed backdoored firmwares available, making the little computer on the drive do mean things.

>>58294129
Once SSDs get huge storage, why would you even need SATA? Plug in a couple M.2 drives and you're done. Need more? USB/networked/cloud mass storage.

People who absolutely need SATA-based storage devices on a consumer desktop will be a niche, they can buy a PCI card or something for that if they need it so bad.

>>58294129
Sata should just be USB C. No need to have a separate cable to give the drive power and it would let people connect internal drives externally.

File: 220px-Caulking.jpg (7KB, 220x174px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 220x174px

>>58295200
>limits of silicone

>>58294129
Yes, by SATA Express

M.2 probably replaced it, isn't M.2 called mini pcie express?

>>58299552
no, M.2 is called Next Generation Form Factor, with is retarded name.

>>58294216
Because a lot of business hardware uses it and won't ever change

>>58294129
If there is no cheaper alternative that is being made or already available who is not going to be shit, then yes. Otherwise, no.

>>58294489
>USB 3.0 is 5gbps compared to SATA3's 6gbps
>I wouldn't be surprised if we at some point see a USB 3.2 at 6 or 7gbps and motherboards just start shipping with that while everything else goes M.2
And SATA 3.2 is 16Gbps.

>>58294489
USB 3.1 is 10gpbs you dork

>>58294944
Plenty of NVME drive work above 6Gbps, even some SATA SSDs saturate SATA, the 960 pro is already close to saturating M2/PCIex4, SATA is already a bottleneck, just not a significant one

File: Uten navn.jpg (288KB, 1925x1103px) Image search: [Google]

288KB, 1925x1103px

U.2 for everyone!

>>58299517
Lol. It's dead. 0 consumer drives were released for it.