Seagate makes 60TB SSD

[DKT27]

Just recently, Samsung’s massive 15.6TB SSD began selling at retailers for $10,000. The 15TB drive was impressive at the time, but now it looks like Seagate is stealing the limelight with the announcement of its 60TB SSD.

 

Seagate showed off its massive SSD at the Flash Memory Summit this week, though it was only there for demonstration purposes, so it isn’t really a full-blown product just yet and likely still needs some work.

 

 

As PCworld points out, if Seagate can deliver on this, then its SSD would be four times larger than the current largest SSD in the world, Samsung’s PM1633a, the $10,000 15TB drive. Much like Samsung’s offering, the Seagate 60TB SSD is a SAS drive in a 3.5-inch form factor. It isn’t really for consumer use but would work well for server use, where you can double down on mass storage and save on rack space.

 

The exciting part is that this drive is based on a “flexible architecture” and could end up scaling to support 100TB of storage in the same form factor, according to the official announcement.

 

View: Original Article

[humble3d]

Seagate built a 60TB SSD, but you can't have it

Remember when Samsung launched the world's first 15 terabyte SSD?

It wasn't that long ago, in March 2016, but it was a crazy amount of solid state storage at the time.

Now, Seagate blew that record out of the water: On Tuesday, at the Flash Memory Summit conference in Santa Clara, the company has demonstrated a 60TB SSD, currently the largest solid state drive out there.

Unless your media collection is really, really large, one of these babies should last you a lifetime, as the 60TB capacity is enough to store 400 million photos or 12,000 DVD movies, according to Seagate.

As you might imagine, though, the 60TB SAS SSD is a product aimed at enterprises, and the price will probably be outside of most individuals' range.

Samsung's 15TB SSD is also an enterprise-grade product.

And if you thought 60TB is a lot, just check Seagate's sales pitch for the new drive:

"Reach 1PB (one petabyte) with only 17 drives."

Seagate's monstrous SSD is currently available for demonstration, and is expected to hit the stores "some time in 2017."

 

http://mashable.com/2016/08/10/seagate-60tb-ssd/#CnRSFVMndSq0

 

[oliverjia]

darn, still remember my first computer with a massssive 3 GB hard drive. 

[pc71520]

TBs will be history soon...

[Ice Frog]

here i am not even able to afford a 256gb ssd   they should probably concern on making them economically viable  

[truemate]

seagate.. ok then it will get crash within a month

[flash48]

On 8/12/2016 at 0:36 AM, oliverjia said:

darn, still remember my first computer with a massssive 3 GB hard drive. 

 

I must be older than you.  My first PC had a 850 Meg hard drive.

[davmil]

21 hours ago, flash48 said:

 

I must be older than you.  My first PC had a 850 Meg hard drive.

In the 80s my 20mb Seagate held all my clients accounting data & software easily.  Backed it up on 20 1.4mb floppies until I eventually got a 20mb tape drive backup.   And that was 'cookin with gas' after using machines with 2 5.25" (360k) floppies - 1 to boot & run software and the other to store data on.  Lame as that may sound to youngsters, it was well worth it in the productivity it brought to the scene.  In fact, i'm betting that was the biggest % jump in office productivity as it seems all the horsepower and resources go into watching video and other entertainment applications.  Early versions of Lotus, Wordperfect, Wordstar, even MSFT Office did 90+% of what one still has do in an office today.  Damn!  I'm getting old.

 

[pc71520]

22 hours ago, flash48 said:

My first PC had a 850 Meg hard drive.

Mine had even less...

[DKT27]

I started with 80GB I think.

 

On 12/8/2016 at 9:40 PM, Ice Frog said:

here i am not even able to afford a 256gb ssd   they should probably concern on making them economically viable  

 

Pretty much the same here. Still waiting for it.

 

On 13/8/2016 at 8:49 PM, truemate said:

seagate.. ok then it will get crash within a month

 

If HDD reliability results say something, you are right here.

[luisam]

On 11/8/2016 at 8:18 PM, humble3d said:

As you might imagine, though, the 60TB SAS SSD is a product aimed at enterprises, and the price will probably be outside of most individuals' range.

Back in the 60s and 70s the 10 Mb Hard Drive was a product aimed at BIG enterprise. As you might imagine, the price, about 5000 USD (or more?), was definitively outside of most individuals' range. But of course, no individuals had computers: who could afford one?

 

On 11/8/2016 at 8:18 PM, humble3d said:

Unless your media collection is really, really large, one of these babies should last you a lifetime

More probably, the lifetieme of the SSD.  Actually, nowhere is mentioned the relatively fast degradation of SSD drives due to use. Some still recommend the use SSD mostly for operating systems and less for data manipulation and storing of data.

 

My first Hard drive for my first PC was just 20 Mb and a friend "hacked" it up to 30 Mb!  But of course, the PC was no my first computer. Before I had the TRS Color computer, bought back in 1981, which actually only had an external floppy drive (180 kb of capacity) I bought in 1983 for 2000 USD. No Hard Drives were available for this computer until about 1985 (but it was never available in my country)

 

On 12/8/2016 at 0:05 PM, pc71520 said:

TBs will be history soon...

Mbs are history; Gb are "yesterday". Will TBs be history too? I'm not sure. Most probably the "X" TB SSD in computers, probably on removable media, will be the cheap, standard option, replacing Hard Drives.

 

[pc71520]

19 hours ago, luisam said:

Will TBs be history too? I'm not sure.

Have a little faith in Technology...

[LeetPirate]

On 8/13/2016 at 11:19 AM, truemate said:

seagate.. ok then it will get crash within a month

Yes I have to agree, Seagate is not worth buying if your data is important to you. In all my years of experience the all time worst hard drives are Seagate, second worst is Maxtor. Even Hitachi a company that specializes in building excavators makes a more reliable hard drive than Seashit.

 

 

On 8/12/2016 at 0:10 PM, Ice Frog said:

here i am not even able to afford a 256gb ssd   they should probably concern on making them economically viable  

 

Guys SSD is more affordable that you may think, BUT all ssd are not made equal despite being built with the same components. First I would say to avoid anything with a SandForce controller. Second is to be careful with selecting based on brand reputation because for example Crucial makes some top notch ssd products but if you buy the low end ssd you will end up with write performance slower than a mechanical hdd. It's not just Crucial, it's Adata, Kingston, Sandisk, and others as well it's important to absolutely know the components inside the drive and research unbiased reviews before buying. I'm not saying those brands don't have good ssd but their low end TLC offerings are all trash and what you might find happening is data corruption, BSOD, system stalling periodically becoming unresponsive due to write failures, and poor write performance slower than mechanical hdd. Even Samsung began producing low tier products such as the 750 Evo series.

 

The ONLY ssd with TLC flash that I can recommend is MyDigitalSSD BP5e Slim 7 Series 2.5" SATA III (6G) SSD Yea sure it's a brand you probably never heard of so people may think it's no good but quite the opposite. Forget the sticker brand on the device, it uses Toshiba TLC with a Phison S10 controller and their design is the only one on the market that does not suffer the poor write performance as the other brands that are using the same TLC and S10 controller. This is the cheapest costing most value for money ssd that money could buy and it's actually reliable.

 

The other TLC based ssd that I recommend is the Samsung 850 Evo series, yes I know I said earlier that there was only 1 TLC drive I could recommend but the 850 Evo uses Samsung propriety 3D vertical TLC so it's not exactly the same as the others. This cost slightly more than the MyDigitalSSD but highly recommended if you have the budget.

 

Finally if you have the money for a top tier SSD make sure it's MLC flash and that it's stated in the product datasheet as some brands have been known to bait and switch where the first batch is high quality and all the reviews are great then the company secretly switches design and consumers lose in the end. I recommend Samsung Pro series ssd.

 

Those 3 drives I recommend are drives that I have actually purchased and used so it's not just based on theoretical but also real world experience. If you are worried about longevity and lifespan of the drives well my main pc is using a 256GB Samsung Pro drive and the drive is rated for at least 150TBW and based on daily usage of greater than 12 hours per day I manage to wear the drive 1TBW per year so do the math, I know I won't live for 150 years so I call it a good investment. The middle tier 850 Evo is rated for 75TBW so in theory it would last me 75 years. The low tier MyDigitalSSD does not have any endurance ratings but based on the built in technologies to minimise wearing of the nand I trust it would last a long time probably close to the 750 Evo which is rated at 35TBW. In terms of storage capacity I store OS, all user docs, and all software except games on my ssd and it's only used 56GB on a 256GB drive.

 

I see no reason for anyone to wait for that magical moment when they could afford a million terabyte ssd to store their entire life while suffering themselves for 20 years saving money, just buy a 128GB ssd and load firefox in under 1 second instead of waiting 30 seconds. I've given some real life stats and review so hopefully this helps to make a decision.

 

 

[DKT27]

On 18/8/2016 at 10:16 PM, LeetPirate said:

 

 

Here is an article how good, or may I say bad Seagate drives are.

 

Good explanation. Here is an article which back your experiences.

 

But there goes my chances of buying an SSD soon.

 

As MyDigitalSSD are not easily found here, I cannot find other drivers using Toshiba either, actually, Kingston's UV300 and UV400 released some time ago but cannot be found anywhere, uses Toshiba, but has same problem you have mentioned.

 

All this seems out of question except the Samsung one you are mentioning here.

[Jordan]

On 13/08/2016 at 5:26 PM, flash48 said:

I must be older than you.  My first PC had a 850 Meg hard drive.

 

My first computer was diskless. it has only 2 big  8-inch floppy drives. 1 for the system and the other for the data!

i didn't used it much though. i had a mini mac which was working much better

Later, i bought an Acer x286 with 2MB RAM and 60 MB HDD if i remember.

it has DOS only.

 

i installed Windows 3x on a x486 computer later

 

As soon as Windows 95 was released, i bought a Pentium 133 MHZ with 240 MB HDD!

 

Don't laugh guys! it was the top then!

[davmil]

12 hours ago, jordan4x said:

 

My first computer was diskless. it has only 2 big  8-inch floppy drives. 1 for the system and the other for the data!

i didn't used it much though. i had a mini mac which was working much better

Later, i bought an Acer x286 with 2MB RAM and 60 MB HDD if i remember.

it has DOS only.

 

i installed Windows 3x on a x486 computer later

 

As soon as Windows 95 was released, i bought a Pentium 133 MHZ with 240 MB HDD!

 

Don't laugh guys! it was the top then!

My Osborne Executive (lugable) had the upgraded 6" monitor and 2 floppies unlike the cheaper version Osborne.  Ran CPM.  Running SuperCalc and Wordstar, I was 'cookin with gas.' 

[galaxyquestor]

14 hours ago, jordan4x said:

 

My first computer was diskless. it has only 2 big  8-inch floppy drives. 1 for the system and the other for the data!

i didn't used it much though. i had a mini mac which was working much better

Later, i bought an Acer x286 with 2MB RAM and 60 MB HDD if i remember.

it has DOS only.

 

i installed Windows 3x on a x486 computer later

 

As soon as Windows 95 was released, i bought a Pentium 133 MHZ with 240 MB HDD!

 

Don't laugh guys! it was the top then!

I'm with you, my friend. That was my first computer also, which I was so proud to have assembled from junk parts. I used it as an opportunity to teach my 9-year old son how to do it.

I remember being incredibly excited when Windows 3, and later 3.1, (which had to be loaded with a succession of something like 12  - maybe 14) floppies, and being just enraptured by it's capabilities.

Only half an hour to download a song! Amazing!   

My first actual hard drive was (remarkably, for those not familiar with the enormous leaps that have taken place in just a few decades) was the same size as all of the later (even to this day) hard drives.

It cost me 250.00, and was a bargain - it could hold 50 (FIFTY!) Megabytes of data (it may have been smaller - it was a long time ago), and seemed incredibly futuristic.

250.00 bucks back then was like about 500.00 bucks today.

The most incredible thing, as I look at my collection of 4GB WD drives (all SATA, of course) today, (and I have a long file-box with nearly every hard drive I ever used, going all the way back - and I've kept the diskettes, as a reminder of what used to be.is how accurate Moore's Law turned out to be, from 50 megabytes to 4 Terabytes (and now 6+ Tb), in the same size container, using essentially the same technology - it really is incredible. In fact, the newer drives are thinner and less blocky than the first ones.

When in forums, I see the unbelievable impatience of younger users, and I just have to smile.

The thing those systems taught more than anything else, from an end-users perspective, was nearly infinite patience.

Thanks for your post, and the journey down memory lane it gave me.

My son is now 29, and sets up networking systems.

I'm a 65-year old coot who still loves to build desktop computers.

[DKT27]

Stories of you guys gives me some belief, that someday, someday, I would able to buy a SSD for my gaming PC.

 

It's funny how I have never got my hands on one of the most impressive and useful tech of recent times here.

[davmil]

22 hours ago, galaxyquestor said:

I'm with you, my friend. That was my first computer also, which I was so proud to have assembled from junk parts. I used it as an opportunity to teach my 9-year old son how to do it.

I remember being incredibly excited when Windows 3, and later 3.1, (which had to be loaded with a succession of something like 12  - maybe 14) floppies, and being just enraptured by it's capabilities.

Only half an hour to download a song! Amazing!   

My first actual hard drive was (remarkably, for those not familiar with the enormous leaps that have taken place in just a few decades) was the same size as all of the later (even to this day) hard drives.

It cost me 250.00, and was a bargain - it could hold 50 (FIFTY!) Megabytes of data (it may have been smaller - it was a long time ago), and seemed incredibly futuristic.

250.00 bucks back then was like about 500.00 bucks today.

The most incredible thing, as I look at my collection of 4GB WD drives (all SATA, of course) today, (and I have a long file-box with nearly every hard drive I ever used, going all the way back - and I've kept the diskettes, as a reminder of what used to be.is how accurate Moore's Law turned out to be, from 50 megabytes to 4 Terabytes (and now 6+ Tb), in the same size container, using essentially the same technology - it really is incredible. In fact, the newer drives are thinner and less blocky than the first ones.

When in forums, I see the unbelievable impatience of younger users, and I just have to smile.

The thing those systems taught more than anything else, from an end-users perspective, was nearly infinite patience.

Thanks for your post, and the journey down memory lane it gave me.

My son is now 29, and sets up networking systems.

I'm a 65-year old coot who still loves to build desktop computers.

Did you ever build a Novell Server with floppies - at least 30 disks; many of which had to be continuously re-inserted "reinsert disk 3 - oxy-gen" or some similar message.  You had to have a spare set or 2 in your kit because inevitably one of the disks had a read error.  And 1/2 hour downloads... try the 300-1200 baud modems were the highest rates that the telephone systems in Vermont & Florida could support without problems.  9600baud eventually came around and it was just plain fast.

 

As to the impatience of young people - My observation over the years (40+) is no matter how fast your hardware/platform, in the end all you (and clients) notice and remember is how long you wait for results...

[andy2004]

On 12 August 2016 at 5:36 AM, oliverjia said:

darn, still remember my first computer with a massssive 3 GB hard drive. 

 

My first computer didnt have a hard drive.. it came with a tape deck.. Commodore C64.. followed by the Spectrum 128+2a,, followed by the Amiga 600 which had a 880kb disk drive.. and no internal hdd. followed by a Amiga 1200 with a 20mb hdd.. and then my first PC which had a 4gb hdd.

[galaxyquestor]

10 hours ago, davmil said:

Did you ever build a Novell Server with floppies - at least 30 disks; many of which had to be continuously re-inserted "reinsert disk 3 - oxy-gen" or some similar message.  You had to have a spare set or 2 in your kit because inevitably one of the disks had a read error.  And 1/2 hour downloads... try the 300-1200 baud modems were the highest rates that the telephone systems in Vermont & Florida could support without problems.  9600baud eventually came around and it was just plain fast.

 

As to the impatience of young people - My observation over the years (40+) is no matter how fast your hardware/platform, in the end all you (and clients) notice and remember is how long you wait for results...

My main interest was always as a hobbyist-enthusiast, and so I never got into the network/server stuff until much later. I remember clearly, though, (I worked my way through college,while taking FORTRAN, BASIC etc. subjects on the side, but this entire time I was managing a Radio Shack store, and using the Tandy TRS-80 to do store inventory - it allowed the main corporate hub in Fort Worth to track inventory based on daily sales, and I had to transmit store details each day . It really was, even though people later made fun of it by calling it "the Trash-80" one of - if not the first - commercially affordable computer capable of doing serious work.They later came out with the Tandy color computer - actually the first little "fun" computer, which had no disk or floppies - just cartridges. I used it to create effects for video editing, and to practice Basic programming on. I think not enough credit is given to this now-defunct company for it's developments in this area.

The thing that would surprise most people today, I think, is how much could be achieved even by these early computers - the Apollo computers were stone-age by comparison, but what they squeezed out of these machines with careful coding was utterly incredible. And this at a time when slide-rules were still a main-stay of scientific calculation.

I do remember having to re-insert this or that  floppy when needed, over and over. I was born in 1951, and was technically inclined, I guess, from birth. I feel lucky to have been born in a completely analog era (no remote controls, no computers, big black land-line phones, no remote controls, microwaves, and a t.v. screen - (when we could afford one) which was about a 6" black and white screen, so blurry by today's standards it would be unwatchable, a.m. radio only (no f.m. for years and years later), and watching "Howdy Doody," and most especially, the "father" of jump-cuts, back-screens, and an enormous number of video techniques still used today, Ernie Kovacs -  and "the Mickey Mouse Club (such a crush on Annette!), and the list is endless.

What stuns me is 1). I've been able to keep in touch with the Tech, all the way to D-Wave's first Quantum computers, and the other things which would have seemed like magic to my 10-year-old mind in 1961, and 2). the speed of development of electronics, digitization, and computers in only a few short decades.

As for me, as an end-user, it was really never about how long anything took. It was always about the miracle that such things could be happening at all, and I really still feel the same today.

Thanks for your reply, and I hope I didn't ramble too much - I always do.

 

[davmil]

47 minutes ago, galaxyquestor said:

My main interest was always as a hobbyist-enthusiast, and so I never got into the network/server stuff until much later. I remember clearly, though, (I worked my way through college,while taking FORTRAN, BASIC etc. subjects on the side, but this entire time I was managing a Radio Shack store, and using the Tandy TRS-80 to do store inventory - it allowed the main corporate hub in Fort Worth to track inventory based on daily sales, and I had to transmit store details each day . It really was, even though people later made fun of it by calling it "the Trash-80" one of - if not the first - commercially affordable computer capable of doing serious work.They later came out with the Tandy color computer - actually the first little "fun" computer, which had no disk or floppies - just cartridges. I used it to create effects for video editing, and to practice Basic programming on. I think not enough credit is given to this now-defunct company for it's developments in this area.

The thing that would surprise most people today, I think, is how much could be achieved even by these early computers - the Apollo computers were stone-age by comparison, but what they squeezed out of these machines with careful coding was utterly incredible. And this at a time when slide-rules were still a main-stay of scientific calculation.

I do remember having to re-insert this or that  floppy when needed, over and over. I was born in 1951, and was technically inclined, I guess, from birth. I feel lucky to have been born in a completely analog era (no remote controls, no computers, big black land-line phones, no remote controls, microwaves, and a t.v. screen - (when we could afford one) which was about a 6" black and white screen, so blurry by today's standards it would be unwatchable, a.m. radio only (no f.m. for years and years later), and watching "Howdy Doody," and most especially, the "father" of jump-cuts, back-screens, and an enormous number of video techniques still used today, Ernie Kovacs -  and "the Mickey Mouse Club (such a crush on Annette!), and the list is endless.

What stuns me is 1). I've been able to keep in touch with the Tech, all the way to D-Wave's first Quantum computers, and the other things which would have seemed like magic to my 10-year-old mind in 1961, and 2). the speed of development of electronics, digitization, and computers in only a few short decades.

As for me, as an end-user, it was really never about how long anything took. It was always about the miracle that such things could be happening at all, and I really still feel the same today.

Thanks for your reply, and I hope I didn't ramble too much - I always do.

 

The productivity gains made intially by simple boxes like Tandy & Osborne & Compaq & IBM were amazing  - especially in accounting and publishing.  Today, there's enough power to compute everything & all people can think to do is sext each other pictures of their gentials, pets, diner and watch videos.  The waste factor is just jaw dropping IMHO.  Only justified by their relatively low cost.  Perhaps something productive will come out it yet; i'm always hopeful.

 

[BEngEE]

On 13 August 2016 at 5:26 PM, flash48 said:

 

I must be older than you.  My first PC had a 850 Meg hard drive.

 

All I will say is, anyone used a C15 - that is - a cassette with 15 minutes duration each side - those 8 bit days :DD

 

p.s. and of course, prior to that, we had paper ;-)

[galaxyquestor]

On 8/24/2016 at 11:26 PM, davmil said:

The productivity gains made intially by simple boxes like Tandy & Osborne & Compaq & IBM were amazing  - especially in accounting and publishing.  Today, there's enough power to compute everything & all people can think to do is sext each other pictures of their gentials, pets, diner and watch videos.  The waste factor is just jaw dropping IMHO.  Only justified by their relatively low cost.  Perhaps something productive will come out it yet; i'm always hopeful.

 

Couldn't agree with you more, bro - everything amazing in society seems to always fall to the lowest common denominator.

But, like you, I do have hope.

The progress, for instance, in digitizing analog equipment has been amazing. I'm a guitar player, since the late 60s, and the equipment and pedals I used on stage have been re-done digitally so well (from some developers), that even my ears cannot hear the difference any longer.

A laptop can hold a warehouse full of gear.

The burgeoning field of really accessible V.R. may be a game-changer - but it may also just drive people deeper into their caves, with V.R. porn separating them even further.

(Nothing wrong with porn, but V.R. could truly turn into an addiction that could kill a lot of actual, real, human contact). I guess we'll see.

Anyway, good talking to a kindred soul, my friend - take care, and be well.

[mona]

, and those a bit off-topic stories in particular. My first disk was 60 GB, btw; so those old stories are fascinating,  

 

@LeetPirate

All what you wrote in your post is absolutely true, but what do you think about such scenario :

I lately felt it's time for my first ssd. Decided to buy the one of around 250 GB capacity. Favorite brands :  Cruicial MX200 or Samsung EVO 850.

BUT .... while shopping for a good price my husband unexpectedly stumbled upon the great deal on 500GB Samsung EVO 750.

The 500GB capacity EVO 750 was brand new at that moment. It has been introduced to the market like 7-10 days ago only and in fact - it was the first 500GB 750 EVO offer/deal I've ever saw.

The price was around $105, the same as for the BEST deals on 250GB Samsung EVO 850.

We went for it immediately (there were only 7 items on sale).  Was it a mistake ?

 

The reasoning behind this decision :

1. doubled capacity for the money,

This allows me to place on SSD not only my main system (W10), along with all installed programs and portables, but also W7 (which I still need and use in dual-boot) and my Virtual Machines.  Sounds great and is actually an unexpected gain !

2. higher capacity SSDs (500GB and 1TB) tend to perform much, much better than smaller ones of the same brand, so buying at least 500 GB gives you some extra advantages.

3. contemporary OSes are growing rapidly, so 120 GB SSD will soon become useless as a system drive. 250 GB have a bit longer "future"/usability ahead, but 500 GB is even better and more flexible.

If the amount of data grows significantly for one OS (or for any other reason) - the second OS could be easily moved to another drive (more secure arrangement) and .... voila ! .... still plenty of free space !

4. online tests and real life scenarios show that all 750 EVOs perform only slightly worse than 850 EVOs (the difference is unnoticeable by normal user ---> read opinions of those who own both drives - on Amazon)

5. trade offs ? They are mainly endurance and warranty.  BUT ......

 

And here is my point : 

No question that Samsung 850 PRO is absolutely great disk, but do normal computer users (I'm NOT talking businesses that keep precious data, essential for their activity), so .... do normal users really need 228 years (2 million hours) of reliability (MTBF) ???    .... Especially if they need to pay a lot of extra money for this feature ?

Durability was SSD's major problem in the past. But current technologies applied even in lower end SSDs worked it out well enough.

Nowadays the chances are for a disk to become non functional (outdated) because of its limited capacity (quickly growing amount of data) rather, than because of physical wear and tear. 

 

Where I live - 512GB 850 PRO ssd costs 2,5 x as much as we payed for same capacity 750 EVO.

The 750 I newly purchased is supposed to be my multiple - system drive for 3-4 years (it's about the warranty life span).

.... After that time 500GB (along with all SATA) ssds will probably be completely outdated (as 60GB are now) anyway.    

 

BTW

1. Seems it was really a very good deal since after 10 days many 250GB 750 EVOs have been offered with the same prices I payed for twice as big  capacity (500GB 750 EVO) . Official price for my drive is also around $45 higher than what we payed.

http://www.samsung.com/us/computing/memory-storage/all-memory-storage/s/solid_state_drives/_/n-10+11+hv22y+zq29m/

 

2. In US  EVO 750 and EVO 850 have been priced with no significant difference right now.

But don't wait for usual gradual price drops of an overall new product EVO 750 is.

Read somewhere online (CNET ?) that in order to make the price gap bigger - this time - prices of EVO 850 (+ 850 PRO ?) will be risen.   

It's actually started happening already now.....