If ThunderBolt is external PCI-E, and there exists ThunderBolt external storage drive

[VirtualLarry]

Then why don't we have PCI-E connected internal SSDs yet? I don't mean ones that take up a slot, I mean one with a thunderbolt-like internal connection, like a SATA plug, only speaking PCI-E and faster. I know that they were working on some sort of PCI-E/SATA standard, but shouldn't that already exist if we have external thunderbolt HDs?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Are you thinking mSATA style SSDs?

When you think on Thunderbolt external storage devices. And wish to compare them with internal. Think of using a SATA controller card and then hook up your devices. Thats how it ends up.

 

[chucky2]

I know this is memory and storage, but what I'd love is Thunderbolt external PCIe 3.0 enclosure, external power supply. Make it 3.5 slots wide or something. Add PCIe graphics card of choice. Attach monitor(s) to that, attach that to docking station, turn cool running and power efficient lappy into desktop computer.

WhereTF is that device?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Are you thinking mSATA style SSDs?

No, the opposite. mSATA is a mini-PCIE physical slot, with a SATA electrical connection. I want a SATA physical connector, with a PCI-E electrical connection. (And thus, higher speeds.)

 

[Blain]

Then why don't we have PCI-E connected internal SSDs yet?

Supply & Demand
The market is not demanding it.

 

[Hellhammer]

Thunderbolt is its own protocol, it needs a controller chip at the end of both devices. It's Intel's proprietary design and meant for external devices, so there really isn't any point in using it internally. SATA Express is where the future is and even Intel is backing it up.

 

[ShintaiDK]

No, the opposite. mSATA is a mini-PCIE physical slot, with a SATA electrical connection. I want a SATA physical connector, with a PCI-E electrical connection. (And thus, higher speeds.)

PCIe aint designed for directly attached storage devices. Plus you can always just up the speed of SATA. SATA6 is already faster than PCIe x1 2.0 for example. And any currect internal SSD storage is just a SAS/SATA controller/raidcard with SSDs attached today for the same reason.

What you wish makes no sense really.

And remember Thunderbolt bandwidth is shared, unlike SATA. So if you run say 4 storage devices on SATA6 in RAID. Thunderbolt would be slower.

 

[Hellhammer]

PCIe aint designed for directly attached storage devices. Plus you can always just up the speed of SATA. SATA6 is already faster than PCIe x1 2.0 for example. And any currect internal SSD storage is just a SAS/SATA controller/raidcard with SSDs attached today for the same reason.

What you wish makes no sense really.

And remember Thunderbolt bandwidth is shared, unlike SATA. So if you run say 4 storage devices on SATA6 in RAID. Thunderbolt would be slower.

There is NVMe which is specifically designed for PCIe SSDs. SATA Express will have support for both ACHI and NVMe, which makes it the optimal interface for future SSDs (still needs chipset adoption, but that is coming).

Upping the speed of SATA isn't an easy job. From what I have seen SATA 12Gbps is something we may see 2014 or 2015, but that is only 1.2GB/s. The design cycle is way too long to keep up with modern SSDs.

PCIe 3.0 can already provide 1GB/s per lane, which translates to 2GB/s for SATA Express (it's designed to use PCIe x2). It will also be rather easy to just bump the interface to PCIe x4 if more speed is needed (that's essentially SFF-8639 which is the enterprise version of SATA Express).