Western Digital has introduced a new family of Ultrastar SS200 SAS SSDs that wed high-performance with capacities up to 7.68 TB as well as relatively high endurance. The drives are aimed at mixed-use and read-intensive workloads that require not only maximum throughput, but also reliability. To guarantee the latter, the Ultrastar SS200 uses the company's Guardian technology.

The HGST Ultrastar SS200-series SSDs are designed for datacenters that rely on SAS backplanes, which are used for modern read-intensive and mixed-use workloads that benefit from performance and reliability (e.g., financial transactions, e-commerce, virtualization, database analytics, etc.). The drives come in 2.5”/15 mm form-factor with two SAS 12 Gbps ports and are based on the Guardian platform originally developed by SanDisk. The Guardian technology handles flash management, signal processing, end-to-end data path protection, power-loss protection and so on. Unlike the previous-gen products featuring the Guardian, the Ultrastar SS200 SSDs are based on a proprietary Western Digital controller and firmware, not a third-party chip with a custom firmware, the company told us. The manufacturer claims that the SS200 drives use “commercial-grade” MLC NAND memory, which probably means 128 Gbit ICs made using 15 nm fabrication process.

HGST Ultrastar SS200 Series Specifications
  Ultrastar SS200
Capacities 400 GB
800 GB
1,600 GB
3,200 GB
480 GB
960 GB
1,920 GB
3,840 GB
7,680 GB
Form Factors 2.5"/15mm
Interface dual-port SAS 12 Gbps
Controller Proprietary
NAND 128 Gb MLC made using 15 nm process tech (?)
Sequential Read 1800 MB/s
Sequential Write 1000 MB/s
Random Read (4 KB) IOPS 250,000
Random Write (4 KB) IOPS 86,000 37,000
Mixed Random Read/Write
(max IOPS 70%R/30%W, 4KB)
154,000 90,000
Write Latency 512 B 100 ms
Power Idle 3.8 W - 4.3 W
Operating 9 W - 11 W (configurable)
Endurance 3 DWPD 1 DWPD
Encryption AES-256
Power Loss Protection Yes
MTBF 2.5 million hours
Warranty Five years

Since different workloads mean different demands for capacities and endurance, Western Digital plans to offer capacity-optimized versions of the SS200 that can store 480 GB – 7.68 TB of data and rated for one drive write per day (DWPD) for five years as well as endurance- and performance-optimized models rated at 3 DWPD for five years that can store 400 GB – 3.2 TB of data. Power consumption of the Ultrastar SS200 SSDs is configurable and can be as low as 9 W or as high as 11 W.

When it comes to performance, the HGST Ultrastar SS200 supports sequential read speeds of up to 1800 MB/s as well as sequential write speeds of up to 1000 MB/s. Random read performance of the Ultrastar SS200 is up to 250K, whereas random write performance is rated at 86K/37K (performance-/capacity-optimized models).

Samples of the HGST Ultrastar SS200 SAS lineup of SSDs are available to select customers now and Western Digital intends to begin their volume shipments in the first quarter of 2017. The drives will be covered with a five-year warranty and will be rated at 2.5 million-hour MTBF.

Related Reading:

Source: Western Digital

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • RaichuPls - Wednesday, December 7, 2016 - link

    Does dual-port SAS 12 Gbps mean a total of 24 Gbps throughput or just 12 Gbps?
  • Samus - Thursday, December 8, 2016 - link

    24Gbps, minus overhead.
  • extide - Thursday, December 8, 2016 - link

    No, I am pretty sure it is active/passive (not active/active) which is curious how they get 1,800MB/sec through a 12Gbit/sec link...
  • ZeDestructor - Thursday, December 8, 2016 - link

    It's active/active - HGST were bragging about having achieved it a few months ago.
  • Samus - Thursday, December 8, 2016 - link

    I suspect they are using an OS-level filter driver for multiplexing the second SAS channel with the primary channel. Until the driver is loaded only one SAS channel is used, so it is neither active/passive or active/active. It's essentially recognized as two separate devices, although the second device is an interface, not a logical drive. The reason I believe this to be the case is because their photos indicate very precisely port 1 and port 2, essentially master and slave.
  • awehring - Thursday, December 8, 2016 - link

    @Anton Shilov: is the Write Latency with 100 ms (milliseconds) correct? Microseconds would appear more appropriate to me.
    Same for the sister drive SN200.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now