SSDs are fast, but do they last?

smarteyeball said:

A dead HDD is just as useless as a dead SSD.

Rubbish! You can transfer the disc to another drive to recover all the info on it. You can't with an SSD.


Supplement:
An SSD is only useful for the OS. So it only needs to be 60GB.
Having an SSD for important info is like taking a chance with having an apple on your head. Somebody is likely to shoot at it!

We get that you're not in favor of SSD's but it seems to me that you're arguing just for the sake of arguing as you've not provided any valid points against other than cost, which I do agree.

BTW spinner drives can lock up in such a way that it's impossible to pull data off them as well. Also anyone using a computer should always do backups, which is pretty much common practice nowadays.

My two cents.

sygnus21 said:

We get that you're not in favor of SSD's but it seems to me that you're arguing just for the sake of arguing as you've not provided any valid points against other than cost, which I do agree.

BTW spinner drives can lock up in such a way that it's impossible to pull data off them as well. Also anyone using a computer should always do backups, which is pretty much common practice nowadays.

My two cents.

I'll keep quite then....Nah!

I suspect the writing is on the wall for spinners. SSD is faster and in my America speed rules. Instant gratification trumps reliability for many people myself included. If my SSD fried tonight I would just order a faster one and move ahead. If that fried, another one would be in the mail shortly.. Failure is an option when the feel good glass is overflowing. Plus... spinners are just boring at this point! Shallow Huh?

Runckle_SP1 said:

smarteyeball said:

A dead HDD is just as useless as a dead SSD.

Rubbish! You can transfer the disc to another drive to recover all the info on it. You can't with an SSD.


Supplement:
An SSD is only useful for the OS. So it only needs to be 60GB.
Having an SSD for important info is like taking a chance with having an apple on your head. Somebody is likely to shoot at it!

The biggest problem with SSDs right now is compatibility - it is not reliability or lifetime. If you can find a SSD that is compatible with your SATA chipset, then it should last longer than a hard drive under normal use. A lot of the new batch of SSDs are having problems with the new SATA chipset implementations, particularly power management features on the Sandybridge.

Capacity on an SSD is not just about how many GB you can fit on it. Higher capacity SSDs of the same model have more NAND chips and are thus, in general, faster than their smaller counterpart. In addition an SSD, depending on the make and model, will perform poorly if it is nearly full. Garbage collection ad TRIM are stressed under these conditions and write speeds can suffer. If you can afford it, a 128GB SSD will, in general, perform better than a tightly packed 64GB SSD. In any case a 64GB SSD will perform so much better than a hard drive in boot and program launch times - enough so you might find the difference in performance between a 64GB and 128GB SSD negligible in comparison.

Too expensive for me. The only thing that could possibly entice me to pay the current price for one of them, is if it would bump encoding speed in the way that it does OS performance, but since encoding already saturates my x6 CPU as things are, I seriously doubt that would be possible.

Like I say the majority of people will not bother purchasing an SSD, so the price won't be coming down in a hurry.

Runckle_SP1 said:

Like I say the majority of people will not bother purchasing an SSD, so the price won't be coming down in a hurry.

I don't expect prices to fall rapidly, but not because of the people that won't pay the price, but because of those that do. It is those that hold out that will eventually cause prices to fall, because the manufacturers will want to entice them.