SSDs are fast, but do they last?

[Dave76]

Have you been writing a lot to it?
It will start 'Lifetime Throttling'.

Or it might need to run garbage collection, let your system sit at login for at least two hours at least once a week, this has worked for others.

Wait... what? Really?! I never knew about that!
I don't really write to it much myself, but Windows does haha. Well, ok, I can let it sit ther everyday if I want to... I leave my PC open most of the time, so, let it sit at logon is just an other place to let it sit haha.

The first time it may take a little longer but on a weekly basis a couple hours should be enough, unless you're doing heavy writes.

 

[Tarka Dal]

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!

 

[sygnus21]

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.

 

[Tarka Dal]

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!

 

[Outlander]

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?

 

[GeneO]

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.

 

[seekermeister]

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.

 

[Tarka Dal]

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

 

[seekermeister]

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.

 

[smarteyeball]

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

Hardly rubbish.

If by 'transferring the disc to another drive' involves moving delicate parts like platters etc to another drive, then the validity of that recovery method automatically eliminates the vast majority of home users.

The percentage who go to such lengths to recover data are minuscule in comparison to those who do not. The same applies to SSD drives.

The most common fault with SSD's lie with the controllers - not the nand that that contains the data. Replace controller, recover data. Once again however, what percentage of users would go to such lengths?

Mechanical HDD's may have a few more 'second chance tricks' available compared to SSD's, but regardless of drive, once they are dead, they are dead. Kaput. Broken. Inoperable. Unusable. In short - they are ****ed. They have ceased to function. Not even Christ himself armed with a bagful of miracles can recover data from a dead drive.


So for all intents and purposes, to the vast majority of consumers; a dead HDD is as good as a dead SSD.

 

[seekermeister]

You under estimate Christ. Not that it really matters, because for him, computers are trivial.

 

[smarteyeball]

Maybe I do. Or maybe he is bad at IT support. It's not an RMA process I'm likely to deal with.

You're right about it not mattering though, figments rarely do.

At any rate, I know he'd have an SSD and to hell with the consequences

 

[Tarka Dal]

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

Hardly rubbish.

If by 'transferring the disc to another drive' involves moving delicate parts like platters etc to another drive, then the validity of that recovery method automatically eliminates the vast majority of home users.

The percentage who go to such lengths to recover data are minuscule in comparison to those who do not. The same applies to SSD drives.

The most common fault with SSD's lie with the controllers - not the nand that that contains the data. Replace controller, recover data. Once again however, what percentage of users would go to such lengths?

Mechanical HDD's may have a few more 'second chance tricks' available compared to SSD's, but regardless of drive, once they are dead, they are dead. Kaput. Broken. Inoperable. Unusable. In short - they are ****ed. They have ceased to function. Not even Christ himself armed with a bagful of miracles can recover data from a dead drive.


So for all intents and purposes, to the vast majority of consumers; a dead HDD is as good as a dead SSD.

The only use for a SSD is as previously said the OS and Raid or cloud computing where that drive holds a percentage of the information carried. A HDD can be recovered by a specialist if required an SSD can not! If your talking about home computing you need an HDD backup!

P.S. What happened to your eye!

 

[yowanvista]

SSDs are overpriced compared to HDDs and don't offer larger capacities

 

[Dave76]

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

Hardly rubbish.

If by 'transferring the disc to another drive' involves moving delicate parts like platters etc to another drive, then the validity of that recovery method automatically eliminates the vast majority of home users.

The percentage who go to such lengths to recover data are minuscule in comparison to those who do not. The same applies to SSD drives.

The most common fault with SSD's lie with the controllers - not the nand that that contains the data. Replace controller, recover data. Once again however, what percentage of users would go to such lengths?

Mechanical HDD's may have a few more 'second chance tricks' available compared to SSD's, but regardless of drive, once they are dead, they are dead. Kaput. Broken. Inoperable. Unusable. In short - they are ****ed. They have ceased to function. Not even Christ himself armed with a bagful of miracles can recover data from a dead drive.


So for all intents and purposes, to the vast majority of consumers; a dead HDD is as good as a dead SSD.

+1

The only use for a SSD is as previously said the OS and Raid or cloud computing where that drive holds a percentage of the information carried. A HDD can be recovered by a specialist if required an SSD can not! If your talking about home computing you need an HDD backup!

SSDs can be used for any data storage.
The only thing that is preventing this is the price, and that will go down, eventually.

There are some failed HDDs that can't be recovered and even some that can would be very expensive.

 

[Tarka Dal]

SSDs can be used for any data storage.
The only thing that is preventing this is the price, and that will go down, eventually.

There are some failed HDDs that can't be recovered and even some that can would be very expensive.

I'll do it for free but the parts need to be supplied.
& no Guarantees

 

[Dave76]

That's good, I'll contact you if one fails, do you pay for the shipping?

I keep several backup images, yes, on HDDs, so it's easier to get a new HDD as they are still pretty cheap.

If my SSD died, I would cuss a bit and then go buy another one.
The SSD testing I mentioned previously, one is at 300+ TiB and still going strong, most of the others are over 200 TiB and none have died, yet.
There was another test being done that went over 1 PB, the guy evidently got tired of writing to it after a year, so stopped.

 

[pparks1]

SSDs are overpriced compared to HDDs and don't offer larger capacities

They are far more expensive that HDD's, but they are substantially faster. Access times of 0.1ms versus 12-15ms on most standard HDD's.

Large capacities are usually not available or are tremendously cost ineffective. But the beauty of the SSD is to run your OS and programs from. You should continue to use HDD's for the storage of all data. Therefore, you likely don't need huge capacities.

 

[toughbook]

I once read a great qoute.

The only people who have nothing but negative comments about SSD's are the one's who can't afford them.

If you were to be given a SSD and used it I am 100% positive you would not want to give it back for your mechanical HDD.

I am currently using my 5th SSD. From a very Intel SLC to a Samsung 470. I have never had as much as a hiccup. I just can't say that for all the spinners I used to own. Heck, I even put one of my old SSD's in my Directv DVR Talk about getting thru the guide in no time!

 

[Dave76]

+1, :grouphug: