SSDs are pointless

Tell me a good reason to use an SSD.
>5x faster than HDDs
>breaks after 3 years

the whole idea about disks are saving data, not read/write speed. if you are /v/ you don't get an opinion

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 90K)

Other urls found in this thread:

anandtech.com/show/8747/samsung-ssd-850-evo-review/4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>breaks after 3 years
I've had mine for four, four and a half. It's the number of writes that is limited, not the timespan. And I would have to write 50 GB continuously every day for over five years for it to become a problem.

My 6 year old SSD still works

Oh, and before you go on about "hurr durr if you take the power out, you lose data". I had it outside my cabinet for 3 months, without any data loss at all. So I guess Jow Forums is just a bunch of memesters.

Stop buying Kingston/2D NAND SSDs OP, literally even chink ones are better.

>disk are for saving data
That's why write speed is important.

Ofc saving data is fucking pointless if you can't retrieve it so that's why read speed is important.
SSDs should be used for applications that need quick and easy saving and retrieving not for long term storage.

Was looking to buy a new laptop recently, and the price is higher for the same specs than 5 years ago (or same if adjusted for inflation). And then there are these things. 32GB storage on a PC? Current year? Really?

you don't an specific amout of writes until it dies, one day it will randomly malfunction
matter of time
I had pic related and it broke after 2 years and 2 months. a lot of other people get the same with every single brand, even samsung

I have a SSD from before they had trim support in Windows 7, still running fine. Surely you didn't store your swap file on the SSD and buy one with just enough capacity did you?

Yes. You can literally stream anything and backup all your shit online. What the fuck do you need a large drive for in a laptop.

>you don't an specific amout of writes until it dies, one day it will randomly malfunction
lol what?

Also, in my experience, SSDs are a hell of a lot more reliable than magnetic drives. I wouldn't dare to run magnetic disks today without them being in a RAID with parity and redundancy.

And btw, when you exceed the number of writes, the SSD is still readable, so you can recover your data anyway.

I run windows 10 for the first year, then i only stored /boot and /.

SSDs last longer than HDDs in normal home use OP. You can be mad about your shit breaking all you want but that's statistics for you. Tons of people buy HDDs and have them fail after 2 weeks.

Not using your SSD for only your OS

Attached: Degenerate.jpg (600x600, 105K)

>I had pic related and it broke after 2 years and 2 months. a lot of other people get the same with every single brand, even samsung
Then either you got the crappy one or you do write a lot like 500GB/day

>when you exceed the number of writes, the SSD is still readable, so you can recover your data anyway.

you got a point there. it isnt still a sensible solution from a consumer point of view since they are expensive for the amount of storage you get

Damn, all SSDs fail after 3 years and Samsung has a 5 year warranty on theirs, even the cheap EVO drives. Someone call Samsung, they're literally throwing money away having to replace 100% of their SSDs for free, that can't be good for business.

You're not paying for the amount of storage your paying for the speed you dense nigger

Where is the point in creating these threads? Is this a time traveller from 2010?

I used to build file servers for my friends back in the days, and I would usually buy 8 HDDs at the time for RAID5+1, and every bulk of disks I bought, there was always one fucker that was dead on delivery.

>hdd
crashes and explodes after 3 nanoseconds of use
>ssd
progressively degrades for centuries, and after it runs out you still keep the data.

>it isnt still a sensible solution from a consumer point of view since they are expensive for the amount of storage you get
Well, you could use this argument against high-end CPUs and GPUs as well, though.

>it isnt still a sensible solution from a consumer point of view

Someone should alert the consumer because they keep buying them. Normies stream everything and store everything in the cloud. I like having a TB of local storage on my laptop and find the price on a TB SSD too high compared to a HDD. I'm not representative of the consumer point of view.

HDDs are quite fragile
CPUs and GPUs processes data, SSDs don't

I have a Samsung 840 series SSD I bought at launch. 120GB drive that is nearing 6 years old now. Has 98TB written to it over it's life span thus far and both Samsung magician and Crystal disk are showing 100% drive health. It's my OS drive in my main build to this day. I a!so have a 250GB and 500GB 850 Evo drives with easily 100TB written to each because before becoming my game install drives, they were for work and scratch space. I have a 960 Evo 500GB now too as a main work drive.

Either you're writing 250GB per day every day (in which case you should be getting a Pro series drive for the longer write lifespan and warranty), and that's what's killing the drives, or you just have bad luck. Maybe check your power supply. I had a good Antec unit suddenly start killing anything plugged into a specific SATA power tree. Took a DVD drive and 2 disks with it before I narrowed down the issue.

>CPUs and GPUs processes data,
80% of Jow Forums and 99% of /v/ use them primarily for gaming.

I mean, when was the last time we had a solid CUDA or OpenCL thread here? We only occasionally have memelearning threads.

>HDDs are quite fragile
Indeed.

>you don't an specific amout of writes until it dies, one day it will randomly malfunction
You realize that this exact same thing can be said about hard drives, right? Hell, it applies even more to hard drives simply because of the fact they have moving parts and many more points of failure.

>Has 98TB written to it over it's life span thus far and both Samsung magician and Crystal disk are showing 100% drive health.

I wrote 13.9 TB over those 2 years and 2 months, CrystalDiskMark and Samsung Magician say it's in 100% drive health. Still you can't write shit.

If you take care of dust, and cooling you should never have a problem. From my experience only 1 out of 12 HDDs I've come across has broken in less than 3 years. The rest still function, even one from around mid 2000's

>breaks after 3 years
I've had the same one for about 10 years

This, too, applies to SSDs.
SSDs are inherently more resistant to random failure than HDDs ever will be, because they 1) have less parts that can fail, and 2) have no moving parts to eventually wear down.
But you also get what you pay for, if you buy the cheapest chinkshit you can find, the cheapest chinkshit is what you get. Don't buy SSDs that aren't either Intel, Samsung, or SanDisk.

By the way, I have an HDD with more than 10 years of power on time in my system right now.

Attached: sp2504c.png (674x727, 76K)

>Tell me a good reason to use an SSD.
Laptops

mines a Samsung 850 EVO nigga

>Don't buy SSDs that aren't either Intel, Samsung, or SanDisk.
SanDisk SSDs are low quality. Cheap Intel SSDs are using ancient shit like sandforce controllers

Best SSD manufacturers seem to be samsung and crucial

Then you have a 5 year warranty.

>samsung
>good

opinion discarded

I know, it still stops my production for a few days. At least I don't have to pay so its relieving.

SSHD master race

A great idea completely made pure shit thanks to abhorrent implementations, just use Intel's RST or AMD's StoreMI with a smallish SSD
You can't? Then you're fucked or have to use GNU/Linux and one of the many SSD software caching solutions

You could do all that shit 5 years ago as well, AND you could store it on your drive as well if you wanted to.
It's strictly a downgrade.

SSDs last longer than HDD though and it's been shown.


Stop buying from shitty third party brands and it won't break. Also it's far more than 5x faster.

>5x faster
You mean 10x faster at least
>breaks in 3 years
You mean 10 years

Well, if you had a random failure you got unlucky as fuck. It happens sometimes, it can happen to literally anything. Still doesn't mean that SSDs aren't inherently more resilient than HDDs, though.

I'm still using all my ssd's
from 2014

you're going to need better bait.

please list all the great storage manufacturers out there to choose from instead

Silent, it's nice to have a silent/super quiet computer, expecially for production.
A looooot faster response time.
They don't randomly fail after two years, like a HDD.
They aren't that expensive for what you get.

If you think SSDs are not worth it, you shouldn't even have built a PC in the first place.

ignore that moron

You need to keep up with the firmware on any SSD.
early SSD's failed a lot but newer ones depend on firmware and the amount of writes

if your a heavy user then industrial SSD's will be the better call.

I've been using the same SSD for 6 years every single day, wtf are you talking about.

My two SanDisk SSDs were my best purchases yet. I'm tempted to try NVME but in reality I don't need the storage.

i have never seen an ssd break. hdds do usually break after 5 years

Attached: ca.png (402x577, 49K)

Don't care about speed.
I care about 0 noise and not waiting for the disks to spin up.
Hard drives belong in servers.

Crucial

period

pick related for 6 years go fuck yourself

Attached: DSC_2833sm.jpg (600x430, 62K)

crucial is the only good flash mfg prove me wrong

my nigga
my OS and Steam drives are both vertex 4s

they have a 6 month non power lifespan before the data corrupts

>breaks after 3 years
I haven't had one die yet. Maybe try not buying garbage.

Attached: bait.jpg (200x200, 4K)

>15x faster than HDD
>"Breaks" after 20 years, can still read data off of it to transfer to new drive
Name one reason to use HDDs besides cost. You can't because there literally isn't one.

>Name one reason to use HDDs
You can destroy data more reliably on HDDs than SSDs

Attached: 1508875086627.jpg (385x383, 19K)

>Still using Intel 520 from 2012, 100% drive health

Still using same HDD from 2009 too, but that's making noise now, going to get 1TB MX500 to replace it and keep that when I do new build in a year or two.

Just snap the SSD.

name one reason OP isnt a massive faggot.
protip: you can't

Attached: kthxbye.jpg (430x250, 15K)

13k hours on a Plextor 256GB
12K on a PNY 480GB
then again, the WD 600GB 10k RPM drives have pic related hours

Attached: Thats a lotta hours.png (1000x641, 450K)

>be me
>have 128GB ADATA SSD for over 5 years now.
>apparently they break after three
Ok

>breaks after 3 years
I've been using mine for like 6 and it's just fine. Meanwhile the HDD I bought at the same time broke over a year ago.

7th hard drive

raid 0, 30TB, all SSDs

Attached: 1522452965939.jpg (4011x2100, 3.73M)

What HDD was it?

its like you dont even have a file server

bullshit

>falling for the SSD meme

Attached: 1498914025938.png (445x472, 191K)

Checked through my old speccy screenshots and apparently it was a Seagate ST31000528AS. I got it the same time I got my 840 pro.

kek, so when they're standing in the racks at Computer City down the road from me, they "dying"? Nice one.

if you wont buy good ram you are fuckiing pleb

>you don't an specific amout of writes until it dies, one day it will randomly malfunction
But that applies to any and all electronics

boot sure does take significantly longer

going on four years at least

Don't knock it till you've tried it.

Are chink ssds the same quality as more expensive ones? I mean the ones by PNY, ADATA, KingDian

>Are chink ssds the same quality as more expensive ones?
No, sometimes chink SSDs are SLC with no DRAM cache so they die a lot quicker.

>not read/write speed
DVD-RAM was made just for you. Just in case that you've just woke up from a coma, there are internet connections that moves data as fast as mechanical hard disks can read/write these days.

>SSDs last longer than HDD though and it's been shown.
Source?

JEDEC standard is 3 months for enterprise, 1 year for client. Varies with temperature. Anyone can check the specifications easily.

anandtech.com/show/8747/samsung-ssd-850-evo-review/4
Depends heavily on use. Most people should expect a death from component failure rather than write wear.

Oh look more Western Digital AstroTurf.

Call me when you have a 100TB 2.5” drive.

>faster
You answered your own question. Also there's durability for laptops.
>the whole idea about disks are saving data, not read/write speed.
I have disks for both.

It's basically impossible to wear off modern 3D NAND in client workloads.

Thank you. Are Samsung's SSDs the most reliable? Which other manufacturers should be considered?

>the whole idea about disks are saving data, not read/write speed.
Oh good. So we should just drop hard drives entirely and use tape drive/SSD combos in our PCs.

>Which other manufacturers should be considered?
Anyone that fabs it's own NAND: Samsung/Intel/Micron (Crucial)/Toshiba/WD.

why would slc die faster you mongoloid

Rotational velocidensity isn't a problem on SSDs, though. It's a tradeoff.

>5x faster than HDDs
My Samsung 960 evo M.2 is actually 20x faster r/w than a 7200 u/min 3,5" HDD (measured myself) and I'm not even talking about access time.

>breaks after 3 years
Never happened to any if my ssds. I had two HDDs fail.

You forgot:
- smaller
- lighter
- silent
- less power hungry
- oil proof (need for my oil build, pic related)

Attached: IMG_20180518_224839~01.jpg (2930x1848, 846K)

You can buy ssd with OPAL 2.0 specification with
Disk sanitization / Crypto-shredding or Crypto erase option.

Crypto-shredding is the practice of 'deleting' data by (only) deleting or overwriting the encryption keys. When a cryptographic disk erasure (or crypto erase) command is given (with proper authentication credentials), the drive self-generates a new media encryption key and goes into a 'new drive' state.

This only works with SED drives not regular ones.

whoopsies, just rechecked that bench of ssds dying after petabytes of writes and it was tlc that died way before everything else

SMART info:
5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct = 0
9 Power_On_Hours = 10821 [h]
12 Power_Cycle_Count = 3543
177 Wear_Leveling_Count = 93 [%]
179 Used_Rsvd_Blk_Cnt_Tot = 0
190 Airflow_Temperature_Cel = 27 [°C]
241 Total_LBAs_Written = 21.281 [TB]

850EVO here 3y old drive.

I'm on my third SSD...

First was a Crucial Mx100 rated for like 75TBW and it's fucking MLC. Health dropped below 80%, randomly started dropping out, BSODs and then disappears from BIOS till I cold cycled it.

Second was some generic local brand 120GB that I used as a server boot drive, lasted about 3 years, went into read only mode, Replaced it with a WD black HDD.

Currently running a Kingston UV400 240GB, a bit over half an year or so old. No problems so far. Contemplating upgrading to a 512gb dunno what brand yet, people keep recommending Crucial, but after my MX100, I dunno.

Samsung doesn't sell their drives in my country.

h'haaaaaa

Samsung is the gold standard.
Intel is really good too.
Micron based SSDs(Crucial for example) are good too.
ADATA uses both Micron and Intel NAND, they are good but they mostly make low end SSDs only.
Avoid Kingston at all costs, horrible quality in general(V300 and V400 are literally the worst SSDs in the market, even Chink SSDs are better), HyperX line is worth considering if there is a nice sale, otherwise avoid, all other options are better.
Toshiba is just werks.
WD is mostly sandisk rebrands, still really good choice but usually overpriced.

SP has been following the ADATA path, their SSDs are pretty much clones, same controller, same NAND but different boards layout.
Example SP S55 is almost the same than ADATA SU650.

Kingdian and Mushkin SSDs are chink stuff, while "reliable" and cheap not the best idea to get one.