Author Topic: SSD Drives - something to consider before taking the plunge (Read 26272 times)

xtabber · « **on:** May 11, 2011, 10:20 PM »

Many tech pundits (who are generally no better informed than other pundits) tell us that within a few years, we will all be running on SSD drives and only using rotating media for videos and other huge infrequently accessed files.

This cautionary tale should make folks think twice about going that route, at least until SSD devices get a little more reliable.

Note that the author is so impressed with the speed of SSDs that he is willing to live with the risk of his data drowning in the bit bucket at any moment. Can't say that I could work that way, even though I am religious about backing everything up frequently and keep ongoing work mirrored on two desktops and a laptop.

The sword of Damocles is just too distracting to be constantly worrying about, to say nothing of the cost.

phitsc · « **Reply #1 on:** May 12, 2011, 02:19 AM »

The general consensus amongst my friends is to use SSDs for OS, applications and reproducible files (compilation etc.) but not for long-time data storage.

I think the important part in the referred article is the table that shows that most of the SSDs mentioned actually broke within the warranty period. I'd hate to have my massively expensive SSD fail shortly after loosing warranty

Dormouse · « **Reply #2 on:** May 12, 2011, 03:25 AM »

I use a SSD for my OS & apps; I don't use it for any data at all. I take and keep images of the SSD fairly frequently which I keep on HDDs. If/when the SSD fails, I will replace it with another. The speed of the SSD is well worth the higher price - to me anyway.

Deozaan · « **Reply #3 on:** May 12, 2011, 05:13 AM »

$560 for 240GB? No wonder he heartily recommends them! He's using a referral link so he makes some commission off of every SSD someone buys due to his articles.

I can't afford to throw away that kind of money every 200 days or so.

Dormouse · « **Reply #4 on:** May 12, 2011, 01:32 PM »

$560 for 240GB?
I can't afford to throw away that kind of money every 200 days or so.
-Deozaan (May 12, 2011, 05:13 AM)

But he's not throwing the money away. There is an advantage to things failing within the warranty period.

I was going to say that there can't be a real need for 240GB, but then I thought of apps that make massive use of lots of scattered bits of data files to work (eg DAWs). and I can see that I might start thinking that it might be worth it.

Deozaan · « **Reply #5 on:** May 12, 2011, 07:18 PM »

$560 for 240GB?
I can't afford to throw away that kind of money every 200 days or so.
-Deozaan (May 12, 2011, 05:13 AM)

But he's not throwing the money away. There is an advantage to things failing within the warranty period.
-Dormouse (May 12, 2011, 01:32 PM)

Good point. I suppose it's like buy one, get 4 free.

Even still, if I had enough money to buy two of those, I could instead buy a very nice desktop computer.

Daleus · « **Reply #6 on:** May 13, 2011, 06:51 AM »

I'm sorry, but I think the salient point for me in that guys post, is that he tried to explain a technical issue via an episode of a trashy sitcom.

I can't trust that kind of knowledge. I'm in the "..not buying a new drive twice a year" crowd on this one. Don't care if they are 5 bucks a pop, I want reliability and in his list of how many days 'til failure, only one unit appeared to last more than a year, with many of them failing far before that.

Sorry, I'll wait the extra few nanoseconds which my brain can't recognize anyway, for longer more reliable storage. While there are applications for a fast storage solution, speed isn't everything and in fact it's mostly nothing.

phitsc · « **Reply #7 on:** May 13, 2011, 06:56 AM »

...

While there are applications for a fast storage solution, speed isn't everything and in fact it's mostly nothing.
-Daleus (May 13, 2011, 06:51 AM)

I have to disagree there. While I'm not sure what you're referring to with 'fast storage' I am of the opinion that there are quite a few 'applications' for fast file access. And speed in this respect can mean lots of $$$ (and efficiency and motivation

)

wreckedcarzz · « **Reply #8 on:** June 13, 2011, 10:33 PM »

Reviving the thread here, but I figured I'd mention it:

I have a Corsair Nova V32 installed in this computer, and there were mixed reviews on NewEgg about it: some were saying it had been running great, others (about 5 out of several pages of 10 each) were saying around the 9-12 month mark, it was crapping out. I was shopping around for a while before I decided to chance it. I went down to the local Fry's Electronics (not wanting to wait for shipping) and had them price match it to NewEgg (saving me ~$25 before taxes). They mentioned that I wouldn't be able to give me a rebate form if I price matched, so I should do the rebate instead of price matching (saving me another $5, and it makes the store look bad to price match, as they have to document it and send it up to "corporate"). I declined and went up to pay and get my SSD, and the gal at the counter gave me my rebate form and rebate recept. I left the store paying $55 (after taxes) for an SSD going for twice as much off the shelf at Fry's, $30 more at NewEgg, leaving with more cash than expected, a thus-far reliable SSD, and a huge grin.

FWIW, I've filled the SSD (to 0 bytes remaining) several times (most recently today, actually; 7zip...

), and it's still going strong. I accidentally started Defraggler on it too a month or so ago, out of habit. It got about 50% done before I realized what I had started. TRIM enabled on Win7, still as fast as the day I bought it.

Link for the interested: http://www.newegg.co...Item=N82E16820233122

iphigenie · « **Reply #9 on:** June 14, 2011, 05:45 AM »

Those of you who have made the jump - did you tweak windows so that the often written folders (cache, virtual memory files, temp folders, user folder) are on another drive or did you just install as normal? Of course on a laptop there is no choice, it is all or nothing anyway, but on a multi drive desktop it might be worth it

PS: I used to do that on XP just to protect my files and settings through the regular reinstalls, but things seem more tangled on windows 7 - but when I dig in there are a lot of configuration, settings and files in the hidden folders under the user tree (put there automatically by apps), some of which would be sorely missed in case of a failure and are not easy to back up except with manual configuration (since the files are hidden)

wreckedcarzz · « **Reply #10 on:** June 14, 2011, 12:35 PM »

I moved swap, Desktop, Documents, Music, Movies, Downloads, and all but a couple games to the 1.5TB HDD. Anything that I was concerned about that had a cache location option got moved (game patch files, Second Life game cache, etc). Temp stays, main user folder stays (just full of virtual folders pointing to the moved ones anyways), AppData stays, etc. As it stands, I have Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (7.84GB) on the SSD and still have 3.33GB free (of 29.8GB).

Dormouse · « **Reply #11 on:** June 14, 2011, 02:13 PM »

Those of you who have made the jump - did you tweak windows so that the often written folders (cache, virtual memory files, temp folders, user folder) are on another drive or did you just install as normal?
-iphigenie (June 14, 2011, 05:45 AM)

I shifted these. As much to save the space as the write limitation.

steeladept · « **Reply #12 on:** June 14, 2011, 07:48 PM »

As it stands, I have Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (7.84GB) on the SSD
-wreckedcarzz (June 14, 2011, 12:35 PM)

How appropriate.

Re OP:
I haven't looked recently, but given the price difference and the reliability, why not look at 10k RPM disk drives if the speed is that important? More reliable, very fast, and about the same price IIRC (at work so I can't check actual pricing). I find 7200RPM drives with lots of size options perfectly fine and very cheap for my desktop, but I have been thinking of going with either SSD or 10k RPM drives on my next build. Currently leaning toward the 10k drives, but since the build isn't that near yet, things may change.

wreckedcarzz · « **Reply #13 on:** June 14, 2011, 08:47 PM »

As it stands, I have Need for Speed: Hot Pursuit (7.84GB) on the SSD
-wreckedcarzz (June 14, 2011, 12:35 PM)
How appropriate.
-steeladept (June 14, 2011, 07:48 PM)

mouser · « **Reply #14 on:** June 17, 2011, 09:03 PM »

According to this talk, you are wasting your life if you don't own a SSD: http://www.livestrea...19-8aaf-35a839b6ecaa

Renegade · « **Reply #15 on:** June 17, 2011, 09:55 PM »

According to this talk, you are wasting your life if you don't own a SSD: http://www.livestrea...19-8aaf-35a839b6ecaa
-mouser (June 17, 2011, 09:03 PM)

That was sexcellent~!

wreckedcarzz · « **Reply #16 on:** June 18, 2011, 12:20 AM »

According to this talk, you are wasting your life if you don't own a SSD: http://www.livestrea...19-8aaf-35a839b6ecaa
-mouser (June 17, 2011, 09:03 PM)

love it

Deozaan · « **Reply #17 on:** June 18, 2011, 03:23 AM »

According to this talk, you are wasting your life if you don't own a SSD: http://www.livestrea...19-8aaf-35a839b6ecaa
-mouser (June 17, 2011, 09:03 PM)

I don't get it. What's are IOPS?

Ath · « **Reply #18 on:** June 18, 2011, 03:27 AM »

What's are IOPS?
-Deozaan (June 18, 2011, 03:23 AM)

IOPS are I/O operations Per Second^w

Deozaan · « **Reply #19 on:** June 18, 2011, 03:43 AM »

Thanks.

But I still don't get it. He really expects the average person to go out and spend $1,000+ for a 600GB SSD?

justice · « **Reply #20 on:** June 18, 2011, 05:24 AM »

no he's talking to server administrators

Deozaan · « **Reply #21 on:** June 18, 2011, 06:00 AM »

no he's talking to server administrators
-justice (June 18, 2011, 05:24 AM)

So basically everything he said doesn't apply to me. I'm not wasting my life if I don't have an SSD. Got it.

Dormouse · « **Reply #22 on:** June 18, 2011, 06:15 AM »

So basically everything he said doesn't apply to me. I'm not wasting my life if I don't have an SSD.
-Deozaan (June 18, 2011, 06:00 AM)

Well, seems to me you will probably be wasting some of it if you don't have one

; rather depends on how much of your life you have to spend to earn the money to buy & fit one & what else you would do with any time saved.

Renegade · « **Reply #23 on:** June 18, 2011, 08:51 AM »

They really are much faster. Since installing one, Visual Studio is WAY faster. It's really that good.

Now, $1,000? Dunno. I have a cheapo 128 GB SSD for something like $200 or $220 (I forget). The next step up here was a grand for a 256 GB drive. Ummm... I'll skip that.

Deozaan · « **Reply #24 on:** June 18, 2011, 05:29 PM »

You are wasting your life if you aren't a nudist! Think of those precious seconds wasted lowering your pants every time you have to use the toilet! Think of the seconds wasted getting dressed! Think of how much sooner you could be bathing/showering or having sex if you didn't have to get undressed first! Just imagine how much faster health services would be if you didn't have to remove your clothing and then slip into the hospital gown.

I know it may not seem like much, these few seconds here and there. But consider two things:

1. These seconds add up. If you shower every day and use the toilet two times a day, that's at least two times each day you go through the entire process of adding or removing all your clothes, and at least two times each day you partially go through the process of removing your clothes. Multiply those few seconds by every day of your life and I wouldn't be surprised if entire hours were wasted changing your state of (un)dress!

2. Multiply this time wasted by about 6 billion people on the earth and you begin to see the scale of time wasted on this trivial matter.

It's time for a modern solution to a problem that has plagued humanity for millenia. Take your clothes off and never put them on again. You are just wasting your life otherwise.