Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > Storage

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2017, 03:07 PM
Sagath's Avatar
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 3,220

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prickly007 View Post
In two years, my OS drive (Intel 730 240GB) lost 2% of its health- currently being used as a Steam drive,
So in 50 years according to your current writes it should die. Amazing!

Obviously not quite true. Clearly more dead space will expedite the writes to remaining cells killing those cells faster as space diminishes...But still. We're talking about at least one, probably two, maybe three decades?

The weird part about all this 'endurance' talk on reviews and the internet is that in the age of mechanical NO ONE talked about endurance. Sure, we mentioned if it seemed like a certain brand had quite a few internet-trends of dying...

Why all this talk about endurance of SSDs in todays market? Even more so when all the white-papers show decades of normal use before failure?

I just dont understand the focus I guess...
__________________
My Disclaimer to any advice or comment I make;
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroSsFiRe2009 View Post
I'm a self certified whizbang repair technician with 20 years of professional bullshit so I don't know what I'm talking about
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2017, 04:01 PM
Allstar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Metro-Vancouver
Posts: 513

My System Specs

Default

I am not worried per say, but your oldest drive is in better health? To drive the price point ever lower, I won't be surprised if SSDs become less robust over time. Like almost every other consumer product; I was looking at espresso machines last night and no manufacture seems to offer warranties longer than a year any more, despite prices (in some case well) north of 350 US/600 Cdn... for the same model.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagath View Post
Why all this talk about endurance of SSDs in todays market? Even more so when all the white-papers show decades of normal use before failure?
Part of it, I suspect, is endurance becomes important if one wants to replace HDDs being used for specific purposes. My media drive, for example, averages (according to HDD sentinel) almost 43GB per day in writes. That figure would be even higher, if all tasks were consolidated onto one drive.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old April 3, 2017, 05:14 PM
AkG's Avatar
AkG AkG is offline
Hardware Canucks Reviewer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,814
Default

Actually 'drive health' is not a great way of seeing how a drive is doing. It will eat all its own over-provisioning and replace dead blocks before its health significantly decreases.

You could easily have all the NAND at 1K worth of writes away from going read only and not know it. Why? Because drive health reporting sucks on consumer/home SSDs. The reason it will not be changing anytime soon is mfg'ers don't want it to be more accurate than 'in the same county' accurate... as they would get a lot of bad PR from peeps who try and RMA a 'dying drive' (which it isn't... its doing what its supposed to) and were denied.

Basically NAND has gotten more fragile with every node-shrink... but controllers have gotten so much more gentle on the NAND (and those node shrinks usually increase on die OP) that the overall its a net gain in longevity.

Want to ensure that a drive has the best chance of lasting a decade? Increase the OP. Turn 275GBers into 240s. Turn 240s into 200. For the bigger... give it 100GB and not worry about NAND dying unless you hammer it non-stop day in day out (and it should still last years and years). This is why I like bigger SSDs... as 100GB on 2TB is nothing... but its 'hard' to take that big a hit on a 250GB or even 500GB ssd. YMMV
__________________
"If you ever start taking things too seriously, just remember that we are talking monkeys on an organic spaceship flying through the universe." -JR

“if your opponent has a conscience, then follow Gandhi. But if you enemy has no conscience, like Hitler, then follow Bonhoeffer.” - Dr. MLK jr
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old April 14, 2017, 01:23 PM
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 238

My System Specs

Default

Do (does anyone") you like the Corsair Neutron XTi 480GB? It was $199 just the other day. Not sure how long... I know HC reviewed it. I was considering it but it's back up to $249. It is the 2nd time I saw it discounted and the next day, it was $50 more expensive. It makes me want to boycot Corsair. I think this company does this more than any other - that I can tell.

The only other option/choice that I can see is the MX300 512GB. It's around $190.

Final question is whether I need approx. 500GB or not. ;)
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old April 14, 2017, 11:10 PM
AkG's Avatar
AkG AkG is offline
Hardware Canucks Reviewer
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,814
Default

The XTi is a decent drive.... but I would pick the MX300 525GB over it. Turn it into a 480 and you have a drive that will probably never run out of NAND (not that it is of great concern for under 5 years of usage). Plus its cheaper so its win-win.
__________________
"If you ever start taking things too seriously, just remember that we are talking monkeys on an organic spaceship flying through the universe." -JR

“if your opponent has a conscience, then follow Gandhi. But if you enemy has no conscience, like Hitler, then follow Bonhoeffer.” - Dr. MLK jr
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GTX 660 SLI vs GTX 680 - Subjective Comparison great_big_abyss Video Cards 14 April 9, 2013 05:02 AM
Price Comparison Jon_di2 Suggestions & Feedback 13 May 9, 2009 02:15 PM
Thermal paste comparison Technokat Overclocking, Tweaking and Benchmarking 3 April 7, 2009 08:12 PM
AA comparison of ATI and NV in games walkingdog Video Cards 9 September 10, 2008 04:20 PM
8800 gt - gts comparison. Squeetard Video Cards 20 November 19, 2007 02:17 PM