SSD vs HDD

[*= WildCat =*]

If you get a SSD Mossiac ... you will soon see how fast they are

 

[Guillermo Staggs]

SSD has a limited life span that is a fraction of the life of a taken care of hard drive.
Bear in mind all an SSD is is a large econo sized flash drive. After so many operations it goes kaput. A hard drive that is taken care of will run for decades.
If you use the SDD as the primary drive in your system and do a lot of hard drive intensive operations, the SSD will reach its MTBF and all your data will be gone along with your OS.
While less prone to impact damage or impact related failure, The cost factors by the gig are still too much unless you have a design need for it.

Indeed truly i prefer HDD anyways. Currently my hard drive in my current but soon to be replaced PC is 7 years old and ive had no problems with it. On the otherhand i would say that SSD is nice for performance but i would definitely back it up on a hard drive incase it went kaput

 

[Mossiac]

I personally prefer the old. It works and has done. But I can't help myself with new(ish) tech. But can anyone give me a little more on how long an SSD is expected to last?

Mossiac

 

[*= WildCat =*]

Hi

There are two types of SSDs: SLC (single-layer cell) and MLC (multi-layer cell) a SLC drive may last a lifetime but is far more expensive, a MLC drive may last ten years depending on use. There is no hard rules a new drive of any type may last a few days to a few years.

 

[WYSIWUG]

There are two things I like with solid state drives.

1: It's fast

2: Defag'n a SSD is just plain dumb.

 

[TheCrow]

Think of ssd's this way, each time you write on them and a little bit of that ssd dies inside. Which is why ssd's are mainly hold the O.S. and constantly used application to read off of.

 

[strollin]

Think of ssd's this way, each time you write on them and a little bit of that ssd dies inside. Which is why ssd's are mainly hold the O.S. and constantly used application to read off of.

The same exact thing could be said for any living thing, each second we live we come closer to death.

An ssd should go about 8 years for a heavy user before any cells start becoming read-only, a decade or more for an average user. I don't know why critics of ssds harp on this as it really is a non-issue. The max write cycles pertain to each individual cell (1 cell = 1 bit) so it's not like the whole drive goes read-only all of a sudden but 1 bit at a time.

How many users of this board have hdds in their machines that are 8 years old or older?

The reason ssds are used mainly for the OS is not due to the write thing, it's due to them often being small due to their cost in relation to an hdd. As prices for ssds fall and the drives get larger, fewer will be used as OS only.

When, and if, my ssds start hitting the max write cycles, I would hope that there are bigger, faster, less expensive ones (or alternate technology) to replace them.

 

[Mossiac]

Thank you strollin for the info I was after.

I will wait a bit longer for one though as already pointed out the are expensive for the size you don't get.

Mossiac

 

[Mossiac]

Just had a thought. Is RAM part of the SSD family?

 

[Celegorm]

Just had a thought. Is RAM part of the SSD family?

No. If it was, RAM would not lose all of it's information when it loses power.