What is better for storage in terms of reliablility, a HDD or SSD?
Decent modern SSDs are actually more reliable than HDDs now for consumers.
>>52470715
but who in their right mind pays 600USD for 2TB SSD?
>>52470834
The same kind of person who pays about that much for a GPU, probably.
>>52470834
I'm planning to use an SSD to storage my videos, music and other things, so an ssd will probably last me a life time without investing in more HDDs
>>52470913
yeah but you can RAID1 5x 2TB HDD for half the price and probably have much longer life span and same if not faster speed too, depends on your SATA ports.
>>52470913
This is retarded; you'll get the same lifespan at 1/4 the cost with a decent RAID array.
HDD.
SSD will corrupt data if you don't keep using it.
I believe after two weeks of never being used, it'll start to corrupt data.
>>52470715
go fuck yourself
>>52470567
In terms of physical reliability, SSDs win hands down, since you're not likely to damage one beyond repair unless you blow it up, while HDDs designed specifically for surviving impacts can only take a three foot fall on hard floor.
In terms or electrical reliability, SSDs are more vulnerable to power surges since the memory chips are directly wired to the controller; with an HDD you can always replace a burnt controller, but the platters will never get ruined from electricity.
In terms of data retention, HDDs are better for long-term storage since data does not degrade over time, while SSDs need to be plugged into the system or risk losing data after a few months.
In terms of MTBF, it depends on write intensity, since SSDs are rated in terms of write cycles, while HDDs are rated in terms of hours running and do not degrade with writes.
>>52470913
There's no use in that anon, SSD should only be used for programs and OSes
Has anyone actually had SSDs failing? I don't get it.
>>52471058
>SSD will corrupt data if you don't keep using it.
When is NAND not gonna be shit senpai.
>>52471064
this
>>52471058
>>52471064
>SSD will corrupt data if you don't keep using it.
now that is shit
how bad is this effect? one anon says weeks one months
>>52471088
been using my mx100 for years and it's writing just as fast as i got it on the first day
i don't understand why people replace their SSDs
>>52471102
it's pretty bad and it comes down to your environment.
>>52471064
I'm always going to be powering on the ssd in my computer everyday. Physcial reliablilty, I'm not going to be moving my computer at all, electrical reliablilty is a con for me when using an ssd
the cloud
Theoretical MLC SSD lifetime is usually nowhere near the much lower practical lifetime. I would not use MLC SSDs for any data that would be hard/tedious to reinstall, at least not in less than a RAID 1 setup.
Hard disks and SSDs alike can spontaneously fail, even if the drive health indicators are all good. More reliable SLC SSDs are no longer commercially viable, because it's cheaper and faster for practically the same reliability to just put multiple MLC drives in a redundant array.
ssd is more reliable on a laptop
