Let the shitstorm begin!
>>53899779
>he fell for blah blah whatever
>>53899779
>buy SSD
>get no percievable speed gain as 11 of my 12GB of memory was being used to cache my HDD anyways
Not worth the money for consumers.
>>53899779
/g/ only likes old technology, anything that's new or efficient isn't allowed.
>>53899792
Do you not know how cheap SSDs are now days? And it's the fastest way to speed up anyone's computer if they're still using a mechanical drive
>>53899779
Did people forget what ram is used for?
>>53899829
Can't keep up with the new tech grandpa?
>>53899839
u so smart
>>53899779
Enjoy having it die because of too much read/write operations.
Fucktards.
>>53899960
For $40, I don't care how fast it dies. The 3 second boot times and instant program launches are worth it.
>>53899779
Are there really people who pretend that there is no massive speed difference between SSD and HDD?
My OS drive is a mechanical drive from 2001, that wasn't used until three years ago. It just werks.
But yeah, I keep forgetting to buy some new drives.
>>53899818
Definately not, ssd's dont have a cheap enough price which means you have to also have an hdd (especially for servers and mediaheads like myself). No one reasonable is going to buy 6+tb of ssd when hdd is so much cheaper.
All an ssd is good for is the os, and theyre so small that you have to install your other programs on a hdd
>>53900018
You're supposed to use SSD for your OS drive you retard, no one is telling you to buy 6tb of SSD storage
>>53900018
What programs do you use can't fit in a modern SSD? The only thing I can think of is games and they don't benefit from the faster read speeds
>>53899983
I want to say they're trolls, but sadly people like this exist
What are the failure rates like on these things? Low failure rates matters much more to me than speed does.
>>53900117
Anecdotal but I haven't had an SSD fail on me in like 7 years
Why does /g call an ssd a meme? Is it because its just a shit posting board and not a tech board at all?
>>53900072
After having the ssd, i definately cant install all my programs. Windows and frameworks /.nets is about 40 gb, ableton and. Vsts ends up being 45gb, more if you count samples. Adobe suite is around 20gb or more. Just with those 2 youve almost used up a 128gb ssd
>>53900060
Yes? The point is ssd is not king due to price. Its still a luxury component. No need to name call comrade
>>53900215
It seems due the poverty. Same reason they bitch about Apple.
>>53900261
Because a 258gb SSD is thaaat expensive. If you have a computer than can effectively run Adobe Suite well, 150-200 bucks more should be nothing.
>>53899960
>read operations
"no"
Besides, most modern SSDs last for over 500TB of writes easy. The Evo Pro 850 for example reached 2.1PB before it died. 500TB would need 140GB of data being written every single day and it'll last 10 years. Manufacturers guarantee more modest endurance, around 75-150TBW. which would mean 3 years of daily 80-140GB write operations, or more reasonably, 20gb/daily which gives you 10-20 years. So yeah.
>>53900261
>128gb
Are you poor?
>>53900398
Or for the price you could just get hard drives and to hold your raws or other files. The speed is good, the price is not.
Personally i have 2 ssd's but i cant wait for 1tb to becomes cheaper than hard drives
>>53899779
of course, I have only solid state storage on me PC
>>53899960
Oh, I forgot that HDDs don't die.
>>53900496
Hdd death can be fixed and data can be transfered from a dead hdd. Its not the actual platters that stop working
>>53900018
if you didn't use a shit OS, you could have most things on a 32gb ssd.
But it would be more realistic to buy >=128gb.
I have 2 ssds in my laptop and I dualboot on a 128gb, using the bigger for extra data.
It is plenty of space.
Internet speeds are fast enough so offloading on a server with more space is not insane anymore.
So unless you work with really large datasets, ssds are fine
>>53900647
Ableton and vsts is already larger than a 32gb ssd, adobe is too i think.
Again thats my point, ssds are good and i have two, but they're far from cost efficient.
I really should have used 138 as an example, i only meant it as an example for a lower priced computer
>>53899818
i bought an SSD you moron, it literally did not speed up laptop up at all.
>>53900868
>it did not increase fps in my games
>>53899779
> Let the shitstorm begin!
>>>/trash/
>>>/reddit/
>>>/9gag/
>>53900617
>data can be transferred from a dead hdd
yeah if you're willing to spend hundreds of extra dollars, also head crashes can happen too, which DOES fuck your data.
Just back up your shit like a normal person.
>>53900758
a decent 250GB SSD is $90, and if you want even more space, a 500GB SSD is still only $150
>>53900881
I don't play games. I have a base RAM usage of 300mbs, I have 11.7 of disk cache and 24/7 uptime. Disk IO almost never becomes a bottleneck, HDD or SSD.
>>53900901
And a 2tb hdd is 70 dollars. 600 dollars for the speed and less reliability isnt worth it
>>53900868
Stop using it in IDE mode
>>53900976
So what do you do? You expect 4chan to load faster?
>>53900976
>HDD isn't a bottle neck for him
>buys an SSD
Anon you're an idiot
>>53900980
Who installs the OS on a 2tb HDD?
M.2 is best drive
I cannot understand why you wouldn't buy an SSD
>>53899779
Fooking Legendary Thread!!!
4chan rox!!
>>53900980
>"less reliability"
>less heat, weight, and power
>much less prone to damage due to physical impact
>much less prone to vibrational damage
>much less prone to wearing
I reckon SSDs have MUCH less failure rates as well.
What do you mean by less reliable?
>>53900980
>And a 2tb hdd is 70 dollars.
Why bother with HDDs bigger then a single TB? Don't multiple platters increase the failure rate? Just get two 1TB HDDs.
ssd a shit
hdd good
>>53900617
HDD deaths can fail in ways that make recovery not worth the effort/time/money. If you have a backup of the data you would want to recover, which you should, it makes recovery of a dead or dying HDD more of a waste.
>less reliability
What you mean by reliability is the better chance of being able to recover your data if the drive fails. HDDs aren't less susceptible to failure than an SSD, in fact its the other way around because an HDD has more points of failure. So yes you have a better chance data recovery but you're also more likely to be in a situation where you need to recover data.
SSDs aren't unreliable and you don't just hit the read/write limits on accident. The only real benefit to HDDs is more GBs/dollar.
>>53900018
Use a 128gb SSD for OS and programs, and HDD for media you dumbfuck
>>53900758
A decent 256gb one is about $50 on an average day.
I'm a programmer, gamer, media junkie and its way more than enough to store the games I play and programs I use for work.
Everything else gets thrown on a 2tb mechanical.
>>53901131
>HDD
>Not Magnetic Tape
fuck off newfag >>>/v/
>>53899960
Enjoy your head crash after you accidentally touch your laptop, lmao.
>what is wear leveling
>what is SLC/MLC technology
You're a fucktard.
And it doesn't die, it just becomes read only.
>>53901404
>it just becomes read only.
Which is fucking ussless,retard.
>>53901404
iirc they become read only until you reboot at which point it isn't recognized/dies.
>>53899779
>tfw no 32x DDR3/DDR4 rig with parallel 10GbE and SSD/HDD in case of power loss
>>53901432
Oh no! My SSD died, but I can easily access all my files still.
>Useless
can't believe how many poorfags there are on /g/
when 500gb OF THUNDER costs 200€ and you can't afford it then go bury yourself in a shallow grave somewhere
>>53901432
It won't become read only in like 20 years. Nobody cares about such drive after that long.
And it's not useless you dumb cum stain, you can move it to the brand new drive and enjoy it for another 20 years.
Fucking waste of air, just kill yourself
You guys are forgetting who the real mvp is
>>53901214
Not that guy but no, a decent 250 is no more than $70-80 and that is an evo 850.
>>53901454
You realize that it is read only as long as it is turned on, right? As soon as it goes into that mode, if the machine is shut down or rebooted the data is lost.
Not nearly as magical as you want to say. And there are even cases where it won't go into read only mode, it will just fail but that depends on the drive
>>53901543
>As soon as it goes into that mode, if the machine is shut down or rebooted the data is lost.
This is completely taken out of ass.
Look at his cute anime girl. She's right about you, don't you think?
>>53901482
>>53901454
How you all tech illiterate can you be to know that you aren't able TO LITERALLY SAVE stuff?
>>53901587
No, it's the truth you idiot. You really are just regurgitating shit you read here aren't you.
>>53901543
Literally false.
I got 2 burner SSDs off a friend to repairs machines, one crucial and one intel.
Both failed because excessive writes (both were near death and thrown into HMPCs) and both were perfectly readable when dropped into an usb enclosure.
Not saying that'll work with every drive though.
>>53901593
Who said anything about saving things TO the read only drive. I'm talking about copying files off.
Besides, I back everything up anyway. But the chances of getting something off a "dead" ssd vs a dead HDD are lightyears greater
>tfw using about 7TB of space
call me when SSDs are under $40 a terabyte
>mfw the fastest hdd (non-raid) has a write speed of ~250mb/s
>mfw that's an entry level low-tier ssd
>mfw you can have pci 3.0/m.2 that's literally 5 times faster than the fastest hdd for $100
>>53901723
>are lightyears greater
>implying HDDs are really irreparable
>>53901615
Maybe it applies to the absolutely oldest 1st gen used SSDs. Any modern SSD is designed in the proper way.
>>53901593
AFTER 20 YEARS OF CONSTANT USE you dumb slut. Driving gear inside any HDD would easily die in half of this time.
How fucking dumb you must be to not understand that, shit stain?
>>53901784
>AFTER 20 YEARS OF CONSTANT USE you dumb slut. Driving gear inside any HDD would easily die in half of this time.
>How fucking dumb you must be to not understand that, shit stain?
Nigger,you're really stupid. I have a 20 year old MFM HDD and it still works.
>>53901807
Are you saying an SSD wouldn't last for 20 years? What's the main reason for HDD failure?
>>53901698
Have you ever read the stupid article that gets posted in all of these threads? All of those drives followed suit.
You have a much higher chance of one simply being useless than being read only. Not to mention, with a hard drive head failures are rare now, and if a controller fails you can simply swap it out with another one and be on your way. You can't swap controllers on an ssd and retain data.
I run ssds in my laptops and the are fine, but they are not ad the level of replacing spinning disks for everything. If I dropped one into my esxi machine it would degrade very quickly
>>53901807
>AFTER 20 YEARS OF CONSTANT USE you dumb slut.
>CONSTANT USE
>dumb slut
Read it again and again until you understand. Especially the part about being a dumb slut.
>>53901774
They're not. But do you really wanna pay out the ass to someone to take it to save your chinese cartoons?
>>53901587
>Intel's 335 Series failed much earlier, though to be fair, it pulled the trigger itself. The drive's media wear indicator ran out shortly after 700TB, signaling that the NAND's write tolerance had been exceeded. Intel doesn't have confidence in the drive at that point, so the 335 Series is designed to shift into read-only mode and then to brick itself when the power is cycled. Despite suffering just one reallocated sector, our sample dutifully followed the script. Data was accessible until a reboot prompted the drive to swallow its virtual cyanide pill.
>The reaper came for the Kingston HyperX 3K next. As with the 335 Series, the SMART data's declining life indicator foretold the drive's death and triggered messages warning that the end was nigh. The flash held up nicely through 600TB, but it suffered a boatload of failures and reallocated sectors leading up to 728TB, after which it refused to write. At least the data was still accessible at the end. The HyperX didn't respond after a reboot, though. Kingston tells us the drive won't boot if its NAND reserve has been exhausted.
Evo 850 didn't even go into read-only mode. It just failed to boot. But probably does.
>>53901885
>evo
it's a consumer shit drive.
>intel 335
also a consumer drive.
>Evo 850 didn't even go into read-only mode. It just failed to boot.
Read only windows partition won't boot you dumb fucker. It's meant to be taken out and connected as a secondary hdd in order to recover data.
>>53901922
>consumer drive
Yeah and how much experience do you have with slc drives? Good job moving the goalposts
>>53901922
>our attempts to recover data from the drive failed.
>As with the other corpses, the drive wasn't even detected, nixing any possibility of easy data recovery.
Dumb piece of shit
>>53901510
>>53901938
non-consumer isn't equal to SLC, dumb slut.
Look up Pro 1500 and 2500 intel drives.
>>53902009
evo is just a shit drive. It failed not because all ssds do that, that's because that's an unreliable piece of shit drive.
Just like you by the way.
>>53902080
If you are going to get mad after being called out, at least being something to the table.
>>53902107
What? You pleasure yourself while watching your wife being raped by bunch of afroamericans? Is that what you just said?
You can officially call yourself KEK now.
>>53902145
Either prove you own a non-consumer drive, or never talk about read only mode again because you are acting like a tool.
Great memes by the way :)
>>53902080
It's not talking about the evo 840 dumbass. All the drives they tested died that way.
>Any modern SSD is designed in the proper way.
Flat out fucking wrong. Just get the fuck out.
>>53902175
you can leave this board now, kid
I have old intel 710 200gb in my thinkpad
that thing is faster than any HDD I ever own
>>53902290
>All the drives they tested died that way.
Provide proof for that, because for now it smells like a simple incompetence.
>>53902295
You haven't even written 3TB on the damn thing.
>>53902327
http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead
>>53899829
so your machine has 512GB of RAM?
>>53902337
what? 14,2TB? Is that what you just said?
>>53902295
Grats, you bought a 250 gig ssd that will still probably fail when read only mode hits. And until you find someone to say otherwise that I'd what will happen.
Whatever helps you sleep at night :)
>>53902411
poorfag envy is sad
i bet this guy hates apple real bad
>>53902389
Are you people fucking retarded? 14TB isn't jack, and especially 3TB. Typical endurance that's GUARANTEED by the manufacturer is usually 75-150TBW. I'm not saying SSDs are unreliable, quite the opposite. The argument here is whether or not SSDs that become read-only after their failsafes are past their limits only do so ONCE until reboot at which point they aren't recognize and are beyond repair, especially if they use Sandforce. Not a problem if you backup.
>>53902411
>being too stupid to understand how wear leveling works
>>53902389
>European
>shit posting
Why am I not surprised? That thing doesn't even have speeds better than any other drive, and it's mlc. You are guaranteed to have overpaid and you don't even know what will happen when the limit is reached
>>53902441
Does your wife know?
>>53902465
kys dumb faggot
>>53902445
This entire discussion is about how all of the drives tested could not retain data after hitting read only mode. All of them whether is be reboot or straight failure
>>53902456
how did you conclude I'm yuropoor? Are you stupid?
>You are guaranteed to have overpaid
I paid like 40$ for that drive. Once again your argument is stupid and invalid. Typical.
>>53902478
About you being a cuckold.
Just making sure you understand how unethical that is.
>>53901180
Ssds also don't die the way hdds do, most ssds are still readable after having reached the write limit.
>>53902479
I don't care about what happens to my drive after 20 years. I'll be dead in 10 years anyway.
>>53901039
Gotra watch those temps though, amirite. Or have you already gotten a cooler for it?
>>53902526
Read the fucking thread dude because all data points to that either not being the case or not nearly as simple as you say.
>>53900261
We're at 512GB SSD's for good prices now.
>>53899779
They're pretty cool. Upgraded my iPod 5th gen to 1Tb and Rockbox, laptop lasts longer, and desktop and server boot faster.
Guys I just bought an Intel 535 instead of Samsung evo. It was a b bit cheaper
Did I fuck up?
>>53899792
I don't understand cacheing.
Ram doesn't hold any data without power right? So for it to be cached for startup wouldn't the information still need to be pulled from the HDD when the computer boots, and so be limited by the HDD's read speed?
Or am I totally off the mark?
>>53900398
Applefags always boast how much better iOS is over "lagdroid" so I would expect them love SSDs just as much.
>>53902551
No, mine doesn't have a cooler and works fine.
Though keep in mind I'm pairing it with an i5 6600 which is a pretty cool cpu, so there is less heat near there.
>>53899789
haha! I like you.
>>53901404
>And it doesn't die, it just becomes read only.
T O P - F U C K I N G - K E K ! ! !
>>53901885
Why don't drives have reserve NAND for drive failures? Once the drive enters that reserve, it can start bugging the user to replace the drive. Kinda like a car does when you don't put your seatbelt on. This will allow the drive to at least boot.
>>53902560
No, it's just retards saying you can't save anything on it, but you can sill get data out of most ssds by simply copying it to any other storage medium. Everyone who's serious about keeping their data safe should have some form or removable storage device with enough capacity, I have a 32gb flash drive where I keep a copy of all my important data.
Why does this myth that mechanical hard drives last longer than ssd's continue to persist?
Why am I getting these insane numbers on this old SSD? I've done the benchmark numerous times and it always results in some ridiculous score. Is it shitting itself?
>>53906652
try crystaldiskmark
>>53905663
You are totally correct. Op is retarded.
>>53906634
because dumbasses are only focusing on the shit they read on forums. More people complain about SSDs because it's the new thing, HDDs are old hat. I work in a DC and HDDs die much more frequently than SSDs and the SSDs usually show SMART errors and go read-only rather than totally taking a shit like the HDDs do.
>>53907343
If OP is a retard, that actually makes you a fucktard.
