Doubts about ssd

Solution

1 more thing. Most USB controllers will add also a bit of overhead lowering IOPS on SSD. Should not get higher than 5% though. IF you have USB 3.1 then your 500/500 SSD should still do ~470/470
on USB 3.0 it's ~310 MB/s ? something close.

UPDATE:
"The enclosure lacks the faster UASP mode. Real world throughput of USB 3.0 has a maximum of 400MB/sec (USB 3.0 has 36% overhead in the best case scenario)." <- 2012, wow 36% overhead ? Either I had luck with good controllers...

1 more thing. Most USB controllers will add also a bit of overhead lowering IOPS on SSD. Should not get higher than 5% though. IF you have USB 3.1 then your 500/500 SSD should still do ~470/470
on USB 3.0 it's ~310 MB/s ? something close.

UPDATE:
"The enclosure lacks the faster UASP mode. Real world throughput of USB 3.0 has a maximum of 400MB/sec (USB 3.0 has 36% overhead in the best case scenario)." <- 2012, wow 36% overhead ? Either I had luck with good controllers or this much changed from 2012
 
Solution


Well im not saying that im 100% right , but im still learning , but you're right.
Same goes for my USB 2.0 doesn't do 15MB/s write but actually 12MB/s and read is 25MB/s~ (on usb 3.0).
 

nobspls

Reputable
Mar 14, 2018
902
12
5,415
If you use an eSATA interface/adapter and assuming the SSD was just a SATA drive, then in that scenario, there should be no loss in performance.

The problem with SSDs is that you want them routinely powered on to refresh their nand cells, or you could run into data retention issues. By making them an external drive, you run the risk of forgetting about the data, and leaving the drive in some storage bin and after a couple years or more, you go back to it and the data is no good.