Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Where are we with SSD?

Tags:
  • Hard Drives
  • SSD
  • Computers
  • Storage
Last response: in Storage
Share
November 15, 2011 1:16:24 PM

are we installing these in business computers yet? or they are still to unstable for such use? will drive degradation be a permanent trait of the SSD technology? or is this something that will be fixed?

More about : ssd

a b G Storage
November 15, 2011 1:53:27 PM

Normally business computers (for the regular worker who just types emails/docs) aren't put to extreme use.

I would say they would be fine. Drive degradation is common even among Hard disk drives (although the years of manufacturing and improving the drives has lowered their failure rate).

SSD's will always have drive degradation - but it also depends on the firmware (and the quality of the flash cells) of the drive as well.

If you have a decent SSD drive - and it doesn't crap out from a manufacturing defect, you should be able to notice a slow down of the drive once the flash cells start to get defective after so many writes - before it completely dies.
m
0
l
a c 544 G Storage
November 15, 2011 2:15:08 PM

Chainzsaw said:
If you have a decent SSD drive - and it doesn't crap out from a manufacturing defect, you should be able to notice a slow down of the drive once the flash cells start to get defective after so many writes - before it completely dies.


It won't completely die after all of the P/E (Program/Erase) cycles have been used; it will just become a Read Only drive, so you will still be able to recover any needed data.
m
0
l
Related resources
November 15, 2011 2:57:29 PM

good info, but any idea if responsible computer people are installing these for small business needs? ie. you got 12 employees in an office, each with their own computer on a network, would it be irresponsible to install ssd's on their machines?

i built a really high end system for a guy some months ago, i put a raptor in his system rather than go ssd, because he wanted reliability. also put a caviar black in it.

i'm just trying to figure out , are we ever going to put aside the mechanical drives for ssd, or will that require a whole new technology to antiquate the mechanical drive?
m
0
l
a c 544 G Storage
November 15, 2011 3:11:40 PM

Hard disk drives were developed in the 1950's, and consumer HDDs have been around since the 1970's. Consumer SSDs have only been available since 2007 so it will probably be 10 years or so before SSDs outnumber HDDs.

If you use Intel SSDs for small business needs it would not be irresponsible.

I'm a SandForce (OCZ) fan myself, but I would only recommend them to hobbyists/system builders at this point in time due to compatibility/reliability issues.
m
0
l
November 15, 2011 3:27:39 PM

when i was doing a bunch of ssd research some months ago...i was surprised to see a company i've had 0 dealings with seemed to have the best reviews, which was Crucial.

would you give the same endorsement to intel, if it's being used on an amd chipset?
m
0
l
a b G Storage
November 15, 2011 3:33:57 PM

Yes, it doesn't matter which chipset you use (as long as it's reliable - which most modern chipsets are).

Intel and crucial both have very reliably SSD currently.

But - if your an enthusiest like Dereck - I would also go with a sandforce SSD (I actually own a previous sandforce controller - on the Vertex 2).

They tend to have the highest I/O as well as R/W - and currently my Vertex 2 is still chugging along nicely for about the past 6~ months with no issues (i had previous issues which a firmware update fixed).
m
0
l
a c 415 G Storage
November 15, 2011 3:51:53 PM

As Chainzsaw said, business computers don't generally need to be particularly fast. There's no reason you couldn't use an SSD for a business computer, but few businesses would care to spend the extra money to do it unless there was some pretty convincing justification. And most IT departments would shy away from the latest "fad" SSDs and stick with the tried and true - which, in IT terms, probably means Intel.

In terms of the basic technology, SSDs are always going to be more expensive in terms of cost per byte than hard drives (well, for the next 10 years, at least) and they'll always have limitations on the number of writes that they can accept. For businesses which run servers that absolutely need the kind of performance that only an SSD can deliver, they will accept those limitations and buy drives that are designed for the Enterprise in mind. Those drives cost a premium because they either use (a) larger cell sizes to increase write endurance, or (b) have much more spare capacity than usual so as to spread the write load across more cells. The only real alternative is battery-backed RAM, which has its own set of issues.
m
0
l
a c 353 G Storage
November 15, 2011 4:10:48 PM

Reliability, long term is still open and will be for a couple of years. Munf can simulate usage, but is no subsitute for real long term usage. My own opinion is the will be reliable. Todate the primary problem is design flaws concentrated in the firmware. These problems are gerally corrected realtively quick (SF2281 being an exception).

As to the general office enviorment, they simply are not cost effective and probably will not be for the near term. Two small and cost soooo much more than a HDD. Case inpoint: I have a older Dell laptop. At work, most desktops have been replaced with laptops so that they can be used both at work and on travel. I need a larger HD, not so much a faster one. At work the laptop is on 24/7, and has been since 2008. They are replacing these old systems with newer ones - Dought very seriousely they will have a SSD. The cost for say a 1000 laptops with SSDs vs HDD would add 130 grand that could better be spent else where.

Individually, some MAY have the need for speed, but normally SSDs, due to size, only boost OS and program load times Not a real biggy. If I need one at work, the project I'm on would buy me one.

That said, I had NO qualms about replacing a SCSI 2 Gig HDD with a 8 gig SLC drive in a critical computer (connected to a 20 Mil Satellite instrument.

Curently have:
.. 80 Gig G1 Intel (NO TRIM)
.. 80 Gig Intel G2
.. 120 gig Torqx
.. 120 Gig WD blue (Ugh losest performing SSD)
.. 120 Gig Pheonix Pro (same-same as vertex II)
.. 2 x 120 gig agility III (Although they work as advertize - My experience with them, never again OCZ.
.. 2 x 128 Gig Curcial M4's Love them and would choose over SF2281 based SSDs.

All with the exception of the 80 gig Intel G1 (stuck in a usb 3 enclosure as added storage for Notebooks) have been in a system since day 1 of purchase.
..

m
0
l
November 15, 2011 4:23:29 PM

damn man, what do you do? War Games or something? haha
m
0
l
a c 353 G Storage
November 15, 2011 8:32:43 PM

Nah, just a hobby.
I bought 2 agility IIIs, one for SB Notebook and one for I5-2500k desktop. The one for the desktop installed right off. The one for the Notebook, no way in HE%$ would it install, so gave up and ordered the M4 for the notebook. Stuck the aggility III in desktop as a "work/scratch" drive. Loved the M4, Did not want to stick a lot of files on it - just keep it as an OS + Program drive and the laptop had two bays so bought a 2nd on for a data drive.

Old desktop (I5-750 has a pair of SSDs and my spare Laptop has an SSD.
m
0
l
!