Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

What's a reliable, fast SSD?

Comments

  • #2
    ED E
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,170 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    http://www.extremetech.com/computing/201064-which-ssds-are-the-most-reliable-massive-study-sheds-some-light

    Might be worth a look.


    Basically other than the really dodgy ones like the OCZ ones they're all decent.


  • #3
    Dcully
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators Posts: 14,742 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dcully


    I have an OCZ for over 2 years working fine :) Ive heard so much about dodgy OCZ SSDs but as i say has been perfect for a long time now.
    My main one is Crucial though.


  • #4
    ED E
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,170 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    It was their older stuff that was dud. Even Luke of LinusTT mentions it in a recent video. Theyve been taken over now after the whole bankruptcy thing.

    There really are very few BAD SSDs, just some slightly better than others. I run a Samsung, Toshiba and Kingston. All perfect. Actually, the server has a Crucial...Yeah a crucial. Also great.

    The one big point I'd make, and its a big one, is HDDs tend to groan and die. And you can sometimes get stuff back from a dead one. SSDs can just go "poof" and be dead. No recovery. In fact Intels controller has a failure state where it goes read only and then nukes ITSELF. So always be backed up no matter what the brand.


  • #5
    5star02707
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,467 ✭✭✭5star02707


    From my previous experience

    Samsung evo / pro, Crucial MX / BX and the KingFast F9 have served me well. No issues whatsoever ;)


  • #6
    Sonics2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,261 ✭✭✭Sonics2k


    I picked up an SK Hynix a few weeks back and it's been fantastic so far. This is the one thought it was a bit cheaper when I picked it up, so maybe wait for a sale.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Intifada
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 974 ✭✭✭Intifada


    ED E wrote: »
    In fact Intels controller has a failure state where it goes read only and then nukes ITSELF.
    I read about this before. What's the purpose?


  • #8
    ED E
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,170 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    Intifada wrote: »
    I read about this before. What's the purpose?

    Its an anti user measure, at least according to Linus/Logan. We all know users will ignore system warnings and popups, this forces their hand kind of like Win8 forcing updates after 24hrs.


  • #9
    Intifada
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 974 ✭✭✭Intifada


    Surely a drive on the blink is better than one that doesn't work at all?


  • #10
    ED E
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,170 ✭✭✭✭ED E


    How I understand it going read only forces the user to stop working, meaning all they can do is copy off to another drive.
    Our journey to 700TB drove the MWI all the way down to one, which is supposed to put the 335 Series in a read-only, "logical disable" state. The flash is deemed unreliable at this point, and in typically conservative fashion, Intel doesn't want to perform a write that isn't guaranteed. The SMART readout might have truncated a decimal place, though, because we were still able to run our usual performance tests and kick off the next 100TB of writes.


Advertisement