SSD Data Retention Reliability

Discussion in 'Tech Talk' started by Blackice, Dec 6, 2011.

  1. Blackice
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2011
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Baker
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-reliability-failure-rate,2923.html

    The material quality is rated to last decades, even under 10GB/day+ load. I wonder how that holds any truth fetching from the same redundant file clusters, hundreds of times a day, though.
     
  2. EniGmA1987
    Veteran Staff Member Xenforcer

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    4,778
    Likes Received:
    34
    Fetching data has absolutely no effect on lifetime of cells. You can read from a drive as many times as you want, the lifetime only has to do with writes to a cell. Reading from the same cluster would do nothing, and it is impossible to write to the same cluster hundreds of times a day as the wear leveling would simply write the data to a new cell location and mark to old location as ready to be collected during a GC sweep.



    Also, Intel 320 series and G2 drives dont have that bug Tom's is talking about, that was fixed a while ago. And Crucial only has issues with Sandy Bridge systems from what I remember. Youll also notice Samsung is the only manufacturer of SSD chipsets not on that list of companies with problems ;)
     
  3. Blackice
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2011
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Baker
    Somehow, even as bad as it was, the return rates were super low: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-reliability-failure-rate,2923-3.html

    BTW, I ended up using the Corsair Force GT with the P8P67 Sandy Bridge platform (your old set, actually) and it works great, lol. Albeit, I had to set it up using the Intel P67 SATA chipset and not the Marvell driver controller. It all totally works but the Marvell controller is/was still a no-go.
     
  4. EniGmA1987
    Veteran Staff Member Xenforcer

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    4,778
    Likes Received:
    34
    The Marvel controller isnt a good idea for a SSD anyway as it adds too much latency. That defeats the whole purpose of a SSD.
     
  5. Blackice
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2011
    Messages:
    507
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Baker
    The drive, firmware, all of it was undetectable. You mean to tell me that it's slow even when it works, too?? I wouldn't be surprised if Asus dropped them altogether. At least Asus had enough sense to diversify, even if the Rev. 1 failed...
     
  6. EniGmA1987
    Veteran Staff Member Xenforcer

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    4,778
    Likes Received:
    34
    Its slow for a SSD. The marvel chipset has a minimum latency of like 5ms, the Intel minimum latency is .05ms. It works well for DVD drives and HDDs but not for a SSD. Always use the Intel ports for a solid state drive. Same goes for AMD platforms with their add in chipsets, always connect a SSD to the southbridge ports.