|
Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
#369117 - 08/29/17 05:00 AM
|
|
|
So much for Windows no longer crashing and so long to my dreams about SSD being "more stable" than traditional hard drives. I had a C drive crash on me way quicker than a oldschool hard drive has in the past decade or more, maybe ever. And when they crash they just brick as opposed to an oldschool drive maybe letting you slowly copy most of it before puttering out holding up a peace sign.
|
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369119 - 08/29/17 05:09 AM
|
|
|
Yeah, pretty much. Once you burn through the write endurance, the SSD is toast. That's why I keep my swap files, scratch space for compiling MAME, etc. on a hard disk and just keep OS and applications on SSD. That way I'm not using up the write endurance too quickly. The better SSDs give you plenty of warning before they fail, but the cheaper ones don't. In theory the Intel SSDs are supposed to go into read-only mode and let you recover data once they hit write endurance limit, but in practice that doesn't seem to happen. This is all pretty well-known stuff.
|
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#369120 - 08/29/17 05:13 AM
|
|
|
I haven't been much of a reader of tech articles in a long time. Anyway I did basically that other than using my desktop also for a workspace because it makes things so much quicker, it temps you into it and didn't get it all backed up.
|
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369144 - 08/29/17 04:26 PM
|
|
|
> So much for Windows no longer crashing and so long to my dreams about SSD being "more
> stable" than traditional hard drives. I had a C drive crash on me way quicker than a
> oldschool hard drive has in the past decade or more, maybe ever. And when they crash
> they just brick as opposed to an oldschool drive maybe letting you slowly copy most
> of it before puttering out holding up a peace sign.
yep, exactly this.
a few years ago when everybody was pushing SSD a lot of my friends went mad for it, until they started failing.
every single one of them is now back on regular HDDs, accepting that faster boot times aren't really that important consider how infrequently you actually reboot a machine.
main advantage I can see of SSDs is in situations where you're quite likely to be moving the device around and there's a risk of dropping it, but for a regular desktop machine HDDs are MUCH more reliable and much easier to deal with when they do fail.
|
|
|
| Pi |
|
Allergic to life
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/20/03
|
|
Posts: 6449
|
|
Loc: Room 101
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#369145 - 08/29/17 05:32 PM
|
|
|
> Yeah, pretty much. Once you burn through the write endurance, the SSD is toast.
> That's why I keep my swap files, scratch space for compiling MAME, etc. on a hard
> disk and just keep OS and applications on SSD. That way I'm not using up the write
> endurance too quickly.
But with larger SSD coming, people just put everything on the SSD, and that's how they fry so quickly. Whenever anyone I know gets an SSD, I always tell them to 1. never defrag it (I still hear of people doing it) and 2. don't put working files in it. When I explain why they all go like, oh then SSD is crap. It's not crap, it's something that has a different usage than the mechanical HDs. I've moved/hardlinked all the temporal/working folders off the SSD, and basically I only have apps and sys in it, and after 3 years it's still healthy, while I got an external HD bought at the same time converted into a brick (haven't got any luck with it yet).
I think the worst they did is make SSDs work exactly like mechanical HDs from the system pov, that makes people think they are the same and misuse them.
Also I don't understand why once the SSD is fried, it doesn't default to read-only. It should be the case for *all* SSDs imho. Not like making it possible would double the price on them.
|
Wound up, can't sleep, can't do anything right, little honey / Oh, since I set my eyes on you. / I tell you the truth.
I can't get it right / Get it right / Since I met you...
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: Pi]
#369146 - 08/29/17 06:48 PM
|
|
|
> > Yeah, pretty much. Once you burn through the write endurance, the SSD is toast.
> > That's why I keep my swap files, scratch space for compiling MAME, etc. on a hard
> > disk and just keep OS and applications on SSD. That way I'm not using up the write
> > endurance too quickly.
>
> But with larger SSD coming, people just put everything on the SSD, and that's how
> they fry so quickly. Whenever anyone I know gets an SSD, I always tell them to 1.
> never defrag it (I still hear of people doing it) and 2. don't put working files in
> it. When I explain why they all go like, oh then SSD is crap. It's not crap, it's
> something that has a different usage than the mechanical HDs. I've moved/hardlinked
> all the temporal/working folders off the SSD, and basically I only have apps and sys
> in it, and after 3 years it's still healthy, while I got an external HD bought at the
> same time converted into a brick (haven't got any luck with it yet).
>
> I think the worst they did is make SSDs work exactly like mechanical HDs from the
> system pov, that makes people think they are the same and misuse them.
>
> Also I don't understand why once the SSD is fried, it doesn't default to read-only.
> It should be the case for *all* SSDs imho. Not like making it possible would double
> the price on them.
Right, and most PCs only contain a single drive, be it SDD or HDD. Explaining to people that they should have an OS drive and a data drive is a difficult concept, the majority don't even understand the difference between HDD space and system memory, furthermore 2 drives is most expensive, and most store bought PCs try to be as cheap as possible.
Also if you buy a drive as an upgrade most of the migration tools just copy the drive content, leaving the same setup as before.
Furthermore, even if you have multiple drives, Windows, even 10 REALLY doesn't like you having your work folders on a different drive to the rest of the OS, something that really should have been working properly in 8 (it actually worked better in earlier versions of Windows, but the upgrade to 8 would either reset it to one drive, or fail to install) Of course prior versions of Windows don't support some other important SDD features properly either, another problem because a lot of people still don't want 8 or 10.
then when they fail, they fail, no chance to recover anything.
then you have hybrid drives, which just seem to be the worst of both worlds...
|
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: Haze]
#369156 - 08/30/17 01:03 AM
|
|
|
I bought a Samsung SSD and it did wonders for my performance. Have owned it for years and its still as good as new with no corruption or failures or slowdowns or anything.
The people who got bitten probably bought crappy SSDs that had crappy memory (either because they were from a crappy brand or from the time when manufacturers hadn't figured out SSDs yet and everyone was bad)
|
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: jonwil]
#369157 - 08/30/17 02:22 AM
|
|
|
> I bought a Samsung SSD and it did wonders for my performance. Have owned it for years
> and its still as good as new with no corruption or failures or slowdowns or anything.
>
> The people who got bitten probably bought crappy SSDs that had crappy memory (either
> because they were from a crappy brand or from the time when manufacturers hadn't
> figured out SSDs yet and everyone was bad)
nope, top end ones, paid good money for them.
you've been lucky, and when it does fail, it will go just like those, no chance to recover even a single file.
|
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: Haze]
#369159 - 08/30/17 03:23 AM
|
|
|
Do you over-provision your SSD drives to allow for failed block replacement?
I've owned about 10 Samsung and Intel SSDs over the years and I've yet to have one fail. I've had plenty of traditional hard drives shit the bed including a Seagate that failed on the first day.
It's possible that my usage patterns have something to do with my SSD luck. I only use the SSD for the OS and programs. I always pair it with a large Western Digital green or red 5400 rpm drive for data storage or compiling.
|
GroovyMAME support forum on BYOAC
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: krick]
#369163 - 08/30/17 03:54 AM
|
|
|
> Do you over-provision your SSD drives to allow for failed block replacement?
>
> I've owned about 10 Samsung and Intel SSDs over the years and I've yet to have one
> fail. I've had plenty of traditional hard drives shit the bed including a Seagate
> that failed on the first day.
>
> It's possible that my usage patterns have something to do with my SSD luck. I only
> use the SSD for the OS and programs. I always pair it with a large Western Digital
> green or red 5400 rpm drive for data storage or compiling.
I'd assume the friends buying them follow whatever the recommended practices are, I've tended to avoid them myself due to the horror stories.
I've found with regular HDDs faults either tend to show up early, or they last a long time. Seagates are still by far the worst, the slower speed drives are definitely more reliable.
The main issue with SSDs seems to be that it's always very much 'without warning' Things can seem fine one day, next day you've got a paperweight. No clicking, no sign of failure, no bad SMART reports, just fine one day, dead the next, no chance of recovery.
|
|
|
| redk9258 |
|
Regular
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 3968
|
|
Loc: Troy, Illinois USA
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: krick]
#369164 - 08/30/17 03:58 AM
|
|
|
I've had good luck with my Samsung 830 SSD. I backup every night though. 11.42 TB written, health status good... according to Samsung Magician. 
|
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: Haze]
#369169 - 08/30/17 11:12 AM
|
|
|
> every single one of them is now back on regular HDDs, accepting that faster boot
> times aren't really that important consider how infrequently you actually reboot a
> machine.
>
> main advantage I can see of SSDs is in situations where you're quite likely to be
> moving the device around and there's a risk of dropping it, but for a regular desktop
> machine HDDs are MUCH more reliable and much easier to deal with when they do fail.
Cannot agree here. I would never go back to HDDs for regular work and never use a HDD for any OS. If you only see a improvement in OS booting time, then you probably dont need a SSD at all. I use HDD only for data-storage, because its still unbeatable price per GB. I dont mind if a SSD would fail (never happened in 6 years), because SSDīs are my power horses and they dont storage important data over a longer period. They have done their job perfect, if they shuffle tons of GB in a fractional amount of time a HDD needs.
I do video editing and my setup uses 3 SSDīs. One of it, is a NVMe with the OS and the rest are "regular" SSDīs for footage, scratch and output. With plenty of RAM, i also use a RAM disk with SSD. This combo is very noticable, when it comes to time sparing. Its at least 40% faster and not only by booting a OS, I feel it all the time while working.
|
|
|
|
#AcronisTrueImage
[Re: Haze]
#369178 - 08/30/17 03:00 PM
|
|
|
Or any other number of backup solutions. I can feel sorry for the person who just happened to buy a computer to surf YouTube and knows nothing... once. After that, and for anybody who is a regular user, enthusiast, or professional, I find it hard to sympathize (for the loss of data, but it always puts a dent in the wallet!).
EDIT: I have 2 different SSDs in my desktop and laptop. Just got whichever had a good sale on Tiger Direct or NewEgg or whatever. Neither have failed. The laptop SSD is only 4 months old or so, but the Desktop one is about 2 years old.
Knock on wood, I guess, but if anything crashes, I'll never loose more than a week of updates. Also, I'll be up and running again in less than 20 minutes.
|
Just broke my personal record for number of consecutive days without dying!
|
|
|
Re: #AcronisTrueImage
[Re: URherenow]
#369184 - 08/30/17 05:29 PM
|
|
|
> Or any other number of backup solutions. I can feel sorry for the person who just
> happened to buy a computer to surf YouTube and knows nothing... once. After that, and
> for anybody who is a regular user, enthusiast, or professional, I find it hard to
> sympathize (for the loss of data, but it always puts a dent in the wallet!).
>
> EDIT: I have 2 different SSDs in my desktop and laptop. Just got whichever had a good
> sale on Tiger Direct or NewEgg or whatever. Neither have failed. The laptop SSD is
> only 4 months old or so, but the Desktop one is about 2 years old.
>
> Knock on wood, I guess, but if anything crashes, I'll never loose more than a week of
> updates. Also, I'll be up and running again in less than 20 minutes.
#MacriumReflect here, and I'll never lose more than two days.
6 SSDs here (5 desktop, 1 laptop), zero failures. Also running 3 _large_ HDDs to store video (and backups).
|
|
|
|
Re: Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369257 - 09/01/17 12:56 AM
|
|
|
http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead
SSD seems to have flake and die quick or last years. HDs used to be the same way. The ones that brick tend to have the same controllers. It is a bit of a wild ride out there for SSDs right now. HDs have pretty much consolidated on 2-4 platforms from 2 vendors. Bricking tends to also be vendor segmented intels tend to die into read only. Yet a samsung will brick out. Even then it seems to be model related. I have taken to reading 1 star reviews to see what the failure model they have.
The 4 SSDs I have are going on about 5 years now.
Always prep for the worst. Back it up.
|
|
|
|
Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369500 - 09/07/17 03:12 AM
|
|
|
That's it, ima goin oldsckewl. I was going hardcore with it to save time on video work but still, brand new drive lasted less than a month. I'll be returning it tomorrow or else taking a public dump on the floor and wiping with the box and instructions.
|
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369503 - 09/07/17 05:06 AM
|
|
|
|
|
| Pi |
|
Allergic to life
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/20/03
|
|
Posts: 6449
|
|
Loc: Room 101
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: krick]
#369542 - 09/08/17 03:19 PM
|
|
|
> sounds like your power supply might be failing and taking stuff with it
+1
|
Wound up, can't sleep, can't do anything right, little honey / Oh, since I set my eyes on you. / I tell you the truth.
I can't get it right / Get it right / Since I met you...
|
|
| casm |
|
Cinematronics > *
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 08/27/07
|
|
Posts: 665
|
|
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Pi]
#369543 - 09/08/17 05:55 PM
|
|
|
> > sounds like your power supply might be failing and taking stuff with it
>
> +1
+2. I've got enterprise storage arrays using SSD as zero- and primary-tier storage in some relatively high-volume environments and SSD failure rates in those environments aren't anywhere near what you're seeing.
Smit, what's the hardware platform, SSD manufacturer, and editing software in use?
|
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: casm]
#369549 - 09/09/17 05:03 AM
|
|
|
Nothing else has died in years and years and my power supply is 2 years old, bought from Fry's. Face it SSD drives are shit. I was doing 4K video processing which is as taxing as it gets for hard drives but still, 28 days and the drive was dead and the one before it died quickly (2 years, wasn't processing anything 4K) and the SSD drive I put on my brother's PC before that went bad quickly (under 2 years) and he doesn't even run it hard.
|
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369553 - 09/09/17 03:34 PM
|
|
|
> Nothing else has died in years and years and my power supply is 2 years old, bought
> from Fry's. Face it SSD drives are shit. I was doing 4K video processing which is as
> taxing as it gets for hard drives but still, 28 days and the drive was dead and the
> one before it died quickly (2 years, wasn't processing anything 4K) and the SSD drive
> I put on my brother's PC before that went bad quickly (under 2 years) and he doesn't
> even run it hard.
Gotta ask: what brand(s) are you buying, and where are you buying them from?
|
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: JWJr]
#369554 - 09/09/17 06:18 PM
|
|
|
The one I bought for my brother 3 years ago that died in under 2 was from a little PC repair shop while I was on vacation in Nashville and I don't remember the name brand. The one I bought 2 years ago that died a month ago was from Fry's and was Patriot brand. The one I bought that died in 4 weeks after long 4K video processing was PNY and I bought it from the nearby Best Buy. Didn't someone here previously mention every name brand dying after a hardcore write test? Are you convincing yourself that only bad name brand SSDs are shitty? That's what everybody does when they hear about one failing.
|
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369556 - 09/09/17 06:56 PM
|
|
|
> The one I bought for my brother 3 years ago that died in under 2 was from a little PC
> repair shop while I was on vacation in Nashville and I don't remember the name brand.
> The one I bought 2 years ago that died a month ago was from Fry's and was Patriot
> brand. The one I bought that died in 4 weeks after long 4K video processing was PNY
> and I bought it from the nearby Best Buy. Didn't someone here previously mention
> every name brand dying after a hardcore write test? Are you convincing yourself that
> only bad name brand SSDs are shitty? That's what everybody does when they hear about
> one failing.
Just looking for a common factor, as my experience with SSDs is completely the opposite of yours. 
|
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: JWJr]
#369557 - 09/09/17 07:28 PM
|
|
|
I think the uncommon factor is video processing. I guess it's essentially an acid test / stability test / life test for hard drives. I've also wrecked a HHD with it, but it took years of abuse to do that where my most recent SSD experience had one go bad in under 4 weeks with 4K video processing. It died near the end of a 30GB write that took a week of straight processing. Essentially the roughest test there probably is for hard drives but still the results says it all - drive instant death. And Best Buy is so shitty they won't take stuff back past 15 days. I should burn it down.
|
|
|
| Foxhack |
|
Furry guy
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 01/30/04
|
|
Posts: 2409
|
|
Loc: Spicy Canada
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369561 - 09/09/17 10:51 PM
|
|
|
> Nothing else has died in years and years and my power supply is 2 years old, bought
> from Fry's. Face it SSD drives are shit. I was doing 4K video processing which is as
> taxing as it gets for hard drives but still, 28 days and the drive was dead and the
> one before it died quickly (2 years, wasn't processing anything 4K) and the SSD drive
> I put on my brother's PC before that went bad quickly (under 2 years) and he doesn't
> even run it hard.
Power supplies go bad just as easily as an SSD.
You mentioned other hard drives dying. That only makes a stronger case for the PSU being bad.
|
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Foxhack]
#369562 - 09/09/17 11:20 PM
|
|
|
It's possible it was due to a bad power supply. And it's possible that my brother's went bad because he also had a bad power supply. And it's possible every computer used with every ssd manufacturer's drive which all failed under stress in the previously mentioned test, also all had bad power supplies.
|
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369567 - 09/10/17 12:55 AM
|
|
|
> I think the uncommon factor is video processing. I guess it's essentially an acid
> test / stability test / life test for hard drives. I've also wrecked a HHD with it,
> but it took years of abuse to do that where my most recent SSD experience had one go
> bad in under 4 weeks with 4K video processing. It died near the end of a 30GB write
> that took a week of straight processing. Essentially the roughest test there probably
> is for hard drives but still the results says it all - drive instant death. And Best
> Buy is so shitty they won't take stuff back past 15 days. I should burn it down.
That's probably the "uncommon factor", yes - we've got nothing that intensive going on around here.
You have my permission (and actually, I'd consider it a favor) to scream my name as you run away after setting the BB on fire.
|
|
|
| redk9258 |
|
Regular
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 3968
|
|
Loc: Troy, Illinois USA
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369590 - 09/11/17 02:22 AM
|
|
|
Patriot and PNY don't seem to be top tier SSDs. Try a Samsung or Crucial or Toshiba. They actually make memory chips and probably use the best ones for their SSDs.
|
|
|
| Pi |
|
Allergic to life
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/20/03
|
|
Posts: 6449
|
|
Loc: Room 101
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: redk9258]
#369591 - 09/11/17 03:24 AM
|
|
|
> Patriot and PNY don't seem to be top tier SSDs. Try a Samsung or Crucial or Toshiba.
> They actually make memory chips and probably use the best ones for their SSDs.
But SSD aren't your usual DDR memory chips. They are different, and are not designed to be used in the way Smitdogg uses them. For that, mechanical drives are suited. SSDs are not for heavy duty writing after writing.
|
Wound up, can't sleep, can't do anything right, little honey / Oh, since I set my eyes on you. / I tell you the truth.
I can't get it right / Get it right / Since I met you...
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: Smitdogg]
#369603 - 09/11/17 06:15 PM
|
|
|
> It's possible it was due to a bad power supply. And it's possible that my brother's
> went bad because he also had a bad power supply. And it's possible every computer
> used with every ssd manufacturer's drive which all failed under stress in the
> previously mentioned test, also all had bad power supplies.
Well, it would certainly explain why at work, all of us programmers have a 500GB SSD, but pull all of our work data onto a 4TB HDD, and do all the compiling on the HDD. And why the working directory for all of our artists is on the HDD. We're worried about potentially bad power supplies, you know.
|
|
|
|
Re: Replacement SSD just died with the same error
[Re: MooglyGuy]
#369604 - 09/11/17 06:28 PM
|
|
|
> > It's possible it was due to a bad power supply. And it's possible that my brother's
> > went bad because he also had a bad power supply. And it's possible every computer
> > used with every ssd manufacturer's drive which all failed under stress in the
> > previously mentioned test, also all had bad power supplies.
>
> Well, it would certainly explain why at work, all of us programmers have a 500GB SSD,
> but pull all of our work data onto a 4TB HDD, and do all the compiling on the HDD.
> And why the working directory for all of our artists is on the HDD. We're worried
> about potentially bad power supplies, you know.
Pretty much, you don't want to do any kind of I/O heavy operations on an SSD, you'll burn through the write cycles in no time.
Kinda find it disturbing that people are talking about doing video editing with them.
|
|
|
Index 
Threaded 
Hard drive crashes worse now on SSD?
Reply
[Re: 
