Originally Posted by
webuyselltradestuff
Not to rain on your parade, but you DO have some issues with SSD drives....and I have one. SSD drives only have so many "writes" you can do to a block, it then "fails". Too many failed blocks, non recoverable drive. ALWAYS use SSD drives for things you do NOT write to as much....for instance, I put my programs on mine and my OS. ALL my data...where I put files, delete them etc, go on a traditional Hard Drive...I generally get WD BLACK Caviar drives (they are server grade, cost about as much as a consumer dirve and still come with 3 yr warranties (ie they are built better since they give 3 yr instead of the typical 1 yr on a consumer drive)).
thought I might point that out. The no moving parts ROCKS...but the memory cells still have write limits....
Completely agreed.
There are some downsides to the SSD's. I guess it's all situational in how you use your machine. ie: I've got one machine set up with an 80 gb SSD and the performance is really good. The total for OS, programs, and data seldom exceeds 25 gb so there are plenty of spare blocks.
There is one issue that i've run into. The SSD's don't easily allow for (pagefile) virtual memory. You have to rely on physical memory installed. With 4 gb DDR 3 installed there are a few programs that tend to hang for lack of memory. I'm going to upgrade to 16 gb within the next few days and see if that resolves the issue. I back up the SSD every so often so when it does eventually fail it won't be a big deal.
It's a hard call on the traditional hard drives. I'm seeing an awful lot of WD blue laptop failures. The Seagates seem to fare a little better. There seem to be two issues involved:
1: Physical damage and likely head crash due to the laptop being dropped.
2: Data corruption of the OS because the battery powered laptops didn't power down correctly.
In a way .... an SSD would help resolve both of these problems because there are no moving parts and power consumption is much lower. They're particularly useful in the smaller devices like tablets and such.
You do run into problems with bad sectors on a traditional hard drive. That's why a 160 gb HDD might only read 149 gb available. At least a part of that spare capacity is in blocks that can be swapped in as sectors go bad. Never seen it before, but in theory the HDD will probably warn you of it's about to run out of spares so you can swap it out before it fails.
I guess times have changed. HDD's measured in Terabytes are pretty much the standard now. I don't know how you could effectively manage something of that size. The operating systems these days tend to compile a lot of useless data. If you give em' room to run they'll hog up 100's of gigabytes of junk you don't need on your machine and significantly slow the whole works down.
Not really saying that one thing is better than another because it's all situational. I guess there are pro's and con's to each way of doing things.
Best anyone can do is weigh their options and choose the thing they think might work best for them.
Bookmarks