SSD Longer lifespan than traditional HDD? True?

I realise that but the firmware did change the way the drive reports its lifespan via SMART. Basically, instead of reporting 10,000 writes per cell, it was changed to 5,000 writes per cell, effectively halving the figure that was there before.

While I realise that the life span dropping to 0% does not mean the drive will stop working at that point, it is unnerving knowing that at that point the number of writeable cells available will be declining to nil. There's obviously no limit on reading data from an SSD but if Windows cannot write data then it may lead to unexpected crashes.

Maybe the figure is way too conservative in the same way that Intel's seem to be the total opposite and way too lenient to me but, nevertheless, I see that figure and SMART reports that the drive is nearing the end of its life span.

I'll be interested to hear what Crucial have to say, assuming they bother to respond to emails. If they do then I'll post it in this thread.

It's interesting reading this thread with people believing that SSDs will outlast HDDs. That's a misconception because HDDs, though they use moving parts prone to wearing out or even failure, theoretically can last many years regardless of how many times you defrag them or how full they get because they do not have limited writes. SSDs on the other hand have FINITE lives where every write to them ultimately reduces the lifespan of the drive. They may last two years or six years but they WILL expire eventually. That's the nature of the technology. Most allow for 10,000 writes per cell (which can be more or less) but if SSDs were truly long-lasting then defragging them (regardless of whether it actually benefits them or not) would not be issue.

 

That is why i did not buy a drive with Indilinx controller. They had new firmware updates every 2 to 3 weeks. Drives needing firmware upgrades in that timeframe cannot be reliable drives even if they are Solid State ones. LOL

And you had to erase your SSD with every firmware update.

That was and never will be an option for me.

HDD have FINITE lives too. Even more FINITE than SSD. Mechanical parts are much more prone to wear-out than electronic parts.

Defraging SSD´s is a bad bad bad BAD idea. I did that once and i got filesystem corruption on my RAID0. It was no real error because i could reset the RAID error in the Intel RST console but it was really annoying and my machine started crashing because of that. Had to do secure erase to get rid of that. Just don´t do it.

10.000 Write/Erase cycles applies to the 34nm NAND flash chips. 5.000 Write/Erase cycles applies to the newer 25nm NAND flash chips.

Yours is definitely from that 34nm production so no worries about halving the lifespan with a firmware update.

 

I updated the firmware TWICE post-Windows install and neither required me to reinstall as they were non-destructive.

 

Then you where lucky with that.

 

My point was that a perfectly working HDD can theoretically last forever as long as it doesn't fail but no matter how realiable your SSD is all its cells will eventually be spent through constant writing and the drive will no longer be usable if you continue to use it as a Windows drive. HDDs generally last longer than two to three years; one of the hard drives I'm using if almost five years old, in fact, and is still performing flawlessly. I doubt my current SSD will last that long; in fact, I know it won't! That drive cost me £70 for 500 GB (obviously now much cheaper) versus £300 for 128 GB. If the hard drive failed then at that cost it is no hardship to replace it; the SSD far less so! :3eyes:

Anyway, all you're doing is swapping one disadvantage (the wearing mechanic parts) for another (limited memory writes) whilst gaining faster read/write speeds. The faster speeds are certainly a nice thing to have but the cost of SSDs, even after five years, is still very high and they are still impractical to be used for mass storage of data because of their write limitations.

I wonder how long it'll be before we get SSDs with potentially unlimited lives; that don't have limited memory writes? 5,000 and even 10,000 writes are not large figures when you consider how much data Windows writes each time you use it.

 

It was the reason I chose that model over others at the time.

 

:stewpid:

NO. You really do NOT know how long your SSD will last. Just tell me again if it is worn out and dead.

All you do is ranting in panic about some numbers you read in your SMART program. And you already found the proof all by yourself that those numbers are wrong. So just stop posting bull****.

 

SMART is intended to warn you of failing drives so you're not caught unprepared and end up losing your data. I get a warning for my SSD when using SSDlite, and CrystalDiskInfo reports the same figure (though without the warning it only has a month of life left).

OK, so it may be nothing... yet... but can you really blame me for being concerned when I'm told my £300 purchase is on its way out and has less than a month of life left? On some machines, the SMART readings for HDDs can prevent Windows from even booting if they're reported as bad but, fortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case for me with the ASUS motherboard I'm using.

I've contacted Crucial as I've said to see what their response is.

What is the point in SMART having a reading for estimated SSD lifespan anyway if you're meant to just ignore them as you're implying? I certainly would not ignore warnings about my other HDDs. It's possible my SSD may even be faulty and the usage I'm seeing is extremely unusual (5% in just over a month for example). I guess I'll have to wait for a reply from Crucial support first.

 

Now we all know: you DID wet your pants reading those SMART numbers. LOL :uhoh: :funny:

Stop being hysterical and hypothetical and post a picture of your SSD´s SMART status. We all want to see what that whinig is about. :bonk:

And you will never know. Maybe your SSD is about to explode in a month time and taking all your computer hardware down in a huge explosion. You better start saving up for a new machine and new living room furniture too. LOL

:micro:

You are even more hysterical than my 86 years old grandmother. aranoid:

 

Remind me never to ask you for advice if condescending responses are all you can give.

I'm at work on a lunch break at the moment so I can't post the screenshot I took of SSDlite's SMART status last night until later when I get home. From memory though, it reported 10,000 GB read, 5,500 GB written, 18% life left, 5,500 hours of use, etc. It also warned me that due to the number of write errors that life expectancy was less than a month.

Of course, we all know that would not concern you...

 

Gosh, that's really mature. I'm impressed that you went back and put even more effort into it to make it look extra childish. Honestly, how old are you because I'm guessing you're still at school by that reply. :3eyes:

The only hysteria is in your head because all I've reported are facts in a coherent and reasonable matter. I don't see exactly where I'm being 'hysterical' unless showing some concern is what qualifies for it in your mind. In which case I'd say you have the problem. Still if you're at school then maturity should take care of that!

 

5500 GB written. :wanker:

Intel for example states that you can write 100 GB per day for 5 years and your data will still be intact for their 34nm NAND flash drives like the Intel G2.

That would be (100 GB x 365 days) x 5 years = 182500 GB of written data.

You just have worn out your SSD by 3 percent. :3eyes:

3 percent usage for about 2 1/2 years. DO THE ****ING MATH. Your SSD will last 83.3 years with your current usage pattern until it is a uselss brick. They don´t even say it is bricked after that.

:bash:

As your drive also is one of the 34nm ones i assume that the numbers for those Indilinx drives are in the same region.

I will take into account that you are bad at math otherwise you will be the king of :spam2:.

And yes i like the funny smileys in the forum and sometimes i use them.

 

Hello? Garbage Collection on SandForce doesn't do anything until the cells are actually being written to, which is what still causes slowdowns even on modern SSDs based around SandForce.

 

You arent worth listening to.

OP, I sympathise and look forward to the response from Crucial.

 

Then why you link that nonesense documents containing graphs from the last century?

@Mufflore:

What will you expect? Your SSD should tell you when it is about to get ****ed up via a SMART tool? Knowing about the theoretical lifetime expectancy of this technology and then ranting in paranoia about that a SSD is about to die in about approximately 1 month. That is just ridiculous.

Indilinx could not make stable firmware releases why you expect them to produce accurate tools about that same SSD technology? Darren Hodgson himself stated that his life expectancy reported by that tool dropped by 50% after a firmware flash.

That discussion is absolutely stupid about numbers that are obviously wrong.

 

But if you rely on those SSD tools so much maybe you want to take a look at that: http://ssd-life.com/

That is a program made only for the purpose to tell you how long your SSD is going to live. LOL

Just made for ppl like you and it is only 19 $. xD

 

I expect you to have more respect for forum users for a start.
How do you know that the SMART reports are wrong?
How do you know that Crucial didnt make an earlier mistake and have now corrected it so it is now reporting the 'projected' end of life correctly?

I dont blame the op for being concerned.
I would be too and would want to investigate what is really going on.
After all SSDs arent cheap and he undoubtedly wants a stable machine that will be available for use when he needs it.
This problem makes that less likely and also changes the 'feel' of the computer such that the op may no longer trust it.

What I wouldnt want is to encounter anyone as immature as you when asking for assistance with a problem.

 

Firtsly, because it isn't nonsense.
Secondly, because it isn't from the last century as people still use older SSDs, to which the document still applies.
Last and not least, because people like you might actually learn something (even though, as others have already stated, the level of maturity shown in your posts most definately suggests otherwise).

 

The tread opener is no longer posting here.

And D.H. had no stability problems he had concerns about his SMART values and reliability in general. He had those even i told him that they are wrong. They must be wrong. If he had read the whole thread he would not have posted such nonesense. And if he had read more about SSD he would not have bought an Indilinx SSD and he would not posting his dumb theories about hardware which he knows nothing about.

He did not report a single problem all he posted was paranoid stuff nourished by a stupid program who reported some bull**** about his SSD.

I don´t doubt his SMART values i doubt the statement from his SMART reporting software which says that he has 18% of drive life left. And i definitely doubt the intellect of ppl who give anything about those programs knowing the facts about that technology.

But maybe YOU are the one who is willing to pay for such nonesense programs. Only 19$. BUY NOW!

But we will see what will happen to his SSD in a month.

If you want mature ppl around you go and visit an old-age home. And ppl who want to go there are definitely not worth listening to.

 

It didnt stop you or anyone else posting, what has that got to do with anything?

Yes that was clear to everyone.

What are wrong and how do you know?
As you are so sure, please provide the proof.

I didnt see him post any dumb theories.
He speculated over the possible cause, something that we expect when something has happened that needs explanation.

He posted that his SSDs SMART values are reporting his SSDs projected life is drawing close.
I'd call that a problem.

His statement is correct, the reporting software is saying he has 18% left of the drives projected life.
He did nothing wrong.

Learn to read, he used the free version

Actually we will see what Crucial say about it first.

lol, proving the point.