|
SSD write speed - matching to computer?
I want to get a SSD for my Lenovo Yoga 2 11. Current drive is a slim line WD (with a proprietary connector which will cost a relatively-small fortune to get around) which is also very s-l-o-w.
I see most SSDs have fast read speed but some have write speeds about 40% or so read speed (others have write speeds near the same). How can one determine how fast a computer can actually write at? Don't want to invest too much if it isn't going to be beneficial. |
I have not seen much on this lately. When I last looked at it there seemed to be little agreement. PC Magazine had a nice overview article on SSD v HDD in February titled SSD vs. HDD: What's the Difference?
I am rebuilding my main computer when Windows 10 comes out as an iso so I am interested in this as well. As my main computer is a desktop I use a SSD for the OS and programs and a HDD for the data based on the view that you should not write to SSDs too much. |
Originally Posted by Paint Horse
(Post 25040295)
... based on the view that you should not write to SSDs too much.
SSD, especially the lower end "consumer" SSDs do have a finite number of writes, but that number is far, far higher than you'd ever expect to use in normal operation in a home PC. Last I checked my home PC, the SSD that was around 2.5 years old was running at 96% of it's "endurance" remaining. ie, at my current usage, the drive would last at least 50 year. If you're concerned about the endurance, the best thing you can do is to NOT run the drive near full. Keeping it below 80% full will help with both performance and lifetime. |
I would not be worrying about this. Whether or not that's the lifecycle of a SSD (which for all intents and purposes is not worth discussing because you'll throw it out first before it craps out) or the read vs write speeds. A hard drive spends more time reading data than writing anyways, so that doesn't surprise me.
But it's all moot. Just buy the biggest SSD you can for the money, and for 99.9% of applications, there will be some other bottleneck worth addressing. |
Originally Posted by docbert
(Post 25040946)
SSD, especially the lower end "consumer" SSDs do have a finite number of writes, but that number is far, far higher than you'd ever expect to use in normal operation in a home PC.
http://techreport.com/review/27909/t...heyre-all-dead The 240 GB SSD in my desktop is 1 and half years old, and the write count is only 400 GB. It will meet obsolescence due to the small size before it wears out. |
That sounds encouraging. I rebuild the computer every year or so. Now if I can just figure out what to do with the box of retired drives.
|
Originally Posted by Paint Horse
(Post 25043236)
That sounds encouraging. I rebuild the computer every year or so. Now if I can just figure out what to do with the box of retired drives.
|
Originally Posted by superangrypenguin
(Post 25043266)
Get a RAID card and set it to Raid 0. (just back up your data b/c if you lose one drive, you're toast). The performance and ability to use up all of your disk space is useful for raid 0. Just be aware of the inherent dangers.
RAID 0 is more useful when you need increased read/write speed but, as you noted, it has inherent vulnerabilities. |
Originally Posted by BigLar
(Post 25043413)
I would recommend RAID 1, if for no other reason that losing one drive does not cause you to lose all your data.
RAID 0 is more useful when you need increased read/write speed but, as you noted, it has inherent vulnerabilities. |
RAID is too much for this data. I would rather use onsite and offsite backups.
The Windows Secrets newsletter suggested encrypting the data on the drives, throwing away the keys, and chunking them in the trash or recycling as available. |
Now back to our regularly scheduled question from the OP. I still do not find much on this topic. I looked at the trade group for SATA at www.sata-io.org. I wonder if this is the strange looking interface you have - https://www.sata-io.org/sata-microssd.
|
It's a SFF-8784 Edge connector (see the photo below - connector in in the bottom middle of the photo). FWIW, HD - WD5000MPCK - is supposed to be 5mm thick but there's apparently lots of room in the computer for a 7mm drive. FWIW, the drive is supposed to have 6 Gb/sec connector speed.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/uploads...PCKalex_01.jpg Below is the EFF-8784 connector: http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NzY4WDEwMj...VhnZq/$_57.JPG Below is the standard SATA connector cable for the computer http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/OTYwWDE1MD...VCPsY/$_57.JPG Disclaimer: I actually haven't opened the laptop yet (requires Torx bits that I dn't have with me) but a drive scan tells me it is the WD drive (the same computer model can also come with a Seagate drive, with a standard SATA connector - a MB to HD connector makes the difference but Lenovo doesn't sell the cable). |
Originally Posted by docbert
(Post 25040946)
Realistically, this is a myth.
SSD, especially the lower end "consumer" SSDs do have a finite number of writes, but that number is far, far higher than you'd ever expect to use in normal operation in a home PC. Last I checked my home PC, the SSD that was around 2.5 years old was running at 96% of it's "endurance" remaining. ie, at my current usage, the drive would last at least 50 year. If you're concerned about the endurance, the best thing you can do is to NOT run the drive near full. Keeping it below 80% full will help with both performance and lifetime. One drive that hosts two virtual machines. 4 years old, 96% remaining. Other drive, 1 year, no status report. |
Originally Posted by superangrypenguin
(Post 25043644)
Raid 1 is horribly inefficient from a # of drives perspective. Even Raid 10 is a bit of a waste.
|
Originally Posted by docbert
(Post 25044786)
RAID 10 is exactly as efficient as RAID 1...
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:06 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.