http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/ Engadget Comments for http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 9:38PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Then again, I don't know shit about this so I'd best shut up.]]>Feb 23rd 2008 10:20PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
Granted, MLC flash SSDs will be cheaper and their sequential write speed usually tops out at around 45MB/s, but very fast SLC flash SSDs are available and obviously will come down in price as time goes on. For a database server, these would be incredible. The SSD would come pretty close to matching an enterprise SAS drive on sequential, sustained write/read speed, AND at the same time it would absolutely blow it away in random read/writes because of the ]]>Feb 24th 2008 3:01AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/damn comment system... it just cut off 1/2 of my post!!!! I'll repost:

Granted, MLC flash SSDs will be cheaper and their sequential write speed usually tops out at around 45MB/s, but very fast SLC flash SSDs are available and obviously will come down in price as time goes on. For a database server, these would be incredible. The SSD would come pretty close to matching an enterprise SAS drive on sequential, sustained write/read speed, AND at the same time it would absolutely blow it away in random read/writes because of the ]]>Feb 24th 2008 3:02AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
Samsung SATA II 64 GB SSDs
Sequential Read: 120MB/s
Sequential Write: 100MB/s

MTron 2.5" 32GB SSDs
Sequential Read: 95 MB/s
Sequential Write: 75 MB/s

BitMicro 2.5" 32GB-416GB SSDs
Sequential Read: 100MB/s
Sequential Write: 100MB/s]]>Feb 24th 2008 3:03AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 24th 2008 3:15AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 24th 2008 4:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 24th 2008 4:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
Not all SSDs have slow write speeds.
Just buy one that has fast write speeds - like an MTRON.
]]>Feb 25th 2008 4:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 9:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 9:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 24th 2008 10:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
I think companies will charge whatever price will maximize net profit for them.]]>Feb 24th 2008 12:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 24th 2008 1:08AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:17PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
Im guessing the answer is no, since you are so concerned with making sure that EVERY device can.]]>Feb 23rd 2008 10:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 11:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 24th 2008 12:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
thank you for that math.]]>Feb 23rd 2008 10:47PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
some parts of the drive will get written to much more than others - say for applications and OS files (like your pagefile). A few clusters may even be written to once every few hundred clock cycles - like if the clusters contain a log file/parts of a pagefile.

What does that mean? Over the course of the first few months, random parts of your drive will wear out. In a year, the drive will be useless.

Trust me. Your back-of-the-envelope calculations aren't realistic.]]>Feb 23rd 2008 11:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 11:28PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 11:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 24th 2008 12:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 24th 2008 12:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
It's kind of a funny psychological quirk.

]]>Feb 25th 2008 4:12PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
You probably write many hundreds of gigabytes per day, easily. I would guesstimate a power-users computer writes many terabytes of random junk.

I'm not saying that SSDs are not ready for the market, but I wouldnt be surprised if there is a class of users who will burn theirs out early and normal usage will not last longer than a typical modern hard drive. I would also be concerned about server usage. I doubt we'll be seeing serious servers with this stuff until theyve improved the process, if thats even possible.]]>Feb 24th 2008 3:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
Lifetime(min) = (Drive Capacity)/(Max write speed) * max lifetime cycles

So, for a 64GB SSD with a 45 MB/s write speed and 100,000 lifetime cycles, the drive will last, at minimum,

(64 GB / 45 MB/s) * 100,000 = ~4.6 years.

So, under *constant* writes, a 64GB drive will last over 4 years. Because of the wear leveling, a larger capacity drive will last longer.]]>Feb 25th 2008 10:52AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
@45 MB/s write you get 4.51 years

@100 MB/s you get a measly 2.03 years.

Granted, given average use, you would still end up with far more than that. These minimum calculations equate to rewriting the entire contents of the drive every 23.7 minutes @ 45 MB/s or every 10.67 minutes at 100 MB/s for its entire lifespan (this also shows you how fast these things are).]]>Feb 25th 2008 3:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 10:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 11:06PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
I kid, I kid....]]>Feb 24th 2008 11:57PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 11:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 11:26PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
I don't think it'll be dying any time soon?]]>Feb 23rd 2008 11:43PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 23rd 2008 11:45PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/Feb 24th 2008 3:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
I think you can easily "write" 1GB of data a day if you take into account the underlying memory paging that's going on in the OS. If you're only using this as auxiliary file storage then your example is correct.


]]>Feb 23rd 2008 11:11PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
I'd call that a "blazin' fast setup", if it wasn't because it's running on a Pentium III....]]>Feb 23rd 2008 11:33PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/23/samsung-puts-the-kibosh-on-ssd-reliability-worries/
I don't think it'll be dying any time soon?]]>Feb 23rd 2008 11:45PM