Recommended Posts

Personally I haven't had any issues with Samsung 830 512gb or Crucial M4 256gb / 512gb, but I've also only been on SSDs for about 6 months. Now two of my friends had 128gb OCZ drives that died within a similar time frame, although many others had lots of positive experience with OCZ. I think the technology has matured enough that all manufacturers are probably decent. I looked at MTBF numbers and warranty when choosing my SSDs.

Ironically, my OCZ drive in my laptop just died a few moments ago. About the 6 month mark... It only makes a high pitched whine and won't actually boot or show up as a drive.

My experience isn't anything more than anecdotal evidence, but there you have it.

Regardless of "reliable" or not, every SSD can and will brick eventually. Imagine what happens if you lost the data on it...if you can't handle losing it, then back it up! Buy a standard WD Green and back it up! Use any tool you want - Windows Backup does a great job.

TLDR: Back it up!!

Oh, most 'brand name' (Crucial, OCZ, Samsung, Intel, Corsair) SSDs are good. Some may be a little better, but they all have a reasonable chance to brick on you.

My gut feeling tells me it is a toss up between the Crucial M4 and Samsung 830,

I have a Crucial M4 128GB, it is my first SSD so i dont really have anything to compare it to, and im not going to say its better than the Samsung because that would be biased!

Its just given me no problems, and i know Crucial are very good with their support should anything go wrong.

Regardless of "reliable" or not, every SSD can and will brick eventually. Imagine what happens if you lost the data on it...if you can't handle losing it, then back it up! Buy a standard WD Green and back it up! Use any tool you want - Windows Backup does a great job.

TLDR: Back it up!!

Oh, most 'brand name' (Crucial, OCZ, Samsung, Intel, Corsair) SSDs are good. Some may be a little better, but they all have a reasonable chance to brick on you.

well, yea, obviously. but it's still a PITA when you have to reinstall everything because the OS disk failed. And although every major brand is good, I'm wondering if there's a clear winner anymore. The old Intel controllers were less than 1 percentage point better than the next best but it was still the undisputed champion in reliability. Is there still someone like that anymore with everyone using either Marvell or Sandforce?

My gut feeling tells me it is a toss up between the Crucial M4 and Samsung 830,

I have a Crucial M4 128GB, it is my first SSD so i dont really have anything to compare it to, and im not going to say its better than the Samsung because that would be biased!

Its just given me no problems, and i know Crucial are very good with their support should anything go wrong.

A couple of people have mentioned Samsung, weren't they pretty bad a while ago? Is the current generation much better?

SSDs and other Flash-based storage devices are on the other side of the "reliability" universe: when they die, they die with a sudden bang and you will never, ever be able to extract a single bit from them.

If you want "reliability", you just need to purchase a server-grade hard disk drive. At least, when the end will come for the drive, you will be able to recover something before (and even after) the drive's demise....

SSDs and other Flash-based storage devices are on the other side of the "reliability" universe: when they die, they die with a sudden bang and you will never, ever be able to extract a single bit from them.

If you want "reliability", you just need to purchase a server-grade hard disk drive. At least, when the end will come for the drive, you will be able to recover something before (and even after) the drive's demise....

I would tend to agree, but the performance you get from the SSD is worth the risk of it dying on you. So to protect my self I run an image of my boot / OS drive 3 times a week to an external USB hard drive. My other two machines with SSDs are imaged manually once in a while; but their contents are mostly static so I don't need a weekly backup. Either-way, whether you go with a SSD or a spindle / mechanical drive, you want to have a backup in place if you have important data or just want to save time during recovery.

Ironically, my OCZ drive in my laptop just died a few moments ago. About the 6 month mark... It only makes a high pitched whine and won't actually boot or show up as a drive.

My experience isn't anything more than anecdotal evidence, but there you have it.

Yep, my OCZ drive lived very shortly, and I've had friend's with failed OCZ drives. Some people have good luck with them, and others don't. I can't recommend them at all. My choice is between the Samsung 830 (or newly released 840, although don't know how reliable they are since it's a new model), Crucial M4, and I've had good luck with Intel 320 series. In any case, the lesson is backup all your data, regardless of the brand.

My OCZ disks have been pretty good.

I had one fail on me, but I overwrote the error flags and it just kept on trucking.

I'd recommend OCZ or Samsung. The Samsungs seen quite good, and as you can see, lots of people recommending them :)

Yarp

I have little experience of my own with SSDs but the Sand Disk Extreme 256GB that I have is been more than good. The price was a steal and the speeds are awesome.

I think many of the early SDD issues like reliability and rewrites have been improved by all manufacturers. I would say try to find the best bang for the buck.

And as other guyhere pointed out: Back everything up just in case. In my case, I keep separate file backups from folders I use on the SSD, not the entire drive because I don't mind reinstall eveything again.

My intuition tells me Crucial m4. Fast and a great Marvell controller.

Three-way tie between Crucial m4 (Marvell controller), Intel 330/520 (modded SandForce controller), and Samsung 83x/84x (Samsung MCX controller).

Note that the generic SandForce controller is not listed (along with the generic Marvell controller) - also MIA is the newer version of the OCZ Vertex 4 (modded Marvell controller, different from the controller of the Crucial m4).

On this topic, we have been switching laptops at work over to Samsung 840's but haven't seen any failures or issues yet, albeit we are just starting to convert over and a few months old. The drives are in laptops with 100% data on SSD. Also drives are encrypted with a third party program so that makes more use I suppose.

I have been wanting to switch to SSD myself in the past but have been too gun shy about it because of the relatively short life on them. I have figured the best practice would be to install OS only on SSD and then use HDD for data/programs etc.. Would this in theory bring the life span of the drive to last longer since the amount of writes is less?

I would tend to agree, but the performance you get from the SSD is worth the risk of it dying on you.

It's a choice you have to make. And until SSD drives won't have something more meaningful for data storage like PCM of memristor chips (let's say, within the next five years?), I will always choose to spend the extra money an SSD will cost on a server-grade hard disk drives with spinning platters....

It seems like the general concensus is a toss-up between Crucial M4 and Samsung 830/840. I read on Anandtech that their review units of the 840 Pro both broke, has that been fixed? And are there significant differences between the Marvell controller on Crucial and the Samsung controllers?

It's a choice you have to make. And until SSD drives won't have something more meaningful for data storage like PCM of memristor chips (let's say, within the next five years?), I will always choose to spend the extra money an SSD will cost on a server-grade hard disk drives with spinning platters....

that's assuming that you value reliability above all else.

Plextor M5 Pro

I second that.

The Plextor M3/M5 series are basically Crucial M4s without the firmware problems (legendary Plextor Firmware engineering and QA) and with an included 5 year parts warranty (the 1st 3 years you don't even pay shipping in case of a RMA, they send someone pick up the drive at your doorstep)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!