Anons of Sup Forums that don't use ssd.. why don't you use ssd?

anons of Sup Forums that don't use ssd.. why don't you use ssd?

Other urls found in this thread:

techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead
twitter.com/AnonBabble

money

Is Samsung Magician needed for the SSD to function properly?

no

Nigga do I look like I got money growing out of my ass? Performance on a 7200 rpm disk is acceptable if the rest of the hardware is up to par.

You can't trick me. SSD is a meme to rip off rich white males.
The Flash Jew can't fool me this time.

I don't do anything that requires fast disk i/o. it's a little annoying when moving large files around, but more than manageable.

I already installed it, should I remove it?
Though, what I did was just set the initial settings and set it not to open whenever Windows starts up.

I could see using one but if I need it I will buy it

im poor

Get an 120GB SSD for your OS and then an HDD for everything else

nigga I said im poor

>expensive
$30 for almost instant boot is expensive?

Move to W10 and you'll get SSD boot times.
Though, SSD makes stuff like Photoshop faster according to Sup Forums, I wouldn't know but it seems that Photoshop is one of your least priorities now with your laptop.

I have 10 thousand other things i need more than a ssd, my 3 1tb drives aren't even close to being full, and I have enough ram so most programs and files I use get cached

Rapid mode is breddy gud.

Windows 10 with 1GB RAM

Good luck user.

I think your n550 wont even support 10 (at least my n450 does not)

>64-bit OS with 1GB of RAM

Can't do that on my laptop, only 1 sata connection

Replace the optical drive with a hard drive

my old PC only had sata-2 so it wasn't really worth it.

lulzing hard at that samsung 850 I have now though. tasty.

Jesus Christ, how does that shit even run that bloated piece of shit windows 7?

>benchmark normally
>breddy gud
>enable rapid mode and benchmark again
>mfw synthetic test glory

He can definitely run 32bit of W10 on it.

Actually, just move to some distro like arch or ubuntu if you just use that laptop as a facebook or whatever machine.

Aint spending that much for only 1TB of storage space

I play games on the laptop

You know that'd actually run better with a 32 bit OS right? 64 bit programs use twice the RAM because they need twice as many bits

Yeah but I'm too lazy

What games? Just use WINE and lubuntu

It won't support 10 (or 8) because of 1024*600 resolution

Good luck then, it's not our problem anymore.
You're poor and you're lazy, not to mention dumb.

Dumb for what? I'm just lazy

Poor people are almost 100% of the time dumb because smart people don't be poor.

I don't need one.

I do have a SSD now, but I got it because it was super cheap not because I actually wanted it. I bought it like half a year before I ever built the computer I used it in.

All I do is shitpost and a 1TB HDD was 1/4 the cost of a 1TB SSD.

If all you do is shitpost, why do you need 1TB to begin with?

why do you have sata SSDs when you can get pci3.0 nvme drives?

Because they're poor and/or stupid.

this desu
950 Pro is nice

I only fell for the sdd meme on my main rig

How ever my second pc....
yeah right. (pic related)

Implying my second pc, my DOS shitbox can even execute a SSD without shitting the bed.

pffft you know nothing kid.

because i have no need for one.

Damn, that's some philosophical shit.

You're right though. I've never seen a poor smart person. A lot of people who are poor, it's usually their fault. They're just stupid and lazy.

Unless they live in some shit hole and it's out of their hands, but still...

I do
>the the only thing I dont steal

Oh god user... I'm sorry. Do you have a few free RAM slots?
I mean, 1GB DDR3 DIMMs are free basically.

Just realized he is running a netbook.
Weeellll... if he starts a GofundMe I'll give him $2. :P

I suppose you have to define 'poor'.
I'm pretty poor by my standards but... my machines all have SSDs. So not THAT poor.

Because I'm not an idiot that pays more per GB for a slight increase in speed.

>poorfag
How is paying the same price for MORE SPACE being poor?

>lol 1 ssd 1 hdd
Or, you know, 2 HDDs for THE SAME PRICE AND MORE SPACE.

Technology today is essentially companies making dumb products and relying on the stupidity of the common person to buy them. See: smartphones.

SSDs provide more than a slight speed boost, and they also provide shock resistance and other important features for mobile devices.

Say I want to transfer my steam games to free up SSD OS space, but don't want to sacrifice load time. Do I buy another one of these fucks, or do I set up some HHD raid0 config?

The human brain can't really handle a full-speed SSD load anyway, so it's fine to get slower mechanical drives

I do, got it for $140

>more than a slight speed boost
Here's a little tip: those benchmarks you run on them in no way parallel real world performance.

Yes, SSDs are faster. There is absolutely no question about that. But fast enough to pay for a lot less space? No.

>mobile devices
Sorry, I don't bother with children's toys. Laptops and netbooks aren't made to be jostled around like your toys and work just fine with micro HDD drives.

How are Crucial SSDs?

>Here's a little tip: those benchmarks you run on them in no way parallel real world performance.
Correct, a benchmark might show a 500x increase in random access, but it might "only" speed up OS/program load times by 5-10x. It's still an extremely significant speedup. Definitely worth the price at least for a system drive.

I use a m.2 pcie3 ssd get on my level fgtttss

Eh, I do find the performace boost worth it, and since that also means that the data can be recovered even if something bad happens in the field (like say, falling off a truck), it's worth it to me.

As far as cost, we don't need a lot of mobile storage so, it isn't too expensive for us.

If it isn't worth it to you though, then no one says you HAVE to buy one.

Most people only understand and look at the 520MB sequential access speed, even Sup Forums.

>tfw am rich white male
life is good.

all the fags hating on here, but if you're not playing games that shit is fine.

I have an N350 or something atom with 1gb ram, it works fine with firefox (chrome not a chance). Not exactly fast, but probably on par with my pentium 4.

I bought a 250gb ssd like ten minutes ago on amazon. My hdd shit out and I've decided it's time to stop using hdd for os+programs. It only lasted 2 years and it's fucking hitachi

games and movies are the only thing I have in my life

and this shit lags when I fullscreen a movie

No it's not idiot and everyone that has ever owned an ssd will never go back. You are just lying to yourself.

A Datev update I recently installed on two otherwise similar pcs took half an hour on the one with a cheap ssd and 2 hours on the one with a hdd which is still pretty new. Threw out the hdd afterwards, waiting that long is unacceptable.

>not RX480
damn nigga

PNY CS1311 480 GB for 124€
Yay or nay?

what i really like about these threads is how 300$ is nothing to them

Why don't you get a job?

>tfw shit motherboard that doesn't support full speedz

I'm lazy

set the OS optimization how you prefer, set the overprovisioning if you can afford the space, then uninstall

Unless your parents are rich, you're practically guaranteed to be poor at one point or another regardless of how smart you are. Smart people just usually don't stay poor for long.

How long do SSDs last? I've heard 2 to 5 years max. Is that true?

For an OS drive, or a laptop drive, it's great. Faster boot times, and less corruptible (no moving parts) if you accidentally drop your laptop. Using them for mass storage in a desktop though is not a wise investment. You're much better off buying a large 3-4TB HDD which will sit in your computer or on your desk in a caddy and not be moving around all the time.

>64 bit programs use twice the RAM because they need twice as many bits
No. That is not how it works, mostly it is only pointers getting bigger IIRC. There is some code size increase, but more like 10-20 %. Don't quote me on the figure, too lazy to find actual data.

I don't think it has to do with being "smart", at least not as universally as you think. Rather how pushy, aggressive and able to press yourself to where you want to be you are.

That is generally important a lot, often more than the actual abilities (unless you are a really hopeless and even that doesn't help you anymore).

>smart people
well, terms like that betreay the thought was also simple in nature?
Protip: easy "logics" like seldom explain how society works

Can't afford one.

Depends on how you use them. Of course, all components fail eventually, but if you get a good SSD it'll last pretty much indefinitely. Old SSDs used to have durability issues - the cells have hard limit on how many times they can be written on before they become read-only - but as I understand it, those issues have been mitigated to the point where it's mostly a theoretical problem. And even if you get a crappy SSD, it should last for a long time as long as you take steps to minimize wear.

What would those steps be and how much can I expect a relatively new SSD to last?

You're spewing shit, It will run windows 10.

>:P

>how much can I expect a relatively new SSD to last?
techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead
300 TB of read/writes. If you are a typical user (5GB/day), that is 165 years.

>pic related

If you keep it connected to a pc that's powered on relatively often and you only use it for typical consumer purposes then it should last you a lifetime. However SSD's can, like any other piece of electronics, fail without warning so always use backups.

Under no circumstance use SSD's for cold data storage or as an archive disk. Keep the SSD attached to a pc and power it up at LEAST once every 6 months. SSD's trap electrons to store data but these electrons slowly escape over time if the SSD isn't powered up.

This process accelerates in warmer weather because conductivity of the silicon increases with temperature. According to this chart (the numbers are weeks) SSD's lose their data incredibly fast in unpowered state and at high temperatures so keep this in mind. For example, keeping an SSD in a blisteringly hot attic during the summer could wipe all of its data in a week.

That part about heat scares me. I do keep my PC powered on pretty regularly, but summers do get really hot where I live. My PC is cooled adequately, but I'm not sure if I would need to install an extra fan if I decide to get a SSD eventually. What do you think?

I heard SSDs die after a few years
is this true still?

I've had my SSD for 4 years since April of 2012 and I have 61% of its rated writes remaining. Those at current use level would probably run out around 2021.

I think you would be fine. Paradoxically it's better for SSD's to be hot while in use but very bad for them to be hot while unpowered. As long as you use your pc occasionally during the hot months its going to be OK. The only thing to watch out for is when the SSD will be without power for a long time.

>why don't you use ssd?
Price/performance ratio isn't good enough yet.
I just use them when I want quiet running/low power.

>However SSD's can, like any other piece of electronics, fail without warning so always use backups.
So you wouldn't recommend an SSD for a NAS or other backup application?

It was never true.
Pic related is a 7 year old SSD that was heavily used (6.6TB written) yet it still has 96% health.

>Don't care about driver failure
>Don't need redundancy

Is it worth RAID0-ing my two 850's? This machine does a lot of bulk reads and writes but the content doesn't need to be stored forever and doesn't need to be redundant (other machines on the network deal with backup).

>heavily used
Pleb

Well a NAS is powered on 24/7 so the data retention problems of SSD's are a non-issue but purely from a cost/GB perspective ist's incredibly wasteful to use SSD's specifically for backup. The speed advantages are also pointless since your typical gigabit ethernet is already saturated by the throughput of high capacity HDD's. So no, I wouldn't recommend SSD's for backup unless it's for a very specific use that justifies the cost.

Also to clarify what I meant about the failure without warning. When an SSD typically fails it's not because the FLASH memory cells are worn out and can't write data anymore. Most of the times it's the controller chip of something on the control board that gets fucked and therefore you lose access to the entire SSD's contents. This kind of failure cannot be tracked through software so when it happens it's sudden and without warning. I have no idea how high these kind of failure rates are though.

You still benefit from the architecure

That's not too great. I guess I'll have to wait until SSDs mature a bit more.

I'm not using my PC for a month and a half to two months during the hot months, because I'm out of town at that time. Is that time period of inactivity detrimental to the SSD?

>I have no idea how high these kind of failure rates are though.
They're high enough that it's a serious research issue for those than run these massive servers (ie google), but for everyone else not all that common.

heavily used 840.
longevity isn't really an issue anymore

Hard to say really, it depends on the model of SSD and the temperature but it will certainly leak electrons from the cells during that period. Under normal temperatures I wouldn't be worried. However if it's 2 months at sustained +40C or +100F temperatures then I would personally put my SSD in a cool subterranean basement or a room with AC, just to be sure. I also think a decent recent model like a samsung pro model would hold the data during that period with high probability without any special measures.

You're a poor motherfucker if you think that's being poor

Note that older drives had 3x nm class NAND, which had much better endurance than 25nm and 1x nm class NAND.

It probably still isn't a problem in practice even with 15nm, but don't expect the endurance to be that much better than the sticker says, as it was in the past.