2000 + 17

>2000 + 17
>he's not using a 2TB NVMe SSD instead of a cheap slow as fuck HDD

explain yourself, are you poor?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=8P5JNNS7MSU
ge.com/digital/press-releases/how-airlines-are-tapping-internet-things
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

I don't need to access my chinese cartoons at 2GB/s

oh shit shots fired...

Because the lifespan of those is 5< years. And because my 3200rpm Seagate from 2004 is still working just fine. Shill elsewhere, pleb.

>are you poor?
yes

I already have a 1TB ssd and it wouldn't be worth the upgrade for what would be essentially negligible improvements.

I have other hobbies that would benefit from that money more.
You do have multiple hobbies right?

my z68 board doesnt support it

Nah m8, 3D VNAND can do ~6,000 P/E cycles before becoming read-only. You'd need to write an insane amount of data even on their 250GB one 24/7 do wear it out fast.

Like 250GB x 6000

Even then that only means it will become read-only.

So in other words, it's a $1500 paperweight after 6 months of light usage. Got it.

I only have a 250GB NVMe drive

You'd have to write like 8TB of data to it every day for 6 months, how would you even do that?

And again no, after ~6,000 P/E cycles it just becomes read only. No data is lost.

It's pretty useless if you cant write to it anymore but you're right, by the time it becomes read only ill buy a bigger capacity nvme for much cheaper

>120gb SSD for OS and shitty programs that take a long time to load
>1TB SSD for shitty video games
>1TB NVMe for storage
Feels good boys

I like to keep my solid state drives defragged

I simply don't care. I have a 16GB m.2 SSD for OS and shit in my home server (data is stored on mechanical disks) and a good old 5.400rpm hard drive in my laptop. Works for me.

>16GB m.2 SSD

They make them that small? That's like the micropenis of SSDs

>being this new
>falling for this obvious of bait

y-yes...

only 2TB?
i bought $1000 worth of hdd's in 2010, which got me 16TB of space

>Spending 1k on hard drives in 2010

that's all you need for OS and programs.

4 U

Win10 is sitting at 13+ gigs for me. Adobe suite alone is 8+ gigs. I've already gone over on that alone.

you realize that most ssds dont even go into read only mode, and the ones that do are only 'read only' for one power cycle, and if you reboot the machine the data is lost?

i know this is bait but i hate seeing that misconception

not on muh loonix hacker operatin system

>Are you poor?
Yes

Plus I'm waiting for the promise of Optane

>promise of Optane


haahahaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHAHAHAAAAAAA

>Win10 is sitting at 13+ gigs for me.
your problem for utilizing a bloated system.

It might be bloated but what are the alternatives?
Dont worry Ill wait

Cute ladies drive you have there OP. Real men play with real toys.

or the Optane

GNU/Linux or MacOS if you are a fag.

Because I use 2 crucial M4 SSDs in RAID 1.

M.2 fags are burning their money.

Still waiting

>not using a live CD
Wow. Just wow.

>NVMe SSD for storage

see

you mean nvme

Pretty sure your disk cache is skewing your benchmark because the sample size is far too low. Those M4's are meh drives at best and can't support the numbers you've posted in a RAID1.

see

> are you poor?
Yes. Also today i noticed that right side of my monitor is glowing in pink. Looks like im fucked.

see

What would you use it for doodoo head

I have a 300 gb hard drive from 2005 for programs and a 500 gb hard drive from 2008ish for chinese cartoons
get on my level

Oh it's using caching all right...

>TLC nand
>fast
Please user, you're making a fool of yourself

What? 960 pro uses V-NAND you sack of potatoes.

Because I run two 850 Evos in RAID 0, which is fast enough for me.

You should be using the 1TB SSD for storage and the NVMe for gaming/programs to reduce them load times...

it was just before the floods, if that's what you're thinking

Except how NAND works is broken down into 3 types; SLC, MLC and TLC. Well technically there's eMLC too.

>RAID 0

>SSDs are now as expensive as they were two years ago

Games wouldn't benefit from NVMe speeds. SSD is faster than the games can handle

As soon i get a job i'm planning to get a very large SSD. I've had enough of the HDD bullshit, once you go SSD, you can never go back.

Just makes things load faster. Not like a game will play faster because of it.
Way more beneficial with relational databases.

Why not a HDD RAID 10 w/ SSD cache?

Not that user, but what kind of RAID would be good for running two SATA/M.2 SSDs then?

and they are going up in price lol.

just go ramdisk if you wanna go fast.

I'm backing up to an external, battery backed up HDD, nothing to worry about.

>Load faster
That's what I mean. SSD is faster than games can handle for loading

RAID 1.

If it's not dumb dogshit, it can figure out that the exact same data written to two devices can be read twice as fast. And completely independent, boosting IOPS by X2 compared to RAID 0 which does not.

Plus slight hardware level fuckups will not destroy data and be a general nuisance/ disaster.

show ya sauce little nigga

>defragging an SSD
is this bait?

Just check your disk usage when playing games big nig.

MacOS usually takes just as much space as Windows you hipster cunt

>are you poor?
someone post that pic with the porto-rican kid

Not him but personal experience from running a passthrough for a year and getting down and dirty with what games actually need.

250MB/s w/ SSD IOPS are all a gaming machine needs in read speed.

>boosting IOPS by X2 compared to RAID 0 which does not.

I think you're mixing up RAID 1 and 0

I've run games in a Ramdisk, no difference compared to SSDs.

Depends on whether or not the game is IO bound. I'd argue that loading a 2 gigabyte + executable into memory is definitively a timesink though.

Nope, just a zpool.

Striping won't provide true round robin I/O.
It gives you double sequential but a marginal increase in IOPS.

You have to prevent file fragmentation to cut down on seek times buddy solid state magnets don't defragment themselves

...

Just how many games are IO bound?

My Z77 board doesn't support it.

I don't know, but I guess realistic simulation games, for example those used by US military etc, would require immense amounts of data, that exceeds what can be contained in system memory.

America's Army is one of those simulation games. The rest are played in the field and not on the computer so much.

Should I replace the HDDs with NVMes, OP?

>The rest are played in the field and not on the computer so much.
I guess they still use IoT sensors that gather a lot of data and send them to servers that aggregate sensord data and then write it to disk??

Maybe? I really don't know.

unless by sensors you mean HD video cameras, it's probably not *that* much data
IOPS might be a concern with tons of low-bandwidth, intermittent sources, but those could be buffered in memory and written out sequentially to hard disks

They had MILES, looks like it's the Dismounted system now... shitty graphics. lol
youtube.com/watch?v=8P5JNNS7MSU

>unless by sensors you mean HD video cameras, it's probably not *that* much data
I don't know. What I do know, for example, is that modern jet engines have sensors that produce terrabytes of data while they are running.

ge.com/digital/press-releases/how-airlines-are-tapping-internet-things

...

What happened with SSD's that they're going back up in price?

Increased demand

also ""nand shortage""

Fucking phones. It's just like RAM, just checked a week ago, I bought two sticks of 8GB DDR3 each for 70€ and now they are 130€ or so. DDR4 hasn't go up that much, but still.

(((nand shortage)))

((((((they))))) artificially made them go up in price by shorting suppy.

Uh, yeah they do. You get to be the first one to load in every time in competitive multiplayer games. You get to show off your NVMe storage to plebs. There isn't a more dank use case, other than for editing RAW photos or running storage-heavy programs.

We write a lot of computational software that's super RAM and main-disk heavy that benefits from NVMe storage. If you're not doing anything like that or putting EVERYTHING on your NVMe, you're really not utilizing the storage speeds.

Don't you get it? The shitty programs that take a long time to load wouldn't take as long if it was on NVME storage. Those are the ones that are probably storage heavy.

computing was a mistake if you're the Sup Forums faggot that's buying this shit

>Hurr Durr windoze
>Hurr Durr gaymen
>Hurr Durr put OS on slowest drive and the crap that doesn't benefit from NVMes on NVMes then show off to the internet

Kys yourself

ssds didnt exist back in the year 2000 fucking retard, learn to year+number

5 years is the warranty period. The lifecycle of modern SSD are into petabytes.

I doubt your 3200 rpm Seagate from 2004 even reaches petabyte of data usage total.

I think the intel's newest ssds can theoretically last 100+ years.

You can buy ~5 TB for about $100-130. 3 of them would be ~$400.

why yes, in fact, I am poor.

I like it when they fall for bait and end up posting something insightful.

>and the ones that do are only 'read only' for one power cycle, and if you reboot the machine the data is lost?
Is it not nonvolatile memory? why would it be overwritten unless explicitly told to do so, or left unpowered for a long enough time for the charge to dissipate from the memory cells?

I'm using a 1TB 850 evo, and a 256GB 840 evo.

For my applications there is virtualy no noticable speed difference between a sata SSD and an NVME SSD.

Also I'm still on Sandy Bridge so no support.

I plan to upgrade to skylake/kabylake soon, then I might get one for shits and giggles

Yes.