What are your experiences with ssds ?

What are your experiences with ssds ?

Other urls found in this thread:

github.com/Drive-Trust-Alliance/sedutil/wiki/Encrypting-your-drive
pcworld.com/article/2887255/samsung-promises-yet-another-fix-for-slowed-840-evo-ssds.html
samsung.com/us/computing/memory-storage/solid-state-drives/ssd-850-evo-2-5-sata-iii-250gb-mz-75e250b-am/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

it's fast!

For the past 12 years, very good.
Best thing since hard drives.

4 u

what were the drives 12 years ago like ?

really good and getting cheaper by the year
look for discounts

...

So far they're faster than my tapes

300 bucks for 120GB here, no thanks

Really no point with NVMe or M.2. SSDs are faster, but I still prefer HDD for mass storage. I only use SSDs for booting Windows because that shit is slow.

>he doesn't know that hard drives are still used by 95% of the world
>he probably is using a hard drive right now

>buy 850 evo
>realize shitty mobo only has sata2 and reduces my speeds by 30%
>buy coffeelake
>finally get full speeds
>install bios update
>speeds reduced by 30%
Its been a great experience

what did he mean by this ?

Underage GenZfag detected

You mean in the consumer market? No. More like 30/70. Hint, laptops.

>what were the drives 12 years ago like ?
Ugh, SSDs on the consumer market have been a thing for almost 30 years.

i was asking about the quality of the first ssd drives

Sad because veracrypt makes mine too slow :(

>laptops predominantly have ssd
how fucking retarded are you?

Pretty enjoyable so far, fast boot times are noice.

at least your bits are encrypted

Muh speed of course.

But on my laptop it allows me to move it around whime it's active without fear of damaging hard drive or hitting the motion sensor which stops hard disk usage, slowing performance way down

Big upgrade in older laptop, was less of an upgrade in my desktop.

Not even, i decided to not encrypt because of it
Probably i wouldnt even notice because it's still fast compared to a hdd, but 50% performance loss triggers me too much

whole disk encryption is too much, better to encrypt the things you need encrypted .

What year do you live in? 2006?
Everything has a M.2, if any hard drives, than just for storage in addition to the SSD.

Everybody I know has a laptop with a SSD and _almost_ everybody has a desktop with at least one SSD, even old people.

My data drive is already encrypted, it just bothers me that anyone somewhat competent stealing my pc could access firefox logins or desktop programs where i'm logged in (like wire, discord)

really damn fast, it moved the system/software startup bottleneck to my cpu

Day and night difference for me compaired with HDD's. sadly I only have an SSD in my laptop and not my desktop

Great. I was using W7 + BIOS/MBR on a HDD from 2010, for the longest time. I finally got a 850 Evo and it's been great. My hardware isn't new enough to support NVMe or anything, but a SATA drive has still been plenty fast for me.

Why would you be using that on a SSD? Any halfway decent SSD nowadays supports Opal, which means everything is already encrypted - you just need to set a password and tell the controller to not automatically know it.

Because I couldn't find the setting to enable Opal in my bios

You don't do it from the system firmware. You have to use something like sedutil to set it up:
>github.com/Drive-Trust-Alliance/sedutil/wiki/Encrypting-your-drive
Takes like 10min, and even provides a bootable image for if your firmware can't boot into the shadow MBR for the PBA.
If your drive supports Opal, seriously don't use anything else. You lose no performance at all, and the encryption is invisible at the OS level, so you don't have to fuck with luks/veracrypt/software encryption in general.

Wow you newfags don't fde why are you even on this board

I have one with those speeds, this is barely 3x the speed of a HD, you can still feel the difference, yes, but not that much

Maybe in sustained writes vs a HDD are you only seeing 3x the speeds. But the random reads are a big part of what makes such a difference for SSDs.

Uh... I have a 850 evo too and i don't get why i didn't found that with all my googling
But i don't get how it works, who/what exactly will ask me the password at boot? Not the OS, so the bios? Should i somehow check if my bios (really old) is compatible?

Im working on it

My SSD was fast until I installed the Meltdown patch. Now it's 4MB/s with spikes of 380MB/s.

>who/what exactly will ask me the password at boot?
Something called the PBA - pre-boot authentication environment. It's a tiny linux stub that just prompts you for a password. Once you enter it, it tries all of your Opal-compliant disks in a row to see if the password unlocks them, and then reboots the system.
Opal disks only re-lock themselves at a powe cycle (the power completely going off, not a soft reset) so you can then boot into Windows Boot Manager/GRUB/whatever as soon as the system gets back up a few seconds later.

>so the bios?
Mind the difference in terminology. BIOS is no more than a form of system firmware, like UEFI is. The generic term is just "firmware".

>Should i somehow check if my bios (really old) is compatible?
Provided you can boot UEFI schemes, you should be fine. I'm using a Sandy Bridge P67 system from 2011, and it still works. I don't know precisely when UEFI became super widespread, but provided your computer isn't a decade old, you should be fine.
You can check by going into your firmware settings and seeing if it supports something like "legacy boot". If it does, then you probably have UEFI.

Sweet, thanks. Looks like everything would work.
Since you're being so kind i'll ask you some more questions:

How much time does this process take compared to normal boot? Also after I have typed in the password and the pc has rebooted I dont need to do anything else, it'll just boot whatever OS is on the ssd?
How does this setup work with the hibernation in windows? As far as i know hibernation should save stuff on the drive and then cut power, so i should be asked the password again next time i boot, right?
Do i need to remove opal if i wanna install a new OS?

Is ADATA actually Good? I have the 240gb 550

>How much time does this process take compared to normal boot?
Probably about a minute, assuming you go from a cold boot without the drive yet unlocked. That includes the time to enter the password, too. A small price to pay for the security of FDE, the convenience of having it be hardware-based and invisible to the OS level, and the total lack of a performance penalty compared to software encryption.

>after I have typed in the password and the pc has rebooted I dont need to do anything else, it'll just boot whatever OS is on the ssd?
Pretty much. At that point it will unlock the drive and expose whatever bootloaders are on it already. So if your firmware automatically detects the EFI system partition, you can just load the Windows Boot Manager from there.

> How does this setup work with the hibernation in windows?
Hibernation/sleep are the sticking points with this. Expected behavior is that it should re-lock the drive if you hibernate. That means you need to boot the PBA and enter your password to unlock it, just like a regular boot. From there, Windows should hunt down wherever it stored the hiberfil file and boot that.

But, honestly, SSD boot is so fast that I would probably prefer to just not hibernate at all. Sleep is enough for me, if I don't leave the computer running or just turn it off.

>Do i need to remove opal if i wanna install a new OS?
Nope. This is all invisible at the OS level. So if you want to reinstall Windows, you would unlock the drive, then boot into either an installer, or boot a partition manager like GParted Live if you want to set up the partitions by hand.

Once the drive is unlocked (by the PBA), you pretty much just mess with the partitions as though it were a normal drive. If you don't try anything really violent (like dd'ing over the shadow MBR) you shouldn't have any problems. If you have the drive set up in a sane way though, i.e. EFI system partition first and then only touch things after it, you should be fine.

>get samsung ssd 500 mbps read 500 mpbs write
>speeds are amazing
>be 8 months later of casual use mostly linux
>ssd speeds randomly go to shit
>transfer starts off at 700mbps and within a minute are going at 4mbps
>what use to take 10 seconds to copy now takes 30 minutes

i think so , i don't have any of their drives though.

:(

yes, that was indeed mfw

Pretty nice, coming from 5400RPM laptop harddrive, that is.

Upgraded all of my computers to use SSDs for OS boot & applications, HDDs for all the data storage & occasionally for software installs that don't require SSD speeds in the rare case I'm using a small SSD and need to conserve space.

Most of my SSDs are overprovisioned at about 30% to improve performance and extend life expectancy. Typically, a 128 GB SSD is partitioned for 85 GB, or a 240 with 155 GB useful install space, for examples. I'm still running a pair of Samsung 128 GB 830s and an OCZ 128 GB Vertex 4, going on 5 years now, and they're in top condition and fast enough I can't tell the difference with a new Crucial 525 GB MX300 I just bought. The system with the Vertex 4 uses that as the OS drive and one of the Samsung 830s is a secondary SSD for applications.

I've got about a dozen HGST 2, 3, and 4 TB HDDs (Ultrastar refurbs and some new Megascales) that handle all of the main critical storage, plus some WD Black, Toshiba and really old Samsung (pre-Seagate acquisition) HDDs with 750 GB to 2 TB capacities that do most of the heavy lifting. I'm using those and pushing them to failure while using the HGSTs for redundant backup.

Thanks a lot for the explanations, im scared because im a noob but im gonna have to try do it anyway because i am too uncomfy without fde

Memes. I prefer my floppies.

based floppy poster

reposting my question from /sqt/

Hello my good men. I have a weird SSD speed problem.

>extract 1GB uncompressed image folder on C: (operating system SSD): 7 seconds
>extract 1GB uncompressed image folder on D: (storage SSD): 26 seconds

After 1/3rd of the extraction, the storage SSD just slows to a crawl (HDD level of speed). In task manager, the storage SSD jumps to 100% disk usage when it starts slowing down, whereas the system SSD never reaches anywhere near those levels.

And speaking of HDD;
>extract 1GB uncompressed image folder E: (mechanical HDD): 37 seconds.

So you see my dilemma? I did a CrystalDiskMark speed test and maybe that can tell me something?

1. It made me rethink how I store things.
With harddrives, you could easily keep large applications you didn't use, you could dual boot operating systems and never care about storage space.
Before the tb era of harddrives, files were generally smaller and most data was generated by yourself, so I didn't have problems with storage space then.
With ssds, you lost about 90% storage overnight (assuming your budget didn't change) and everything went from download to streaming.
I started to use backup solutions as the only place I stored things because there was never enough storage space.
2. It is much faster. Despite all the time wasted on redownloading stuff I rarely use, it was a good transition.
3. It is not as reliable. Maybe this is just my personal experiences, but hard drives never died on me the same way ssds have.
One day, I was listening to music and the song was corrupted. The drive was just gone. Harddrives usually needed to be dropped or overheated to malfunction so it was harder as a consumer to break them.

They were the same as now, just lower storage space.

I've used the same SSD since 2012, never had a problem.

and lower life spans ? or were they the same too

I've had this computer for 2 years now, and not once have I had any desire to get an SSD.
I'm not posting this to shitpost, I'm after some insight.
I typically either leave my system on over night, or I'll get home from work, turn it on, then go make coffee and have a snack. Boot times aren't a concern for me.
I've seen a few times where people mention application load times. How significant are they over mechanical drives? For example, if I open up Skype for video conferences or calling my wife while abroad, it only takes upwards of 15 seconds, which to me is still pretty acceptable, since I'm not sitting there doing nothing in those 15 seconds. If anything, I'd prefer getting a better internet plan.
I've never had a problem with file access times, aside from if I ever load up a several GB zip, which is nowhere near a frequent occasion to justify.
The only thing I can currently think of is when it's a weekend, and I get together with some friends to play some GTA5 or something to chill out with. That game takes ages to load, but it seems nonsensical to get an SSD for games, since I don't play them often.
Could anyone enlighten me to any more benefits?
Again, I'm not trying to shitpost, I'm genuinely curious about SSDs, since I've had HDDs in every system, desktop or laptop, my entire life of owning computers.

I've never tried but I know adata is reputable
check reviews and buy now. That's an excellent price.

Boot times and game loading times are not the main issues, its the "15 second loading time" for normal software you're talking about. You'll only realise how long it is after you switch to an ssd, not before (which is the you now).

Hard drives are 20th century technology, SSD is the only option in the 21st century.

>For example, if I open up Skype for video conferences or calling my wife while abroad, it only takes upwards of 15 seconds, which to me is still pretty acceptable, since I'm not sitting there doing nothing in those 15 seconds.

Skype takes about 4 seconds to load for me.
Late 2016 15" Macbook Pro.
Essentially two "bounces" of the icon on the Dock.

An SSD is the best upgrade you can have for general system responsiveness, no question.

Google gave me my first one for free so I never had to wonder about that SSDs are a meme bullshit Sup Forums used to pull. They're great

how is it fucking 2018 and people are still questioning ssds? is this bait? are americans seriously this fucking retarded? do you somehow live in a fucking bubble for the past 10 years?

nah, i'm sure it's bait. SURELY nobody is this fucking retarded

i hope you feel better soon

go back to plebbit, dipshit
>consumer market
seriously consider killing yourself

people aren't questioning if ssds are faster, they are questioning if the speed increase is worth bothering yourself for. i have an hdd and like anons in previous posts i don't really feel the need to upgrade, only upgrade i genuinely feel that i could use is to 16gb ram

You'd be craving the upgrade had you used an SSD before

>mbps
>doesn't know what 4k random transfers are
>was probably copying to a piece of shit hdd or usb stick

you as well, kill yourself

>people aren't questioning if ssds are faster
where the fuck did i say this?

Fast BUT expensive. We've been waiting for 1 TB SSD to hit

truly? might buy a 120gb ssd just to try it out then

If you're getting SSD now, go for 256 GB level SSD. The pricing difference between the two is in few dollars.

The movement towards 3D NAND was slower than expected.
The $/gig should drop once vendors introduce 512Gbit dies (and thus nuke 128GB capacities for good).

>Should drop
Once China produces more factories and disrupts the Chaebols's monopoly

IMFT and Toshiba/SanDisk 64L 3D NAND is already equal or better than gook V-NAND.

I copied to:
to and from another partition on the same drive
to and from a ramdisk
to 2 different computers over a wired network connection to two different inhouse(non wan) networks, these connection that will hit speeds of 118mpbs with mechanical drives when writing to the sweet spots.

no, I dont know what meme statistic that relates to, but what I do know is the same meter clocks the speed difference and this drive has degraded over a very short amount of time.

Do the world a favor and castrate yourself using a method of your choice so that the world is spared more versions of you.

is it a Samsung 840 SSD? All of them had performance degradation like fuck

>buying anything first generation from Samsung

pcworld.com/article/2887255/samsung-promises-yet-another-fix-for-slowed-840-evo-ssds.html

This is mine, and it's freaking perfect. My notebook is a beast now. Thanks Samsung!

samsung.com/us/computing/memory-storage/solid-state-drives/ssd-850-evo-2-5-sata-iii-250gb-mz-75e250b-am/

t. Samshit shill

pretty good

HAYAI