|
Wondering the same for my pc, except using an M2 SSD instead of a normal SSD, but is it really wort it?
|
|
|
|
|
Depends. Does your motherboard have an M2 connector?
They are more expensive - quite a bit - but they are faster - again, quite a bit.
Either way, go as big as you can: because of how they work larger drives last longer, with the same amount of data. It you don't have a lot of free space, then you are using he same cells over and over - and that pushes the life down lots as each cell has a finite number of writes before it breaks.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
It does have an M2 connector, but Im wondering if it is advantageous to put the operating system on that one. Or does that not matter?
More is more when it comes to storage 
|
|
|
|
|
It's not just "more is more", it's "writes wear it out": if you have 100GB on a 128Gb drive, there are only 28GB of cells that get written to when there are changes. For a 1TB drive with 100GB on it, there are 900GB of cells to rotate through as data changes. Since each cell has a fixed number of writes, the smaller drive will wear out much more quickly as cells fail.
Stick the OS and Apps on the fast expensive drive, and data that changes on cheaper, slower drives.
Needless to say, back the buggers up! 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
From my point of view you are speculating very much.
You mention 'Since each cell has a fixed number of writes....'
Please define that more specific 
|
|
|
|
|
Actually, he's not.  SSD memory cells can only handle so many writes - a lot of them, but there is a limit. See this: SSD reliability in the real world: Google's experience | ZDNET[^]
with that in mind, the controller on the SSD (as well as any other persistent silicon storage) does the job of wear levelling. Because this controller exists, we no longer need to defrag SSD drives. Eventually, cells on the device will fail, and the controller marks them as bad and doesn't attempt to use them. Years ago, when I converted to SSD, I dug into this area, as I was skeptical about how long an SSD would last. The math I worked out was something like 8 years, longer than the life span of the laptop.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
Nice explanation! 
I did the same research when I bought my first, and that's why I got a 1TB SSD for OS / Apps and (still) use a 1TB HDD data drive. It also reduces the amount of data I need to backup, which helps.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry an article from 2016 is a nice explanation 
|
|
|
|
|
2016, good luck
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I am aware, the laws of physics haven't changed in the last 7 years.
The detailed numbers may be different (hopefully better) with improvements in processing, but the fundamental principle remains.
SSD cells wear out.
The controller does a good job load levelling.
But eventually it runs out of good cells.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
And at least as they fail, you can monitor the "quality" and replace in good time - they don't (generally) have the "catastrophic failure" mode most HDDs experience.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
the article was referenced for general results, don't be such a hard a$$ . I doubt google's data farms have changed that much from hammering the crap out of their hardware.
Seriously, I support embedded hardware that has been in the field for decades. One of the issues we have to worry about is wearing out persistent storage like this - much smaller but the same concept. When I was thinking about moving to SSD, one of the gripes was that when the SSDs failed it was instant as compared to spinners making noise.
With that said, I've been using SSDs since 2010? Heck at least a decade. SATA, m.2 and higher. None have failed. I think it's far more likely to lose your system in some other way.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
charlieg wrote: The math I worked out was something like 8 years, longer than the life span of the laptop.
Steve Gibson, being the nerd that he is, also did the math a few years ago in an episode of his Security Now podcast and came to the conclusion that yeah, it comes down to many years, but that's assuming you're rewriting all of your free space non-stop, 24/7. For real-world use, I forget the details and his exact parameters, but it came down to many decades, but that was still with unrealistically high usage patterns.
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth Haugland wrote: but Im wondering if it is advantageous to put the operating system on that one. Or does that not matter?
Oh yes... It is a boost on speed. Moving data faster is something I wouldn't miss that much, but other things that require reading / writing (i.e. compiling) is a noticable difference.
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
what is the brand of your SSD?
diligent hands rule....
|
|
|
|
|
And *that* is a valid question. There are a lot of gray market stuff out there, so I don't hesitate to go straight to Samsung for my NVMEs.
Do NOT buy their appliances. Just trust me.
Charlie Gilley
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
Has never been more appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi All,
I have commented on this before but this ones getting to me. The useless bit of Friday, 15:00 to 17:00 too late to start anything new, too early for the weekend. If you do start anything new, you have two options stay with it until it's good or stand the chance of a  moment on Monday. Or leave comments that you use to find the path (& probably realise it was wrong). Or do what I am planning, to get Visual Studio or VS Code and access to be able to download requires an invasive body scan and other things. I am planning to do it at home and bring in the test results Monday. So in theory I can scoot home... a case for 'tis easier to beg forgiveness than seek permission'... Opinions please...
|
|
|
|
|
It is never too early for the weekend !!
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonWork3 wrote: The useless bit of Friday, 15:00 to 17:00 too late to start anything new, too early for the weekend
This is where I go for the so-called low-hanging fruit...I almost always have some code somewhere to refactor/clean up, nothing so major that it could spill over. Or add comments that you meant to add earlier but never got around to. Anything that doesn't require much brainpower.
|
|
|
|
|
Never change anything on a Friday.
|
|
|
|
|
lol 
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
|
So...you get Fridays off?
|
|
|
|
|
Documentation.
Never enough of that. And I am usually the only one that does it. Unless someone forces others to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonWork3 wrote: 15:00 to 17:00
I chose to work 07:00 to 15:00 anyway, so I avoid that.
Today I'm off, yet here I sit, tweaking a utility I've been working on this week. 
|
|
|
|
|
We live in strange times. Star Wars usually does not interest me at all anymore and if anything, it's the nameless lower ranks of the bad guys that I have most sympathy for. After all, the government also once grabbed me right after finishing school, gave me a uniform and a rifle amd let me stand guard a little. So I was able to enjoy this little video:
FOR THE EMPIRE: SEASON ONE/a>[^]
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
