This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

How reliable are SSD vs. standard hard drives?

#1Shadow_CloudPosted 2/12/2014 9:56:25 AM
My laptop is five years. The hard drive on it has functioned well and never given me any serious issue. I'm going to buy a new laptop and would like to upgrade to a SSD (probably a Samsung 840 EVO). Will the SSD be just as good with its longevity?
#2SampsonMPosted 2/12/2014 9:58:18 AM
No, they don't last as long. Still I think the performance is worth it. In this era of ubiquitous cloud storage, I'd go with an SSD and back up important files to Google Drive, Dropbox, Skydrive what have you.
"They tell me dont get high, and I should try to make a living, I tell em' imma hustler and I'd rather make killin' "~Weezy F. Babby
#3SinisterSlayPosted 2/12/2014 9:58:27 AM
Uh... well....

It's relative....

SSD's are unreliable to the extreme if we consider their 3-5 year life span.
When my 10 gig HDD from 1998 is still working perfectly....
He who stumbles around in darkness with a stick is blind. But he who... sticks out in darkness... is... fluorescent! - Brother Silence
#4Flaktrooper123Posted 2/12/2014 10:03:45 AM
I thought it is the other way around. SSD is more reliable because it has no moving parts. However, while you can see symptoms of a hard drive starting to fail, if an SSD fails, if will fail without warning.
#5bewtsPosted 2/12/2014 10:15:42 AM
I still have an SSD from 5 years ago.. vertex 2 60gb.
#6Shadow_Cloud(Topic Creator)Posted 2/12/2014 10:16:48 AM
Okay I did some searching and found this:

I think I'll stick with the SSD. Now whether to go 250 GB or 500 GB is a new question I'll have to consider.
#7popping4itPosted 2/12/2014 10:28:37 AM
ssd is good in laptops because they dont draw as much power.

also ssd reliability depends on if you do alot of writes to it which also means larger drives are more reliable since you're not writing to the same memory cell.

conventional hdd just wear and tear from all use and typically fail randomly although before they fail completely you can tell they are and have a chance to back any data.
whens mahvel?
#8pothocketPosted 2/12/2014 10:41:43 AM
Flaktrooper123 posted...
I thought it is the other way around. SSD is more reliable because it has no moving parts.

In theory this is true. However the damn things have to be manufactured correctly. My first SSD was crap and half the time I turned on my computer it wouldn't even recognize it was there. Just kept rebooting until it found it and everything would work fine after that. I eventually got a Samsung one and have no problems since.
#9GTRagnarokPosted 2/12/2014 10:52:49 AM
SinisterSlay posted...
SSD's are unreliable to the extreme if we consider their 3-5 year life span.

Do you write a 100GB of data to your drive every day?
Wow. Very sig. Such original. So words. Wow.
#10PhilOnDezPosted 2/12/2014 11:32:33 AM
If longevity is your biggest concern I'd go with an 840 pro over an evo. The regular 840 and 840 evo use a newer, cheaper type of flash memory with a maximum lifespan of 16 years. That's even if you don't use it. The max lifespan on CDs was supposed to be 10 years though and I have some from pre-2000 that still work. The estimated lifespan on the Pro and most other brands is 60 years for the memory itself. This is with 0 use though, obviously if you're using them they'll reach an unwritable state much sooner than that. The Evo or Pro either one should last until they're 'antiquated' though, providing you don't abuse them.
Every time I try to go where I really wanna be it's already where I am, 'cuz I'm already there
XBL, PSN, Steam, Origin, BSN, GFAQs, MC: PhilOnDez