| 1 |
On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 02:22:36PM -0500, Dale wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Thanks for the additional info. As I figured, they got most of the |
| 4 |
> kinks worked out by now and we got some dependable SSDs to buy. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I found a 240GB for a little over $42.00 USA. Not bad at all. For |
| 7 |
> those curious: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Careful, you get what you pay for. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
When I built my first PC from scratch (had laptops before that), I bought a |
| 12 |
128 GB Sandisk SDSSDP128G. I didn’t have a lot of money back then, it was |
| 13 |
relatively cheap, but not the very cheapest. It doesn’t even have real |
| 14 |
branding to speak of. No series or model name, just a label with “Sandisk”. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I’ve been using it for 5 years for a dual-boot system (2×64 G for Windows |
| 17 |
and Gentoo). By the end of last year it became slower and slower when |
| 18 |
writing. Especially eix-update became sloooow. My main suspicion is that it |
| 19 |
was quite full and there probably is no overprovisioning for wear-leveling |
| 20 |
built into the drive. So it was writing the same cells over and over when I |
| 21 |
did my world updates. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> Sandisk SDSSDA240GG26 |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Should last me a good long while. It's the /home that keeps growing. o_O |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
When I built my NAS 2 years ago, I wanted the cheapest (but still from a |
| 28 |
notable brand) SSD for the OS. So I bought a Sandisk SDSSDA120G, so |
| 29 |
apparently from the same series you mentioned. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
A simple read test with hdparm -t reveals: |
| 32 |
500 GB Crucial from 2016: Timing buffered disk reads: 1596 MB in 3.00 seconds = 531.46 MB/sec |
| 33 |
128 GB Sandisk from 2014: Timing buffered disk reads: 1532 MB in 3.00 seconds = 510.60 MB/sec |
| 34 |
120 GB Sandisk from 2017: Timing buffered disk reads: 968 MB in 3.00 seconds = 322.42 MB/sec |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
The theoretical maximum of SATA-III is around 550 MB/s. As you can see, even |
| 37 |
a very simple read test already shows a considerable performance drop, even |
| 38 |
though it is the newest in the bunch (by date of purchase). |
| 39 |
A good SSD should always be able to saturate SATA-III when reading. Most do. |
| 40 |
Sequential writing on the cheap Sandisk topped off at around 90 MB/s, IIRC. |
| 41 |
This is slower than an HDD. For a NAS system drive this is enough, but not |
| 42 |
for a desktop, methinks. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
So my message is: don’t by the cheapest. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
Gruß | Greetings | Qapla’ |
| 48 |
Please do not share anything from, with or about me on any social network. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
A good position is better than any job. |
Archives