Re: [gentoo-user] Re: SDD, what features to look for and what to avoid.

[Dale]

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


I generally go by the model number.  If a model number is the same
between two different sellers but one has a better price, I'll go for
the better price.  If it's the same model, it shouldn't matter.  One
thing I did try to do, avoid the much older versions.  I found some
older models that were cheaper but I wanted a newer model since most of
the kinks and quirks should be fixed in the newer ones, according to
what folks posted on here anyway. 

I still haven't bought it yet.  I ordered some toner cartridges a while
back for my printer.  The site said that the ones I ordered fits my
printer.  Well, it appears they found out that was a error because they
removed that page and relisted it but did not include my printer model. 
So, I had to order a whole new set, at about $100.00 each for high
yield.  Needless to say, I'll be paying on that for a while.  I'll try
to sell the wrong ones later.  I only opened one color so the others are
still sealed. 

BTW, next time I'll find a printer that allows refilling and such too. 
I don't like that chip thing.  It counts against my page count on color
even if I print a black and white page.  Still, printer does a awesome
job.  Beats those ink jet thingys by a country mile. 

Dale

:-)  :-)