| 1 |
Thank you for the input. |
| 2 |
I've decided to try SSD: |
| 3 |
Crucial MX100 512GB SATA 6Gb/s 2.5 |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
It seem to have a good review |
| 6 |
I have a Poly-ITX 945GC3 an ATOM-330 how to check if this disk will be compatible with this motherboard? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The unit run asterik, hylafax and VM (VirtualBox) 7/24 |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
-- |
| 11 |
Joseph |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
On 08/29/14 08:58, J. Roeleveld wrote: |
| 15 |
>On Thursday, August 28, 2014 10:54:25 PM Joseph wrote: |
| 16 |
>> No, I wouldn't get 1TB SSD too expensive but something like 300GB I might |
| 17 |
>> consider it. Are they worth the investment? What brand do you have and how |
| 18 |
>> long? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
>Please do NOT top-post. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
>Currently, from what I found out, good brands are: |
| 24 |
>Intel, Samsung and Crucial. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
>Do check on how they perform though, for my usage (Extensive use of VMs), the |
| 27 |
>Samsung EVOs were not suitable as the performance can drop with large writes. |
| 28 |
>(doesn't help when taking a full snapshot, eg. with memory-dump, of a VM with |
| 29 |
>a lot of memory) |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
>But for most people, the EVOs are good. |
| 32 |
>The Samsung Pro does not have this, but costs more. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
>The Crucial has, according to some reviews, a cleaner shutdown where any |
| 35 |
>outstanding writes during shutdown are actually committed to disk. I am not |
| 36 |
>convinced I will ever notice it either way though. |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
>Intel has good reviews and good performance. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
>For any model you are considering, check the reviews online as the technology |
| 41 |
>behind SSDs is still changing and the firmware and chips keep changing as |
| 42 |
>well. A good brand now, might be a bad one tomorrow. |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
>For reference, I use the following in my laptop: |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
># smartctl -a /dev/sda | grep "Device Model" |
| 47 |
>Device Model: INTEL SSDMCEAC120B3 |
| 48 |
># smartctl -a /dev/sdb | grep "Device Model" |
| 49 |
>Device Model: Crucial_CT1024M550SSD1 |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
>-- |
| 52 |
>Joost |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
>> -- |
| 55 |
>> Joseph |
| 56 |
>> |
| 57 |
>> On 08/29/14 06:11, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 58 |
>> >On 29/08/2014 00:56, Joseph wrote: |
| 59 |
>> >> So there seems to be a pattern :-/ |
| 60 |
>> >> How about SSD they are not that much more? Will it withstand Gentoo |
| 61 |
>> >> compilations :-) ? |
| 62 |
>> > |
| 63 |
>> >No. There is not a pattern. Two guys used drives for 5 years and then |
| 64 |
>> >they failed. |
| 65 |
>> > |
| 66 |
>> >5 years? Wow. That's double what you can reasonably expect, you got good |
| 67 |
>> >service. |
| 68 |
>> > |
| 69 |
>> >SSDs are much more expensive than spinning disks, 1TB will cost a |
| 70 |
>> >fortune. But they work in Gentoo very well - I'm on my second and this |
| 71 |
>> >one is 256G, still runs as fast as the day I got it. |
| 72 |
>> > |
| 73 |
>> >> -- |
| 74 |
>> >> Joseph |
| 75 |
>> >> |
| 76 |
>> >> On 08/28/14 22:46, Mick wrote: |
| 77 |
>> >>> On Thursday 28 Aug 2014 21:45:10 Joseph wrote: |
| 78 |
>> >>>> I need to select 500GB or 1TB infernal 2.5in drive, any recommendation |
| 79 |
>> >>>> (reliability) of the brand. My current WD 320GB fail after 5-years. |
| 80 |
>> >>> |
| 81 |
>> >>> Interesting ... mine also failed catastrophically a couple of months |
| 82 |
>> >>> ago after |
| 83 |
>> >>> around 5 years of continuous use. |
| 84 |
>> >>> |
| 85 |
>> >>> Which reminds me to run a backup on my Seagate: |
| 86 |
>> >>> |
| 87 |
>> >>> Model Family: Seagate Momentus 7200.4 |
| 88 |
>> >>> Device Model: ST9500420ASG |
| 89 |
>> >>> |
| 90 |
>> >>> I'm not sure how much anecdotal reports on reliable drives actually hold |
| 91 |
>> >>> water, unless we're talking about an epidemic of failures like I seem to |
| 92 |
>> >>> recall Dell's Seagate drives experienced a few years ago. |
| 93 |
>> >>> |
| 94 |
>> >>> -- |
| 95 |
>> >>> Regards, |
| 96 |
>> >>> Mick |
Archives