1 |
David Haller wrote: |
2 |
> Hello, an addendum without digging up the details ... |
3 |
> |
4 |
> On Tue, 17 Mar 2020, David Haller wrote: |
5 |
>> On Tue, 17 Mar 2020, Grant Edwards wrote: |
6 |
>>> I've put five Samsung SATA drives into various things in the past few |
7 |
>>> years with flawless results. Samsung is one of the big manufacturers |
8 |
>>> of flash chips, so I figure they should always end up with 1st choice |
9 |
>>> quality chips in their own drives... |
10 |
>> And they produce and use their own controllers, so they additionally |
11 |
>> know the ins and outs of those, i.e. they can easily optimize the |
12 |
>> whole SSD from Flash-Chip over controller up to the firmware... |
13 |
> [..] |
14 |
>> AFAIgathered, Samsung is the only one producing the whole product. |
15 |
> I guess Intel did (still does?) that too, but you'll have to check |
16 |
> that, ISTR that Intel now sells SSDs with non-Intel controllers and/or |
17 |
> non-Intel/"IM-Flash" flash-chips... Oh, wait, yes, Intel still does, |
18 |
> but those "pure Intel" SSDs come with a *very* hefty price (like 4 |
19 |
> times as much) and all the "normal" priced ones are those with either |
20 |
> and/or non Intel flash-chips and/or -controllers... But please go |
21 |
> check that yourselves though! |
22 |
> |
23 |
> The second thing I remembered: the german "c't"[2] magazine did a |
24 |
> torture test in late 2018 (IIRC), basically grabbing a few then |
25 |
> current SSDs and run their own testtool[1] on them until they died. Or |
26 |
> so was the plan. That was a "write till it dies" test. |
27 |
> |
28 |
> First of all: all SSD exceeded their specs, some IIRC just barely. The |
29 |
> bulk by a factor of 2 or more. ISTR some of those "just barely", but |
30 |
> wont name them without digging out the actual results, which I'll do |
31 |
> upon requests. |
32 |
> |
33 |
> The test had one problem though: a (IIRC) Samsung 850 Pro just refused |
34 |
> to die ;) They aborted the test after something like over 4 months |
35 |
> (all other drives had died inside of about a month) of _continous_ |
36 |
> writes (or write-verify cycles) to that one remaining SSD, which was |
37 |
> still happily chugging along... |
38 |
> |
39 |
> I do remember though, that even the Samsung EVO came out at the top of |
40 |
> the bunch |
41 |
> |
42 |
> (Note: c't does not award a "test-winner" or anything. Just data and |
43 |
> an conclusion aka "Fazit", the reader has to digest the data and make |
44 |
> up his own mind for _her/his_ own usecase). |
45 |
> |
46 |
> All IIRC, I can dig out and translate the details though! (and it's |
47 |
> month's later followup on what became of that Samsung ;) |
48 |
> |
49 |
> HTH, and please do PM (no need to clog the ML) if you want me to go |
50 |
> digging for the details, |
51 |
> -dnh |
52 |
> |
53 |
> [1] which name escapes me ATM, but tried and tested since 199[0-5] or |
54 |
> so ;) |
55 |
> |
56 |
> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%27t (that page is sadly woefully |
57 |
> outdated) |
58 |
> |
59 |
|
60 |
|
61 |
I wouldn't mind seeing the info posted to the list myself. I'm |
62 |
interested and I suspect some others may be as well. After all, several |
63 |
people have SSDs now and buying good ones is something we all are |
64 |
interested in. |
65 |
|
66 |
Dale |
67 |
|
68 |
:-) :-) |
69 |
|
70 |
P. S. Sorry for the typo in the subject line. I just noticed I typed it |
71 |
in as SDD instead of SSD. I generally proof the body part but given my |
72 |
age, eyes getting bad, plus just being me, I may need to proof the |
73 |
subject line as well. o_O |