Just bought an SSD

[Wilksha]

Only thing I don't like about SSD is that they have a rather low tolerance lifespan. The more you write to a SSD the shorter it's lifespan. Best way to use a SSD though it for commonly loaded applications and the OS. I'd also make sure games that have an auto-save function don't save to the SSD. This will kill the drive as auto-save games see to save too often. Main use of a SSD should be instal and run and all save data and common write data sits on a standard HDD. Though more expensive I think the combo HDD+SSD are good but I think they are pricey.

[Dhalmel]

I like how people complain about the write lifespan of a SSD, this was a problem with the past with older controllers and shoddy quality NAND. Unless you're writing more than 1TB a day on your SSD you shouldn't worry about using up all of your NAND writes.


Stay away from crap brands like OCZ and untested/buggy controllers and you won't have to worry of such things. I own several SSDs from Intel, JMicron/Cruicial,Samsung not one has died and they've have been heavily used.

[Vilhem]

I like how people complain about the write lifespan of a SSD, this was a problem with the past with older controllers and shoddy quality NAND. Unless you're writing more than 1TB a day on your SSD you shouldn't worry about using up all of your NAND writes.


Stay away from crap brands like OCZ and untested/buggy controllers and you won't have to worry of such things.

Wut he said.

[Reika]

O noes, i'm using a OCZ Vertex 4. How long does it have left?!

[Dhalmel]

O noes, i'm using a OCZ Vertex 4. How long does it have left?!

Hopfully for years, don't get me wrong not all of OCZ is crap, but they have a very bad reputation of releasing SSDs before they're ready with immature firmware, cutting quality NAND with cheaper sets to save on costs(they did this with their RAM...we all know how this turned out), and releasing firmware patches that bricked SSDs.



They seem to be doing alot better with their Octane and Vertex 4 model drives, but I would be VERY weary of their budget SSDs.

[Wilksha]

I'm not really complaining about the shorter life span, I was merely pointing it out as a con. I personally don't like the the SSD lifespan being based on writes, but Looking at HDDs, they both have a similar life cycle. I think for HDD after so many years, each following year has Double the chance of the drive failing. Overall if you're not constantly writing data to a SSD, it should last just as long as a HDD. Remember all technology has an expiry, even if it's not mentioned. On things like a Vid Card or the CPU, the life span is heavily influenced on it's usage and keeping within safe operating temperature as suggested on most hardware boxes.
Take care of your tools and they will last a long time.

[Dhalmel]

I'm not really complaining about the shorter life span, I was merely pointing it out as a con. I personally don't like the the SSD lifespan being based on writes, but Looking at HDDs, they both have a similar life cycle. I think for HDD after so many years, each following year has Double the chance of the drive failing. Overall if you're not constantly writing data to a SSD, it should last just as long as a HDD. Remember all technology has an expiry, even if it's not mentioned. On things like a Vid Card or the CPU, the life span is heavily influenced on it's usage and keeping within safe operating temperature as suggested on most hardware boxes.
Take care of your tools and they will last a long time.

It wasn't really pointed towards you but users in general, there's people who do completely unnecessary things with their OS & caching that it does more harm than good just to save those few writes.


There's also those very very few idiots who are still running XP with a SSD...who complain about poor performance after a few months of use.

[Alhanelem]

ARR engine is different, even if playing of a slower laptop drive, the caching, ect is utilized better. SO you won't see the stutter mess of 2.0

Unless you are made of money a sufficient SSD for gaming isn't going to be easy. It's actually better all around, to have a ssd act as the direct load cache to windows. It will speed all around performance up for common used applications. Havign sufficient main memory is also a main step.

A quality SSD doesn't have to cost all that much as long as you don't demand a large capacity. 64GB is enough for your OS + related data + core software and maybe a game or two. Move your documents/pictures/etc folders to your old hard drive.

I recently got a 128GB Samsung 840 Pro series, only $120 and it came with a free copy of Asassin's Creed 3 . Drive has great reviews and seems to have a solid lifespan. Did I mention it's fast? Windows boots up in seconds and my PC is useable instantly, unlike before where I had to sit and wait for a minute or two after logging in before I could actually use my PC (yes, even defragged/optimized)

Go with Intel (most expensive) or Samsung (not as expensive but still very good quality). Avoid OCZ like the plague. Other brands, check customer reviews before buying to gauge reliability.

A few small tips: Your SSD may come with software that can reconfigure key Windows settings for you, but if not-

Disable your disk defragmenting utility if you have one that does it automatically or on a schedule. SSDs don't really need to be defragged as they can randomly read any block of data at the same speed, and defragmenting causes a LOT of reading and writing and can thus shorten disk lifespan a little.

Set your swap file (aka virtual memory) to a fixed size so that it isn't constantly being resized by Windows, again increasing strain on the drive.

Disable the indexing service (which speeds up file searches). With the speed of an SSD it's not really necessary and again increases strain on the drive.

[Dhalmel]

A quality SSD doesn't have to cost all that much as long as you don't demand a large capacity. 64GB is enough for your OS + related data + core software and maybe a game or two. Move your documents/pictures/etc folders to your old hard drive.

I recently got a 128GB Samsung 840 Pro series, only $120 and it came with a free copy of Asassin's Creed 3 . Drive has great reviews and seems to have a solid lifespan. Did I mention it's fast? Windows boots up in seconds and my PC is useable instantly, unlike before where I had to sit and wait for a minute or two after logging in before I could actually use my PC (yes, even defragged/optimized)

Go with Intel (most expensive) or Samsung (not as expensive but still very good quality). Avoid OCZ like the plague. Other brands, check customer reviews before buying to gauge reliability.

It's not really the brand that matters but the controller that the brand name used. If intel had the displeasure of releasing a SSD using the SandForce SF-2200 controller, would you buy it? H E L L NO

Most brand besides use nearly identical make ups of SSDs off of a reference design.

[Alhanelem]

It's not really the brand that matters but the controller that the brand name used.

Intel and Samsung design and manufacture their own controllers, unlike most of the other brands that get them from a third party. This means they have more quality control over the whole product compared to those that don't make all the components themselves (e.g. The two brands I named are not "most brands")

The brand does matter because not every brand uses the same controller nor does every brand design and manufacture their own.

It's really not hard to see the difference in the customer reviews (on Newegg). Some brands you'll see a lot of 5-eggs (because it worked) and a lot of 1-eggs (either the drive worked, or it didn't / failed quickly / was DOA) Other brands you'll see mostly 4s and 5s. This isn't an end-all deciding factor, so you also need to look at the actual comments- What are the low reviews complaining about? Why are there so many of them? Is the manufacturer offering responses?

Some brands are consistently better/worse than others. It's not entirely subjective.