The problem with an SSD is that it's almost impossible to retrieve data from it if it fails.

The problem with cheap SSDs is that they start to lose charge much faster with increased wear and tear than HDDs. Many times faster. Cheap drives also have poor fault tolerance in terms of power schemes. The most common problem is the loss of the translator during a sudden power outage (eg BSOD). For Chinese drives of the second tier, the controller's power piping floats very quickly in terms of parameters and they begin to fail even faster, because. usually such cheap things are bought in cases with a PSU, also cheap Chinese series, all this is doubly aggravated.

All SSD manufacturers must formally adhere to the JEDEC industry standard, according to which consumer versions of SSDs promise data retention without cell refresh for 1 year at an ambient temperature of no more than 35C and with 99% wear. But in reality, this is almost impossible to verify, except in long tests, which is what most scammers use.

Now compare the storage life of an SSD with an HDD, where, at least before, you could be sure that the data will be saved without updating by writing for exactly 10-15 years, even if the disk has been in operation for several years and is seriously worn out ...

The more the capacity of the SSD grows, the more the problems of QLC and especially the terrible PLC will manifest themselves, which are even once worse than even TLC in terms of the rate of loss of charge in the cells.

I have two flash drives from Transcend of the same series. One old on MLC and another on 3D TLC. Both are worn out by less than 5%. So, the first, after 3 years, reads the data at full speed. And the second one lost 90% of the speed ... it will take another 2-3 years, and perhaps the data from there can no longer be read.

But there are also 3D MLC SSDs that are cheap in grade, on which the charge in the cells also drops too quickly. I have such a cheap drive from LiteOn 120GB. After 4 years, the drive lost 60% of its read speed.

At the same time, my old 128GB Transcend MLC (still planar) from 2011 quietly stores and reads data 10 years later at almost top speed...

Everything is determined by the grade of NAND chips. Where is it written on the discs? And in the specifications? You'll never know when you buy it, except after a long time of use...

In general, we have a classic information collapse - capacities are growing, and the reliability of drives, on the contrary, is rapidly declining in all models... Remember the recent scandal with the Samsung 980/990Pro, and before that, the mass death of some batches of 870 Evo made since the end of 2020. But this is the number one NAND manufacturer on the planet, always using only their own chips ... what to say about manufacturers who buy NAND chips from others...

Quote from: Tal on February 18, 2023, 18:15:11Western Digital SN770 costs 64$ for 1tb and is 8 times faster...

It's faster for read only. For writing outside the SLC cache, when it is 80% full, it will write data no faster than 500-700Mbyte/s.  In terms of read speed in 4k blocks, it is only 1.5 times faster than SATA SSD.

The best pci-e 5.0 models have 10-11GByte/s read but are 100 times slower at 4k IOPS. Almost no progress...

Quote from: voidstar on March 13, 2023, 09:34:002TB SSDs have been available in the $80-90 range from Newegg for a while now.

I don't know when the last big drop happened, but I've personally bought half a dozen of them in this range in the past couple weeks.

To be fair, seeing them much below $200 is a relatively recent and exciting development. But this is nowhere near the lowest price out there, now the first to go this low.

Anyway, at this point, for most purposes, there's really no excuse to still be using spinning rust.

There is one reason, in fact - you can actually recover data from a HDD when/if it dies in most cases. Good luck doing that with SSDs.

2TB SSDs have been available in the $80-90 range from Newegg for a while now.

I don't know when the last big drop happened, but I've personally bought half a dozen of them in this range in the past couple weeks.

To be fair, seeing them much below $200 is a relatively recent and exciting development. But this is nowhere near the lowest price out there, now the first to go this low.

Anyway, at this point, for most purposes, there's really no excuse to still be using spinning rust.

Western Digital SN770 costs 64$ for 1tb and is 8 times faster ...

Don't be dumb, people. They just inflated the price to make it look on sale. If you look, buying two of the 1TB ones, which are not on sale price and are full regular price, still comes out to less money than the "sale" of the 2tb. I highly doubt then that the 2tb was originally twice that price.