Quote from: asl97 on March 28, 2023, 17:15:34All of them brand has size differences, it about the 1000bytes vs 1024bytes, samsung also fudge up the numbers on their phone recently, it's the same old dumb misconceptions and some brand does stupid things about how they shows the number
Are you sure you read what I wrote? Because you write complete nonsense. Where do I write about GiB? We are talking about GB - degree 10, not 2(GiB). Transcend are well-known scammers. Although such tricks with deception by the size of flash drives - there really are still some brands.
By the way - thanks to this deception - they are easy to hand over at any time under warranty to the seller. After all, a simple quality check (and even more so a forensic examination) will immediately detect forgery on the part of the manufacturer - with what is written on the package and what is actually available to the buyer.
For example, I easily handed over such flash drives, the sellers could never refuse me, realizing that they would lose the case 100% in court. Therefore, they simply had no arguments, and their relationship with the manufacturer does not bother me at all, these are their personal problems.
Quote from: asl97 on March 28, 2023, 17:15:34Pretty sure Samsung done it too, the shortage causes whole bunch of brand to change internal parts
I have never heard of Samsung's memory type scam. There are already many problems with the quality, but not with such deception. Here at other manufacturers, I really read about such a deception, and an obvious one. Or implicit, as I wrote above - a flash drive of the same series, but with a smaller volume on MLC, and with a large one on TLC with sharply worse characteristics, but because the packaging does not say about the type of memory, this can be considered a buyer's problem. But they write the exact size of the flash drive and blatantly deceive. And for example, in their SSD they do not have such a deception. If 1TB is written, then you will definitely get at least 1000000000000 bytes available to the user. From the point of view of the size in their SSD, they have nothing to complain about legally.
It should also be understood that a cheap 3D MLC grade can be worse than the AA+ 3D TLC grade in terms of quality and data storage time without updating cells. I encountered this on a LiteOn SSD with 3D MLC.
Quote from: asl97 on March 28, 2023, 17:15:34I don't really believe you saying your price being 3x-3.5x more, unless you are telling me you are selling 1TB 220S for US$25, in which case I gladly take 1 or even a few if you include an enclosure to be used as an external ssd
Prices vary everywhere. We have 220S costs about $75, and 980Pro $210-220 for 1TB.
Quote from: asl97 on March 28, 2023, 17:15:34speed doesn't magically drop, TLC means you get only 1/3 available for SLC cache (speed) compare to 1/2 of MLC,
You again write some nonsense, as if you are dyslexic and unable to understand what is written. And I wrote that on (3D)TLC memory, the loss of charge in 3-3.5 years, even with minimal wear, reaches such a value that the reading speed drops by almost 10 times. Given that on the same flash drive, the same series but with (3D)MLC - the speed drops at best for the same series flash drives time by 5-10%, no more. Feel and realize the difference...do you still want to use 3D TLC flash drives to back up your data for a long time?
I definitely don't want to. But we are left with no choice - today it is almost impossible to buy an MLC or SLC flash or SSD. And even at the cost of reducing the size of the flash, manufacturers do not give buyers the right to reformat the disk in MLS or SLC mode. The firmware can easily do this and work in this mode. But we are deliberately not given this.
What's stopping you from selling 1TB SLC drives today instead of 4TB QLC? Nothing but the unwillingness of manufacturers to sell such disks and the unwillingness to switch the entire volume of the disk to permanent SLC mode in the QLC firmware of disks, which is done elementarily, because. all drives have SLC cache.