3 ms·
Durability will be the test. I've one data point, but I've had 6 SSDs, most from Crucial, used for developer-desktop work (VMs etc) and as well as regular file
by porker 9y ago
Durability will be the test. I've one data point, but I've had 6 SSDs, most from Crucial, used for developer-desktop work (VMs etc) and as well as regular file corruption via 'bad sectors' (didn't think those were standard on an SSD due to its error checking) they've failed more regularly than any hard drive ever did, even the ones thrown around in laptops.
I am seriously considering paying double for an Intel SSD next time, as I understand they are less likely to fail.
- jmiserez 9y agoIs that a Crucial M4? I had mine replaced 3 times due to sector corruption as well, and then trashed it. It also had a bug where it would break after ~5200 hours of use. OTOH, I never had an issue with my Intel or Samsung SSDs, even with heavier use. I agree with you that reliability is key, and it bugs me that reviews still mostly look at speed and price.
- Terretta 9y agoThis review durability rating was 0.3 writes a day for 5 years. Hopefully they mean rewrite entire drive every 3 days.
- porker 9y agoMostly MX100's of varying sizes. The one that's currently doing sector corruption is a MX300 750GB, and the "Too good to be true" new price on Amazon (in a sale) should've been a warning.