6 ms·
Here are comparable numbers for SSD from another source [1] (this site is affiliated with an online computers shopping site). Intel 0,3%, Kinston 1,2%, Crucial
by doe88 15y ago
Here are comparable numbers for SSD from another source [1] (this site is affiliated with an online computers shopping site).
Intel 0,3%, Kinston 1,2%, Crucial 1,9%, Corsair 2,7%, OCZ 3,5%.
[1] http://www.hardware.fr/articles/831-7/taux-pannes-composants.html http://www.hardware.fr/articles/831-7/taux-pannes-composants...
Edit: and on last page of the previous link there is a list of the current models sold between 10/01/2010 and 04/01/2011 with the worst fiability track record:
6,7%: OCZ Agility 2 120 Go. 3,7%: OCZ Agility 2 60 Go. 3,6%: OCZ Agility 2 40 Go. 3,5%: OCZ Agility 2 90 Go. 3,5%: OCZ Vertex 2 240 Go
- barrkel 15y agoSimplistically assuming a very high failure rate of 7%, Jeff's friend anecdote of 8 out of 8 failures has a probability of about 0.07^8 or about 1 in 2 billion. That's quite a lottery to win. What this tells me is that there are probably some differences in the environment that you use your SSD in that can have disproportionate effects on its lifetime.
- jacques_chester 15y agoYou assume that only 8 of Jeff's acquaintances bought SSDs. It might actually have been 8 failures out of 100 purchases, for example.
- barrkel 15y agoDid you read the article? I'm referring to this: "Portman Wills, [...] he went all in. He purchased eight SSDs over the last two years ... and all of them failed".
- jacques_chester 15y agoI stand corrected. I admit that I tend to skim Jeff Atwood because his occasional tasty flakes of insight are thickly coated with delicious but useless fluff.