SSD Upgrade Q&A

[Emoz93]

1. Is it okay to partition an SSD? Let say I bought a 256GB SSD and I want to divide it into several partitions. One for the running the OS, another for storing system image backup and other files (e.g. videos and mp3).

2. Does SSD require a power cable connected to the PSU?

3. Does an SSD using NTFS file system require defragmentation once in a while?

4. How long is the lifespan of SSD? Is it longer than HDD?

5. I heard that the read-write speed of SSD will become slower after a few years. After that what happens? Can I make the SSD faster again by reformatting it or get a new one?

6. Can a SSD crash like a HDD would? If it can, then I still have retain an external HDD for backup purpose.

7. My mobo only supports SATA2 (3Gb/s). Is it good enough for SSD?

8. Any signs of manufacturers are starting to produce 3.5" SSD specifically for the desktop?

[RedRamage]

The wiki page on SSDs has some good info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solid-state_drive

I think the biggest reason I won't be looking at SSD anytime too soon is this:

Cost: [list][*]As of February 2011, NAND flash SSDs cost about (US)$1.20–2.00 per GB [/*:m]
[*]As of February 2011, HDDs cost about (US)$0.05/GB for 3.5 in and $0.10/GB for 2.5 in drives[/*:m][/list:u]

At around 25-times the cost per GB, I think I can live with the slightly slower HDDs.

Also on that page was this tidbit:

Solid state drives that use flash memory have a limited number of writes over the life of the drive. SSDs based on DRAM do not have a limited number of writes.

So it seems if you are looking at SSD, look for one that uses DRAM to avoid longevity issues.

[Gilly]

1. Is it okay to partition an SSD? Let say I bought a 256GB SSD and I want to divide it into several partitions. One for the running the OS, another for storing system image backup and other files (e.g. videos and mp3).

Yes fine to partition, however you don't need the "SSD speed" for the image backup and videos and mp3s. You will gain nothing apart from silence, and a large hole in your wallet.

2. Does SSD require a power cable connected to the PSU?

Yes, standard SATA power connection.

3. Does an SSD using NTFS file system require defragmentation once in a while?

Yes in theory, however in practice, de fragmentation of a SSD reduces its lifespan, so should not be run.

4. How long is the lifespan of SSD? Is it longer than HDD?

5. I heard that the read-write speed of SSD will become slower after a few years. After that what happens? Can I make the SSD faster again by reformatting it or get a new one?

They do get slightly slower but with an O/S, controller (no RAID) and SSD that support TRIM, they run at pretty much the same speed all their life. If you don't have access to TRIM, you can zero the entire drive, and that will restore its speed.

6. Can a SSD crash like a HDD would? If it can, then I still have retain an external HDD for backup purpose.

Yes, it is electronic. Nothing stops firmware problems, power cuts, lightning etc etc.

7. My mobo only supports SATA2 (3Gb/s). Is it good enough for SSD?

Depends on the SSD, some can use more bandwidth than the SATA2 specification copes with, however, a saturated SATA interface would give a might fast transfer anyway.

8. Any signs of manufacturers are starting to produce 3.5" SSD specifically for the desktop?

OCZ did one, but I don't think they will catch on as a normal product, just because they have all generally been 2.5" for so long now.

[Armenius]

4. How long is the lifespan of SSD? Is it longer than HDD?

Like all hard drives, the lifespan depends on how many total hours it is run and how many writes it executes during that time. The current widespread MLC architecture of NAND flash drives lasts about five years from what I've heard, and as little as three years. The more expensive SLC architecture holds data integrity better over this time span, and supposedly lives as long as 7-10 years. SLC SSDs cost about $7-$10/GB. For comparison, HDDs typically last about 7-10 years, with drive speed a big determining factor in the lifespan of the drive.

If you need a lot of space and you're going to be doing a good amount of regular writing and deleting then you should stick to HDDs. SSDs make no sense for data storage in the current market. This is just my opinion of course.

[tepescovir]

another thing to consider is that ssd drives have already been superceded by revo drives which are a lot faster, but more expensive.
they are basicly a ssd drive on a pci ex card so no sata bottleneck to worry about as it can use the pci ex bridge instead.
It is new tech, so expensive, fast and probably still needs some tweaking.

http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-revodrive-x2-pci-express-ssd.html

[Emoz93]

Back in 2007, a 2GB USB drive was selling for RM80-RM100. Now it is only RM20. The price DDR3 was 3-4 times higher compared to DDR2 a few years ago. Now DDR3's price is comparable to DDR2. Last year, a 500GB 2.5" external HDD was selling for RM360. Now the price dropped to RM200 and RM360 is enough to buy a 1TB 2.5" external drive.

From this observation, I'm convinced that SSD's price (including SATA3 & PCIe variants) will become much more reasonable 3-5 years from now.

[Paradigm Shifter]

For what it's worth, I've been told that partitioning an SSD is a bad idea, as it breaks the wear levelling algorythms. Whether that is true or not (particularly on new controllers) I have no idea.

[Emoz93]

If you don't have access to TRIM, you can zero the entire drive, and that will restore its speed.

Formatting (not Quick Format) the drive isn't the solution? I have to get a drive wiper utility?

For what it's worth, I've been told that partitioning an SSD is a bad idea, as it breaks the wear levelling algorythms. Whether that is true or not (particularly on new controllers) I have no idea.

Okay, then I'll get 2 Intel SSDs (since Intel's are cheaper). One for the OS, another for storing files.

[Armenius]

[quote]
If you don't have access to TRIM, you can zero the entire drive, and that will restore its speed.

Formatting (not Quick Format) the drive isn't the solution? I have to get a drive wiper utility?Formatting doesn't zero out the drive. It just clears the MFT so new data can be written and recognized. The manufacturer of the drive should have diagnostic utilities available that should have the option of zeroing out the drive. Seagate has SeaTools, for example.

[Ryom]

Google "Secure Erase" if you want to restore an SSD to new condition. SE is an actual command supported by the SATA standard.

[snuble]

8. Any signs of manufacturers are starting to produce 3.5" SSD specifically for the desktop?

My corsair drive(s) came with a 3.5" conversion frame.

If your MB have raid, consider buying 2-4 smaller and cheaper SSD's and raid0 them. Yes, theoretical failure chance increases, but over a workstations lifespan its still going to be luck or not. One day I'll regret raid0 on 4 drives, but right now I'm enjoying fast operation on nearly 500 GB of storage space... Tomshardware just ran a story on scaling in raid0 and conclusion was that it scales well.

[razor86]

[quote]
If you don't have access to TRIM, you can zero the entire drive, and that will restore its speed.

Formatting (not Quick Format) the drive isn't the solution? I have to get a drive wiper utility?

For what it's worth, I've been told that partitioning an SSD is a bad idea, as it breaks the wear levelling algorythms. Whether that is true or not (particularly on new controllers) I have no idea.

Okay, then I'll get 2 Intel SSDs (since Intel's are cheaper). One for the OS, another for storing files.

You don't need a SSD for storing files. Putting your operating system on one is the way to go, I have my OS on an OCZ vertex 2 100GB SATA, my computer boots in seconds. I installed windows 7 in just over 7 minutes via flash drive, and all the updates were done by 13 minutes flat.

[Armenius]

8. Any signs of manufacturers are starting to produce 3.5" SSD specifically for the desktop?

My corsair drive(s) came with a 3.5" conversion frame.

If your MB have raid, consider buying 2-4 smaller and cheaper SSD's and raid0 them. Yes, theoretical failure chance increases, but over a workstations lifespan its still going to be luck or not. One day I'll regret raid0 on 4 drives, but right now I'm enjoying fast operation on nearly 500 GB of storage space... Tomshardware just ran a story on scaling in raid0 and conclusion was that it scales well.

The tradeoff isn't worth it in my opinion, but if you do regular backups and it keeps you happy then go for it. With four drives, though, I would go for RAID 0+1. Granted you'll only have half the usable space, but your data is mirrored in case there is ever a failure.

[Paradigm Shifter]

Don't forget backup to a second (non array) drive, preferably one that isn't permanently hooked up so it's more 'virus/accident' proof. ;)

[Emoz93]

Don't forget backup to a second (non array) drive, preferably one that isn't permanently hooked up so it's more 'virus/accident' proof. ;)

If I attach another SSD to SATA port 2 (port 1 is taken by another SSD), as long as I don't change AHCI to RAID, it'll show up as 2 separate drives in Windows Explorer right?

[snuble]

The main advantage isnt just increased speed, but more the combination of large storage space and general ssd speed.

I would still raid0 my 4 drives even if it gave a slight performance decrease compared to a single smaller ssd.

Large volume files like pictures/music/video goes to a regular hdd. Games live on the raid while I play them, and with steam its easy enough to move games no longer played somewhere else for hibernation...

This is how I use my system now, but who knows, 1 or 2 years down the road I might be the one that says "never ever raid0" :)

[tet5uo]

THe OCZ Ibis with their new HSDL interface are pretty swanky.

http://www.ncix.com/products/?sku=56314&vpn=OCZ3HSD1IBS1-360G&manufacture=OCZ%20Technology

They just bypass the sata entirely and made their own interface you plug right into the PCIe bus. Talk about bandwidth.

[Emoz93]

Even though the read-write speed have slowed down, data integrity is not affected right?

[kiselk]

Hi All,

As an owner of a couple of Kingston M Series based on Intel X25-M G2 80GB I want to tell you the following:

Both drives stopped being detected by BIOS after messing with S1,S3 Power modes, setting them to ATA, formatting low level, installing Oracle Enterprise Linux R5U6 x64 (Red Hat 5), powering off the machine after it hung on root / partition formatting during OS install because that damned DELL machine doesn't have a reset button.
I tried to switch back all the parameters, mess with power and sata cables, switching them off and on during boot but no luck, the drives weren't detected. Later, I've read a release note for Oracle Ent Linux about not supporting S3, which my BIOS was using during Linux installation. I guess this was the fatality.
I've went the only one SSD repair shop in my city, since I'd lost a receipt of the purchase and the warranty expired, and have been told by the man that they do not have a proper program on their programmer for my particular model and that they couldn't help.
So I turned back to my office and plugged in on of the drives. ITS WAS DETECTED. My Win7x64 is installed on it now. I couldn't get the second one to life with my own attempts, should be visiting the same repair shop in the near future, just wanted to make you all know about the problems I've met and warn you about the very "SSD + ATA + S3 + Red Hat 5update6 Linux" incompatibility which just bricks the drive. I guess the ata_piix driver embedded in the linux distro sucks as much as the Intel chipset of the G2 version if they allow this thing to happen.

Regards,
Konstantin