Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Volguus
Mar 3, 2009

teagone posted:

The OP says the avoid ADATA though :thunk:

At this price, use it till it drops dead then buy another. You'll still come ahead.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Potato Salad
Oct 23, 2014

nobody cares


Adata keeps making decent, if budget, ssds.


Changing.

Potato Salad
Oct 23, 2014

nobody cares


priznat posted:

Also NVMe over fabric is going to be a thing so there will be NVMe over ethernet, fibre channel, whatever. Imagine having a NAS box that has NVMe devices that is connected via 10GbE cat6 :frogsiren: crazy 100GbE links :homebrew: :blastu: and fast as hell.

Fyp :D

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



teagone posted:

The OP says the avoid ADATA though :thunk:

That was accurate like 5 years ago, they're fine now.

You can also get the Micron 1100 2 TB for $200 :popeye: with the same BF20 code.

Also, the 660p 2 TB for $250 if you need/want NVMe.

Seamonster
Apr 30, 2007

IMMER SIEGREICH
Ordered a 2tb micron. That should take care of the last of the spinning rust (not counting externals anyways).

priznat
Jul 7, 2009

Let's get drunk and kiss each other all night.

100GbE is the poo poo but that’s wayyyy beyond home users atm, or is it.. hmmm :haw:

But that’d be what to strive for mos def.

Keep your massive all flash array nice and cool in the basement!

WhyteRyce
Dec 30, 2001

I just want 2.5 or 5 gigabit to take off :(

I said come in!
Jun 22, 2004

I was hoping someone could please help me confirm if my laptop can use this SSD: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...10K6FaI4T0wgguE

Here is what I have; https://www.msi.com/Laptop/support/GE62VR-6RF-Apache-Pro

I wanted to make sure everything would be in order and good to go before I bought anything.

LRADIKAL
Jun 10, 2001

Fun Shoe
I don't know why I help so much. Is this the right laptop?
https://www.laptopmain.com/msi-ge62vr-6rf-apache-pro-disassembly-and-ram-hdd-ssd-upgrade-options/

Malcolm XML
Aug 8, 2009

I always knew it would end like this.
Flash prices are in structural decline do these deals aren't as good as what will likely happen over the next 6mo

LRADIKAL
Jun 10, 2001

Fun Shoe
Until the production breaks kick in. It's like trying to bet on exactly when the market bottoms out. You should feel good that prices are half of what we paid 6 months ago.

I said come in!
Jun 22, 2004


This is perfect, thank you so much!

Ika
Dec 30, 2004
Pure insanity

German electronics store Saturn has the 860 evo 1TB fuer 140. While I would prefer NVMe, its twice the price for the same size, moving my win7 install to NVM and getting it to boot will be a pain, and I'm not sure I have any PCIe lanes left over.

Do I wait for a NVMe price drop, or do I finally replace my 250GB 830 which has survived years of horrible mistreatment such as constantly getting filled up to 100% capacity. Amazingly enough its only had 44TB written over its lifetime.

I don't really need the NVMe performance for the OS drive, I have a really nice PCIe one I got a great deal on for games etc.

LRADIKAL
Jun 10, 2001

Fun Shoe
You don't need NVME. However, it shouldn't be any more difficult to port Windows to it, or get it working. Twice as much money is a big ask, but a cheaper NVME per gigabit will still be faster than a SATA drive. I've only ever seen NVME eat SATA slots, so not a big deal there either.

Edit: the biggest place NVME would make a difference is on the boot drive, so if you have a pcie SSD, don't worry about it.

BIG HEADLINE
Jun 13, 2006

"Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"

I said come in! posted:

I was hoping someone could please help me confirm if my laptop can use this SSD: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...10K6FaI4T0wgguE

Here is what I have; https://www.msi.com/Laptop/support/GE62VR-6RF-Apache-Pro

I wanted to make sure everything would be in order and good to go before I bought anything.

There are three types of M.2 slots. Ones that take NVMe drives only, ones that take SATA only, and then ones that can use both. They're easy enough to tell by sight.

Going by that disassembly link, it looks like you've got a dual-keyed slot.

BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Nov 23, 2018

ddogflex
Sep 19, 2004

blahblahblah

BIG HEADLINE posted:

There are three types of M.2 slots. Ones that take NVMe drives only, ones that take SATA only, and then ones that can use both. They're easy enough to tell by sight.

Pardon my ignorance, but how by sight? I installed my SATA M.2 in the wrong slot first oops.

BIG HEADLINE
Jun 13, 2006

"Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"

ddogflex posted:

Pardon my ignorance, but how by sight? I installed my SATA M.2 in the wrong slot first oops.

By where the notches are on the slot, which side said notches are on, and how many there are: https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Overview-of-M-2-SSDs-586/

Ika
Dec 30, 2004
Pure insanity

LRADIKAL posted:

You don't need NVME. However, it shouldn't be any more difficult to port Windows to it, or get it working. Twice as much money is a big ask, but a cheaper NVME per gigabit will still be faster than a SATA drive. I've only ever seen NVME eat SATA slots, so not a big deal there either.

Edit: the biggest place NVME would make a difference is on the boot drive, so if you have a pcie SSD, don't worry about it.

I know when I tried to install win7 on the P3500 it was such a pain to get drivers to work I ended up keeping it on my 830. But maybe that is just intel. Why would NVMe eat SATA slots? I can enable / disable the slot in my BIOS and that takes away lanes from other slots on the motherboard, and they are basically all used.

I also think having games / databases (lightroom etc) / code on the faster SSD is more important that the OS, since saving a handful of seconds when booting isn't as important as making everything else load quicker.


E: So asus has a table here for the Z97-A. If I am reading it correctly I could enable M.2 PCIe, and move my sound card from a PCIe x1 slot to the x16_3 (x2) slot, and run a GPU, the PCIe SSD, M.2 SSD, and the sound card.

Ika fucked around with this message at 01:44 on Nov 23, 2018

BIG HEADLINE
Jun 13, 2006

"Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"
The upsetting thing is that I'm sure Samsung's been sitting on this for *years*, and now that SSD pricing is cratering, they're going to be putting them out: https://www.techpowerup.com/249834/the-new-samsung-860-qvo-ssd-with-qlc-nand-gets-listed-online-will-be-cheaper-than-the-evo-family

4TB SSDs for under $500, and probably way lower, because I can't imagine the other makers won't immediately undercut this initial pricing level.

Anime Schoolgirl
Nov 28, 2002

They better make 2tb for $200 the new regular price

isndl
May 2, 2012
I WON A CONTEST IN TG AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS CUSTOM TITLE

Ika posted:

I know when I tried to install win7 on the P3500 it was such a pain to get drivers to work I ended up keeping it on my 830. But maybe that is just intel.

I'd bet your problem there was actually Windows 7, it didn't really have support for anything newer than SATA out of box. A clean install of Windows 10 today should have no issues.

Malcolm XML
Aug 8, 2009

I always knew it would end like this.

BIG HEADLINE posted:

The upsetting thing is that I'm sure Samsung's been sitting on this for *years*, and now that SSD pricing is cratering, they're going to be putting them out: https://www.techpowerup.com/249834/the-new-samsung-860-qvo-ssd-with-qlc-nand-gets-listed-online-will-be-cheaper-than-the-evo-family

4TB SSDs for under $500, and probably way lower, because I can't imagine the other makers won't immediately undercut this initial pricing level.

qlc is trash tho, best for a nas or something. 4TB @ 2-3x cost per gig is worth it to not have to deal with spinning rust

BIG HEADLINE
Jun 13, 2006

"Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"

Malcolm XML posted:

qlc is trash tho, best for a nas or something. 4TB @ 2-3x cost per gig is worth it to not have to deal with spinning rust

I don't think anyone in here is thinking of using them as anything other than fast storage or as a Steam drive - it's going to be annoying having to explain to people in the building thread that the "QVO" drives aren't meant to be boot drives, though.

"But it's cheaper!" :downs:

HalloKitty
Sep 30, 2005

Adjust the bass and let the Alpine blast

Malcolm XML posted:

qlc is trash tho, best for a nas or something. 4TB @ 2-3x cost per gig is worth it to not have to deal with spinning rust

When I hear nas I think backups, and I'd rather have spinning rust in that role than any ssd, especially a super cost optimised one

isndl
May 2, 2012
I WON A CONTEST IN TG AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS CUSTOM TITLE
After getting burned by the 840 EVO I'm more inclined to wait and see how the QVO drives shake out rather than rushing to buy immediately. Prices are cratering anyways, no need to rush bulk storage just yet.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



HalloKitty posted:

When I hear nas I think backups, and I'd rather have spinning rust in that role than any ssd, especially a super cost optimised one

Even if you're using SSDs for the frontline storage, it only makes sense to have HDDs as the backup. You can even likely have a single HDD as the backup for your SSD array.

I'd still just build a NAS with HDDs and save the SSDs for applications that actually need the performance, though.

isndl posted:

After getting burned by the 840 EVO I'm more inclined to wait and see how the QVO drives shake out rather than rushing to buy immediately. Prices are cratering anyways, no need to rush bulk storage just yet.

Yeah as we've discussed, there was an issue with that one type of NAND and you can't apply the fairly unique experience with the 840 Evo to every other SSD.

isndl
May 2, 2012
I WON A CONTEST IN TG AND ALL I GOT WAS THIS CUSTOM TITLE

Atomizer posted:

Yeah as we've discussed, there was an issue with that one type of NAND and you can't apply the fairly unique experience with the 840 Evo to every other SSD.

My concern is mostly that this is an expansion of what started with the 840 EVO: from triple layered cells it's now quad layered. I'm not saying it's inherently flawed, but it seems easily susceptible to unforeseen issues as any new tech. In any case I'd rather not deal with the hassle of firmware updates if there does turn out to be a problem, even if the problems are completely fixable.

Who knows, maybe Samsung has been sitting on this for so long precisely because they were doing extensive testing to avoid the 840 EVO situation. Given current price trends I'm still inclined to wait and see.

LRADIKAL
Jun 10, 2001

Fun Shoe
Blah blah, even the 840 wasn't really a problem!

Lambert
Apr 15, 2018

by Fluffdaddy
Fallen Rib
It was, my laptop was dog-slow accessing certain files for a while. Samsung took a looong time releasing the update for the mSATA version. But I don't expect them to repeat the mistake.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week

BIG HEADLINE posted:

it's going to be annoying having to explain to people in the building thread that the "QVO" drives aren't meant to be boot drives, though.

"But it's cheaper!" :downs:

What exactly makes them unsuitable as boot drives, for the average desktop & games goon? The ones one the market already from Intel & Corsair were pretty much tuned specifically for mainstream (ie read-heavy) desktop performance. You don't need to worry about the page file consuming too many writes or whatever, it'll generally stay in the SLC cache which doesn't burn the write capacity. At the most conservative, maybe you go back to recommending that people short-partition the drive by 100mb so it always has spare space, since the worst problems occur when you fill the drive enough that the SLC space is restricted.



Personally I'm not very excited by the first-generation QLC drives. The current ones are just "NVMe at sata prices" but I'm already fine sticking with sata. And I think future improvements might come along that make the limited-writes problem even less of a problem -- for example, if the OS / filesystem could give "hints" to the SSD about temporary vs permanent data. But the history of TLC suggests that gamers & PC enthusiasts are really bad at estimating drive life and how fast they'll go through it. People used to say not to buy TLC drives because of endurance, and they were wildly wrong.

DrDork
Dec 29, 2003
commanding officer of the Army of Dorkness
Why the hell are we worrying about writes? Even TLC drives of moderate (256+GB) sizes have effective write tolerances so hilariously high compared to normal consumer workloads that they will far out last the rest of the computer you stuff it into. It's worth actually looking at what an average persons disk writes per day are. For most home users, it's actually quite small.

I mean, the Samsung 840, a first-gen TLC drive, went out to 800TBW on a 256GB drive before it died. The QVO drives are advertising about 1/2 the endurance of TLC drives, which even if true, means that they have plenty of write cycles available for Joe Consumer.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



Yeah it's not as huge a deal as it's made out to be. Any SSD is a better option for a boot drive than any HDD, and the average consumer will not wear out an SSD unless they don't understand what they're doing and a) buy a lower-capacity drive than they really need, and b) use it at nearly-full capacity.

It's simply that there are certain parameters that make an SSD ideal for OS use: DRAM, sufficient capacity, and NAND flash type (QLC natively being legitimately slower than fast HDDs in sequential writes in particular.)

QLC is going to be ideal as low-cost, high-capacity, non-archival HDD-replacement solid-state storage. It's not there yet, but soon, that will be the real value of QLC.

Klyith
Aug 3, 2007

GBS Pledge Week

DrDork posted:

Why the hell are we worrying about writes? Even TLC drives of moderate (256+GB) sizes have effective write tolerances so hilariously high compared to normal consumer workloads that they will far out last the rest of the computer you stuff it into. It's worth actually looking at what an average persons disk writes per day are. For most home users, it's actually quite small.

I mean, the Samsung 840, a first-gen TLC drive, went out to 800TBW on a 256GB drive before it died. The QVO drives are advertising about 1/2 the endurance of TLC drives, which even if true, means that they have plenty of write cycles available for Joe Consumer.

The new drives we're talking about are QLC, four bits per cell. Currently the Intel 660p and Crucial P1 are on the market, samsung announced they're doing QLC too.

The first-gen QLC is being spec'ed with 20 writes per cell. Yes, twenty. That would seem to be a problem because even a mainstream user might write 20 or 40 TB. But they are also using the SLC cache that Evo-style TLC drives do now, only with even more smart management to dynamically size the SLC cache. Because the SLC cache can be pretty huge, the drive is less aggressive pushing data into QLC storage. Writes in SLC mode put a fraction of the wear on a cell that quad mode does, so the effective endurance is fine for mainstream desktop use.

Intel is selling the 660p with a 5 year warranty and 200TB write endurance limit. And Intel is the most conservative SSD maker about write endurance.

Encrypted
Feb 25, 2016

The problem with intel's 660p is its failure mode when the drive reaches it's conservative EOL estimate, as the drive simply locks up and goes into a read only mode.

This is going to be even more troublesome for recovering a nvme instead of the regular ol 2.5"

DrDork
Dec 29, 2003
commanding officer of the Army of Dorkness

Klyith posted:


Intel is selling the 660p with a 5 year warranty and 200TB write endurance limit. And Intel is the most conservative SSD maker about write endurance.

That's kinda my point, though. 200TB is more than most users will accumulate over 5+ years. Samsung is specing theirs with similar limits. With that as the minimum, as long as people aren't buying 128GB models for their only drive, it'll probably last more than long enough for most people.

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



Klyith posted:

The new drives we're talking about are QLC, four bits per cell. Currently the Intel 660p and Crucial P1 are on the market, samsung announced they're doing QLC too.

The first-gen QLC is being spec'ed with 20 writes per cell. Yes, twenty. That would seem to be a problem because even a mainstream user might write 20 or 40 TB. But they are also using the SLC cache that Evo-style TLC drives do now, only with even more smart management to dynamically size the SLC cache. Because the SLC cache can be pretty huge, the drive is less aggressive pushing data into QLC storage. Writes in SLC mode put a fraction of the wear on a cell that quad mode does, so the effective endurance is fine for mainstream desktop use.

He's aware that we're talking about QLC, he was making a comparison to TLC to point out that the durability of NAND flash is often underestimated, especially for the ordinary consumer's workload.

For comparison, I consider myself an enthusiast, albeit with an infrequently-used gaming desktop, and the Intel 330 in that has seen IIRC 14-18 TBW after almost 6 years.

Encrypted posted:

The problem with intel's 660p is its failure mode when the drive reaches it's conservative EOL estimate, as the drive simply locks up and goes into a read only mode.

This is going to be even more troublesome for recovering a nvme instead of the regular ol 2.5"

Well as long as you can still read from it it shouldn't be an issue, and you can always restore from your backup, so.... :shrug:

WhyteRyce
Dec 30, 2001

Why do people stress over the cell write lifespan when HW and FW design purposely build a solution around that and the overall drive write per day lifespan is a sufficient measurement for most cases?

WhyteRyce
Dec 30, 2001

Encrypted posted:

The problem with intel's 660p is its failure mode when the drive reaches it's conservative EOL estimate, as the drive simply locks up and goes into a read only mode.

This is going to be even more troublesome for recovering a nvme instead of the regular ol 2.5"

Just curious, but why? Read only mode isn't dead mode and couldn't you just read/clone off the data? I've never had to recover an EOL drive but I'd imagine that's preferable to a drive passing it's EOL and just letting you continue to write to the drive and gently caress things up

Atomizer
Jun 24, 2007



If anything I'd be more worried about a controller failure, which would completely prevent you from recovering anything from the drive (but again, you have up-to-date backups so no problem there,) as opposed to NAND flash exhaustion. The only time I've heard of someone actually wearing out an SSD is like one guy in this (or a similar) thread who uses consumer SSDs to cache an enterprise RAID.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Geemer
Nov 4, 2010



Wasn't there some Intel(?) drive that went into read-only mode one time and then wiped itself after a reboot?

WhyteRyce posted:

Why do people stress over the cell write lifespan when HW and FW design purposely build a solution around that and the overall drive write per day lifespan is a sufficient measurement for most cases?

Because NUMBER GO DOWN AAAAA WORLD IS ON FIREEEEE :supaburn:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply