I have a question about these new solid-state drives (SSD). It's just out of pure curiosity right now and for future reference, I guess, as I've got a laptop and am not really into upgrading PCs, etc.

I've just had a glance over the Wikipedia article for SSDs, to try and see what I want to know. But I couldn't see anything relating to my question.

Is it just me or have I seen, in recent times, mention that SSDs have, like, limited write ability? I'm pretty sure I read somewhere (perhaps even on here) that after so many writes per 'sector' (might not be the right phrase) that 'blocks' (again might not be the right phrase) start 'dying'?

Therefore, if that is correct, the drive would have a limited life-span. And if it does have a limited life-span, would its life still be comparable to that of a regular hard drive?

I may have this totally wrong!

Thanks in advance for any answers!

The claim is that if one buys a correctly sized (for the intended use) SSD, it will last for many, many years (decades even) before it "wears out".

Of more import: SSD electronics fail much faster than that in too many cases. Moreover, SSD failures are often "abrupt" and complete with no recovery. Whereas, hard drives usually give some warning so that files can be moved; and, often, files can be recovered from a "failed" HD. So, backup important data with an SSD.

I've been avoiding SSD. But, as I got a good price on one, I just started using one myself (as noted in other thread). But, I'm using it with "my eyes open" regarding the potential downsides.

Maybe the best solution is to use it as a cache disk.
OCZ make one especially for the job, only slightly more expensive, together with special software.
This will then cache a whole hard drive and on repeated use accelerate all access.
Independant tests show improvements close enough to a dedicated SSD.

Because its a cache there is no risk of data loss.
50% of the disk capacity is reserved to avoid 'burn-out'.

If it wasn't Windows 7 only I'd have ordered one already....

(BTW this isn't the very expensive 'hybrid drive')

Cheers
Keith

In thinking about it.

I have only some game files on SSD now -- but not game saves which are on the C: drive. There is very little writing to the SSD -- when used for gaming in that way. So, "wear out" should be far less of an issue than for SSD used as a C: drive with constant back and forth movement of data.

We'll see how long my SSD last -- "forever" I hope

Thanks for the input, but to directly answer my initial question(s), do 'blocks' or 'sectors' or whatever have a limited write factor before they start to 'burn' out? And how comparable is the lifetime of an SSD to that of a normal hard drive under 'normal' usage?

Oh, and what about PC shutdown/booting? If you have an SSD is it wise to do less shutting down and more using 'sleep' mode? Just a thought. I bet there are some Chinese-made SSDs that wipe the entire drive on shutdown!

i dont trust SSDs enough to go all in, I'd rather put Two HDDs in raid-0

Yes.

Initially, it was an issue. Now, it is claimed, the overall SSD design -- which includes features to prevent "over writing" particular areas too often -- when done right -- gives practical lifetimes equal or better than HD (HD are only expected to last a few years). I read the number of writes to a section and some extrapolations that indicated very long useful lifetime even at very high normal usage. But I forget the exact numbers -- and you want an accurate number

Again, electronic failure (not wear out) is the problem with the recent SSDs. On that note, my SSD claims 2 million hours between failures (228 years). As one who's business was once designing space hardware to a level of reliability, we know reliability numbers like those are mere calculations/extrapolations -- make one feel good -- but not worth much. Actual SSDs have been failing in months (sometimes a lot, sometimes a few) not decades.

SSD write/erase/rewrite cycle count is still limited (but improving), sectors will literally wear out over time, a traditional magnetic disk (which in theory has infinite rewriting cycles) does not have this issue but the chance of a mechanical failure even the playfield a little bit.
In theory best use of the SSD is for large mount of data to be accessed quickly but rarely modified (for game/application install)

Thanks for the answers, I told a mate of mine about SSDs having what could be classed as 'limited' write functionality and he almost couldn't believe it.

I'm glad I was right and didn't relay some bad info!

I've been running an Intel X-25M 160GB for 2 years now as OS drive for my system. Its wear level is 98%, meaning it has spent 2% of its estimated wear life in that period (approx. 8800 hours online). Just got a 512GB Samsung 830 to replace my mechanical drive for steam folder and scratch disk.

I wouldn't worry too much about wear level on flash memory for standard workstation use of SSD's. Ofcouse there is no substitution for backing up your system in case of drive failure, but that is the same for SSD vs HDD.