New server

That person you're talking about have an old SSD. Older SSDs = dramaticly higher NAND lifetime.

Newer SSDs have dramaticly reduced NAND lifetime, and although it's okay for most people it is most certainly not okay for server usage or semi-pro usage. And I personally would want to have my SSD for as long as possible. I will be building computers till I die, and that's a long time. I still have the hardware of my first computer. That's why I value quality and endurance, I will use the hardware untill it dies.

The reason this for the most part isn't an issue is because most people have very few writes per day. And no, the short NAND lifetime isn't bullshit. It's really short, especially with TLC NAND these days. Kingston V300 is an example of this, where the performance is acually throttled down after very few writes (it's a shitty SSD, although they have really good SSDs in HyperX series.. Samsung 840 Evo don't have good lifetime either. Is it an issue for most folks? No, but for a long time there have been many alternatives with better NAND, for a lower price (why pay more for less?!). The 840 did it well right after release because they were the cheapest and were easy to market as the performance was good, which actually doesn mean much because "all" SSDs today will give you sick performance compared to an HDD and you won't notice much difference unless you know how to test it. I recently bought a Crucial M500 on sale which is considered a very slow SSD, but you won't notice this. The price and NAND is great also. Now I'm off topic, sorry, I do that.

The rest of the SSD will outlast the NAND and will never be the reason an SSD stops working. 3D NAND will take the SSD NAND lifetime back to the older consumer SSDs. Server SSDs with SLC is another world to MLC, but that's to expensive. Stacking seems to be the strategy for many manufacturers. It will find it's way into the GPUs too soon.

Yeah, it's actually pretty nice. It was pretty slow before.

Which SSDs are you using?

Just a friendly thought: you should perform offline backups.


EDIT: The forum is splitting the quote into two pieces... Wierd..

 

Neat. I've always wondered why intel SSDs aren't more common. Also, now we know that every image on this site plus the forums fit onto at max ~450GB. That's interesting.

 

One of the tests I read was actually an 840 evo. Survived about 600 tb of data transfer on what I think was the 120gb model. That is more than mechanical hard disks are rated at.
I know full well that flash has a limited lifespan. But most people won't have an issue. Only flash I've had go bad is an SD card

 

Dual SSDs....I can already feel the difference the load times are DEFINITELY faster I hope its 1 SSD is primary and the other SSD is a backup

 

RAID 1 mate.

 

Why did you not run in RAID 10?

 

Still getting some invalid URLs.

 

I might be a little late but I can definitely tell its faster.