Is the lifespan of SSDs improving?

[Ketchup]

So SSDs are getting faster, getting bigger, and getting cheaper. The tradeoff has always been limited life.

My question is are they improving in lifespan, or has that pretty much stayed the same?

I see the 840 EVO has a three-year warranty, so that is encouraging.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7173/...w-120gb-250gb-500gb-750gb-1tb-models-tested/3

 

[Elixer]

The smaller the process, the worse the lifespan is.
That is why they are trying to use 3D, and other things to increase lifespan & reliability.

 

[Ketchup]

The smaller the process, the worse the lifespan is.
That is why they are trying to use 3D, and other things to increase lifespan & reliability.

Awesome! This is what I like to hear. Not that I am holding off on one for this reason alone (money is the main factor here) but good to know. Does this translate to flash drives as well?

 

[Engineer]

Awesome! This is what I like to hear. Not that I am holding off on one for this reason alone (money is the main factor here) but good to know. Does this translate to flash drives as well?

I can imagine the 3D stacking would help flash drives. The other tricks (DRAM cache, etc)....not so much as the room isn't there (unless you make them huge or put the DRAM on chip with the flash).

 

[Ketchup]

I can imagine the 3D stacking would help flash drives. The other tricks (DRAM cache, etc)....not so much as the room isn't there (unless you make them huge or put the DRAM on chip with the flash).

I would agree for the time being. However, hearing about something computer-related being "huge" makes me think we'll get there. Of course by then, the modern flash drive could be something else entirely.

 

[Lonyo]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7173/...w-120gb-250gb-500gb-750gb-1tb-models-tested/3

A 120GB drive having 100GB written per day has a lifespan of 3.95 years based on rated cycles.

Do you really need to worry about the lifespan of your SSD? Have you ever?
As an end consumer, the sort of person who would be buying this sort of drive, you are unlikely to be writing that much that regularly, and it would be unlikely to ever become a concern.
Just look at the numbers for estimated life and then consider whether you need to care about whether lifespan is an issue.

Lifespan is also impacted by things not related to process, and SSD manufacturers will set up their products so that it's not an issue anyway, such as by increasing spare area if necessary.
So no, lifespan won't improve, it will almost certainly stay about the same, because manufacturers will set a bottom threshold for lifespan, and set spare areas as required to meet that lifespan and required performance level.

 

[postmortemIA]

no, lifespan is actually decreasing. First with MLC, and now with TLC.

 

[Mide]

All I know is that by the time my SSD dies because of use, I'll be ready for a new system anyway.

 

[Ketchup]

All I know is that by the time my SSD dies because of use, I'll be ready for a new system anyway.

Interesting thought. I usually keep a hard drive until it dies (aka through several systems) but with the increasing speed of SSD drives, I could see replacement/system as a real possibility.

 

[Red Squirrel]

SSDs are fine for OS drive or other non IO intensive operations, they'll last longer than the system itself.

Where the life span thing may be an issue is servers like VM servers, where the last thing you want to worry about is having to reduce the I/O. Also in raid configurations if each drive gets equal writes they are more likely to all fail around the same time, which is a big no no in a server environment. With spindle drives at least when they fail, it's random. The odds of multiple failures at once are slim. May not be an issue in enterprise environments where servers get replaced often but in a home environment where you may want to keep the same server for over 5-10 years it would be an issue. I see SSDs as being awesome for OS drive so stuff loads faster, but for mass storage spindle drives still win. I think both need to coexist as they both have their purposes.

 

[Deders]

I was under the impression the new Evo lasted over 10 years

 

[Hero1711]

Normally you build a new PC every 5 years or so, at these times you toss away most of the old hardwares. So who cares if the TLC only last 11 years (for the 120GB model) on average usage (you should be at this usage because these drives are for consumer market, if not try an enterprise SSD)?

 

[Eug]

My lightly used 120 GB model Samsung 840 lasted all of 4 months.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2338861

Likely not a NAND issue though, but a firmware issue.

 

[BrightCandle]

On normal amounts of usage they last well past the point when they become obsolete. On very heavy workloads, maybe your an animator or edit movies you might find you can put many 100's of GBs through on an SSD a day. But in reality if you are one of those people you aren't going to moan about having to swap the SSD every few years anyway because it is clearly faster than a HDD.

Lifespan is a non issue. It is in theory decreasing slowly, but the amount of error correction is increasing to compensate. The lifespan is not currently at the point where you should worry about it all that much.

 

[gbohn]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7173/...w-120gb-250gb-500gb-750gb-1tb-models-tested/3

A 120GB drive having 100GB written per day has a lifespan of 3.95 years based on rated cycles....

Do you really need to worry about the lifespan of your SSD? Have you ever?
.

I don't know if my situation is out of the ordinary, but I recently got an 840 Pro 256 GB drive to use as my C: drive (for Windows 7). I've managed to get the Write Amplification Factor down to 'only' 4.5 or so.

Using your numbers above (a 120 GB drive for 1,000 PE Cycles and 100 GB a day) this would yield about a 267 day lifespan. (120 Gb * (1000 / 4.5)) / 100

Granted, 100 GB a day is probably large, but depending on the WAF, the actual numbers may be a whole lot smaller than first envisioned if you are counting on a WAF of 1...

And if the future drives yield even fewer P/E cycles then it's likely downhill from here.

 

[Zap]

Interesting thought. I usually keep a hard drive until it dies (aka through several systems)

I could not imagine using some of the ancient HDDs that I have. Yes, I have old EIDE drives, but even my old SATA drives are crazy slow - I have USB 3.0 flash drives which are faster! And hold more data!

 

[Cerb]

Normally you build a new PC every 5 years or so, at these times you toss away most of the old hardwares. So who cares if the TLC only last 11 years (for the 120GB model) on average usage (you should be at this usage because these drives are for consumer market, if not try an enterprise SSD)?

Today, it takes about 10 year old hardware to be worth not re-using, IMO. 5 years is still well within a non-business service life (this includes business machines, just not at said businesses, anymore), and not old enough to toss. IMO, if it's faster than a Zacate per core, and is native SATA, it's still worth doing something with.

Also, enterprise SSDs are too damn expensive to buy as a desktop or notebook user--and, in fact, the same can be said for more than a few server users. Enterprise drives seem to be designed and priced very much for big enterprises, and not so much power users or budget-minded businesses. Not that you don't have options, but you shouldn't have to curtail your usage to match the drive's limitations, unless you just have stupid crap running (like a background defragger).