Kitz Forum

Computers & Hardware => PC Hardware => Topic started by: kitz on February 24, 2014, 08:33:37 PM

Title: SSD failure rate
Post by: kitz on February 24, 2014, 08:33:37 PM
I'd appreciate others thoughts on SSD drives.

My 18 month old OCZ vertex4 has just died on me.   I don't think I've ever has a drive fail so totally and so suddenly without warning before     Prior to this weekend I was pleased at how fast it was, but now I'm unsure about the possible trade off between speed and reliability.


Obviously I'm going to have to replace the drive with something, and having only just got in, not sure yet what to go for.

I have tried all the usual stuff, swapping cables ports etc, but the device just isn't recognised even in the bios..  And I get bootmgr is missing (obviously) when attempting to boot the pc.

There was no ore warning that it was about to go...  I was attempting to transfer some data on to my pc via USB, when everything just ground to a craaaawl, eventually the pc locked, so I'm assuming it perhaps was trying to write to a bad sector?

Not impressed if they only last 18months :(


-----

// tired and grumpy Monday kitz who just wanted to get home ASAP, but infuriated that all the roads around here that sprung up this week with 20mph speed limits...  Including major A roads...  What a stupid idea...  Grrrr...   That made my day... Not.   So I'm a bit PCless right now and no idea when it will get fixed :(
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: sevenlayermuddle on February 24, 2014, 09:12:20 PM
I'd appreciate others thoughts on SSD drives.

Have to say the only disk drive failures I have ever had were  couple of Seagates in the Linux server.   But the SMART monitoring tools caught them both in the bud, warning me of a sudden and huge increase in bad sector counts.  I had time to shop around for the right alternatives and await their arrivals, by which time the ailing seagates were still soldiering on so the impact was minimal.  I guess the advantage maybe is that HDD tends to be mechanical failure, and mechanical failure tends to be a bit more progressive and thus predictable?

Quote
// tired and grumpy Monday kitz who just wanted to get home ASAP, but infuriated that all the roads around here that sprung up this week with 20mph speed limits...  Including major A roads...  What a stupid idea...  Grrrr...

Ah now, even more sympathy!  I am convinced that these 20 limits have sprung up in recognition of the perceived 'fact' that 'everybody drives at 10mph over the limit.  So to get the traffic to slow down to a quite reasonable 30mph, they impose a 20mph limit.  Trouble is, some of us actually obey speed limits - it's one of the few good driving habits I've had since a teenager.  So now, to stand by my principles, I have to drive around like a twit at 20mph, being tailgated by bicycles, even though I'm convinced nobody seriously expects me to do so.    >:(
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: roseway on February 24, 2014, 09:21:50 PM
That's really bad luck. SSDs are supposed to be much more reliable now than they were when they first came out. There are some special considerations in formatting and mounting SSDs, but I have to believe that Windows would conform with these requirements.

About 6 months ago I went over to an SSD (a Plextor PX-256M5Pro) on my main PC so I'm crossing my fingers now.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: Ronski on February 24, 2014, 10:15:21 PM
I've had quite a few ssd's over the years, a few have had problems,  but have never totally failed. My Crucial M4 doesn't like waking from sleep, takes about 60 seconds to respond. I had problems with an OCZ,  can't remember what it was though. The only SSD drives I've had that have been totally reliable are Intel drives, and they can be had for very good prices. I replaced my M4 with an Intel drive and I've had no problems since, the M4 is still in the system but not the OS drive.

It would be worth trying the drive in a different port, with a different cable, but I suspect you know that.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: kitz on February 24, 2014, 10:33:34 PM
Cheers yep. 

I've swapped it's drive bay to where a seagate drive is, and plugged the seagate into where the OCZ was.  The bios can't see the OCZ drive in either bay,  but it can find the seagate in where the OCZ normally lives, so I guess that counts out any cable or port issues.

I've just realised the vertex 4 is supposed to come with a three year warranty, so I guess it's see what SCAN say now.   Even if they RMI it I could be without a pc for a while.    :(   I don't have any spare pcs or drives these days, otherwise I could perhaps install my copy of windows on a spare drive fr a temp measure...  Not even sure how that would affect windows licensing either. 
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: kitz on February 24, 2014, 10:46:23 PM
>>>>it's one of the few good driving habits I've had since a teenager.  So now, to stand by my principles, I have to drive around like a twit at 20mph, being tailgated by bicycles, even though I'm convinced nobody seriously expects me to do <<<

I was a bit unsure what to do because I have a taxi right up my arse obviously non too pleased either,  tbh I did go up to about 28 at one point, under pressure from taxi which obviously wanted a free ride in my boot.   They recently reduced the speed on a dual carriage way from national speed limit to 40 and 50 and even 30 at some points.  Police were having a field day when they did that.   I'm sure this is a backward step and makes for impatient drivers.  Just say I wasn't happy driving home, one. at the slow progress. 2 with the taxi up my arse. 3. Feeling under pressure cause I felt like I was holding a stream of traffic up by doing 22mph.  :(


Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: sevenlayermuddle on February 25, 2014, 12:01:14 AM
Apologies for focusing on the lesser of your worries (speed limits) Kitz but I'm reminded of a 30 limit in a nearby village that was recently extended about three quarters a mile into what used to be National limit 60.   The Police strongly opposed the plans on the grounds that

it 'devalued' speed limits, thus eroding respect for the law
there was no evidence of safety risks with the old limit
they would have no resources that could justifiably be diverted to enforce the new limit

But the county council were allowed to ignore the police and went ahead anyway, reminding the police that enforcement was their (the police's) problem and not the council's.   We now have absolute mayhem.   Most days I have to choose between speeding myself or putting up with traffic scorching past me as it's a road with good visibility and easy overtaking.   Once in a while there is a camera van and, for once, those captured speeding have just a little sympathy from me. >:(
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: echo92 on February 25, 2014, 04:07:47 AM
Hi all,

Long time lurker and thought it's time to finally sign up :)

Kitz, it sounds like the SSD controller chip - interfacing the SSD flash memory with the computer - has bitten the dust, either that or one of the flash chips has failed. In the former case which is more likely, I'd imagine you'd be able to get back the data - though sounds like a job for data recovery services :( I recall OCZ has had a reputation for reliability issues and would second Ronski's suggestion for Intel drives being reliable and speedy. 18 months is a very short time for failure admittedly!

Luckily, it looks like the warranty (link: http://ocz.com/consumer/support/warranty) for OCZ Vertex drives is being honoured by Toshiba when they bought out OCZ late last year (after OCZ went bust), at any rate Scan should replace it under RMA. As for re-installing Windows, it's a pain in the proverbial, fingers crossed the internet activation will behave - else it's the automated activation line (sigh, a lot of number entering for about 10 minutes... why, Microsoft??)

Edited for extra linky-ness
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: Berrick on February 25, 2014, 05:52:28 AM
@kitz
Quote
I guess it's see what SCAN say now
They will inform you that its down to you to follow OCZ'ed rma policy as the extended warranty is "a value add" provided by the manufacture.
 
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: Ronski on February 25, 2014, 06:28:01 AM
You shouldn't have any problem reinstalling Windows,  even if it's an oem copy a new hard drive is not considered a new PC, at worse you may have to phone, but it's all automated.

I use Acronis which takes regular backups of my entire OS drive so I can just image that back to a new drive if need be. I also have a Windows Home Server which takes daily back ups, but I don't have much faith in that. For the cost of Acronis it's well worth it.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: kitz on February 25, 2014, 11:59:19 AM
Thanks guys, I had a reply to each if you, but as sometimes happens when using the ipad, I lost the whole post when adding the link...   I'll redo later..

I'm struggling a bit with revues etc and I never normally shop for anything on a mobile device...  So have I perhaps missed something with this deal of the day on ebuyer

http://www.ebuyer.com/447256-kingston-240gb-v300-ssdnow-2-5inch-ssd-sv300s37a-240g

Budget I'm afraid is only about 100, so I thought I may be stuck with a 120gb until I saw that. 
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: roseway on February 25, 2014, 12:54:18 PM
On paper that Kingston device looks good, and it has a 3-year warranty. My only slight concern is that we don't know who the actual manufacturer is. Another (slightly more expensive) one you might consider is this: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-250GB-Basic-Solid-State/dp/B00E391OX6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1393332710&sr=8-1&keywords=samsung+ssd (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-250GB-Basic-Solid-State/dp/B00E391OX6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1393332710&sr=8-1&keywords=samsung+ssd)
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: les-70 on February 25, 2014, 01:00:54 PM
  I did a big review search and intel seemed the most reliable ssds. Reliability is more important than speed and most ssd offer a great speed boost, my intel has been fine for two years and the lifetime is still estimated as 100% by the intel software.  I have not done a major  search but

http://www.dabs.com/products/intel-120gb-530-series-sata-6gb-s-2-5--20nm-mlc-7mm-ssd-oem-92N8.html?utm_source=google&utm_medium=ppc%20product%20search&utm_content=Q200&utm_campaign=Components%20and%20Storage%20-%20Hard%20Drives%20-%20Internal%20Hard%20Drives&origin=pla

 looked good if you could cope with only 120GB, if not

http://www.pixmania.co.uk/solid-state-drive-ssd/intel-solid-state-drive-530-series-solid-state-drive-240-gb-internal-2-5/21751224-a.html#merch=1&srcid=11270&nopopup=1

  This may break your budget but would give you 240gb
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: Ronski on February 25, 2014, 01:12:20 PM
I've just built new PCs for work, this is what I fitted.


http://www.ebuyer.com/437589-intel-180gb-335-series-ssd-ssdsc2ct180a4k5 £105, I'd rather go for that than a 240GB Kingston.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: kitz on February 25, 2014, 05:35:35 PM
Thank you everyone for the comments, I've decided to go with the samsung one Eric posted.   Unfortunately the intel one just stretched my budget too far :(
The Samsung was only a couple of quid more than I wanted to pay, but from what I read the samsung drives seemed to come out with good reports by everyone, so it should hopefully be ok.

Sorry for not responding straight away..  It's taken me the best part of two hours to place an order and complete the rma form with toshiba (after much cursing and swearing).
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: kitz on February 25, 2014, 05:57:38 PM
Ack.  And now I've only just seen ronskis link (caching?),  I'd seen the earlier one for 120gb, but too late the deed is done I'm afraid, and the samsung has a bit more capacity.   It's going to be a while before I'm up and running again as I'm out the next few days with appts and college, so realised the earliest I could take delivery is fri.

Thanks muchly, for everyone's help.   I did write a reply earlier up in the thread which was lost, so I'll try summarise that now.

@echo...  Hi and welcome to the forums, thanks for your link.  It would seem that toshiba may honour the vertex4 warranties.  I've since submitted a rma firm with all the details, but now have to wait for them to review it.

@berrik..  You were correct at scans response.

@ronski.. The windows licensing query was re if I transferred the license to a temp drive, then soon after put it again on a new drive, I was concerned if I may be pushing it by in effect using the same licence on 3 different drives in a relatively short time .. and if that may trigger a phone call being needed.

@7Lm....   I think the councils have lost the plot, either that or it's an attack on motorists..  Bleeding stupid is all I can say.. 

Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: NewtronStar on February 26, 2014, 07:32:47 PM
Sorry to here about your HD issue and not to many months ago you had problems with Nvida driver it never rains it pours and fingers crossed things don't happen in three's.

I would serously think of setting up your PC into Dual Boot mode using two indivdual Hard Drives for each OS and you can use your old OEM OS and buy a cheap Windows 8 or even the linux varients, it's like having two PC's in one box unless the MotherBoard gives up then your screwed  :o apart from that backup monthly if you can to a seperate HD if you can !
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: kitz on February 26, 2014, 08:41:48 PM
Cheers newtron, not quite sure if I follow what you mean though, sorry.

I intend putting win7 pro back on when I get the new SDD.  So are you perhaps suggesting that I dual boot with Linux, and what drive would I install linux on would that also be the SSD or another drive?

I have (had) 3 drives in the pc.   
- The SSD is the system drive c:
- 1TB HDD which is split 500/500.  D: keeps my files, music, photos, website.  E backups up vital stuff from C: such as my docs, desktop and a few vital config files
- 2nd TB HDD split 500/500 .  F: mirror of d:   G mirror of e:

NAS which holds a ghost backup of c:  and yet another copy of d: which is done uumm when I remember, but not so often since I put the mirror drive in.

Oops reread...  Get another drive and put linux on that, leaving 2 totally separate system drives..

Will have to look at the mobo again as I think I used the last sata port when I installed the third drive.  I think there's 5 usable in total, 2 used by the cd/DVDs, one by something in the case for front USB and card reader... then I also have a hot swap drive bay which takes one, but I think I 'borrowed' that when installing the 2nd Tb drive.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: kitz on February 26, 2014, 08:53:49 PM
A quick update .

Looks like toshiba may agree to rma the vortex4, as it looks like I may have a rma number.
Unfortunately I can't read what it says though from the ipad

Code: [Select]
This message cannot be displayed because of the way it is formatted. Ask the sender to send it again using a different format or email program..

-----


The new samsung SSD should be here tomorrow.   Which is rather unfortunate because I paid 3.99 for it to arrive on a specific day knowing full well I would be out all day tomorrow and not getting back till late. :(.   
Oh well no tracking, so it looks like Royal Mail, who if they can't deliver will hopefully retain it so I can pick up from the post office on Friday  :-\
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: sevenlayermuddle on February 26, 2014, 11:14:17 PM
may have a rma number.
Unfortunately I can't read what it says though from the ipad

Code: [Select]
This message cannot be displayed because of the way it is formatted. Ask the sender to send it again using a different format or email program..



How Horrible.  :o

I check mail almost exclusively with an iPad and it works well, have never seen that one.  Yet a quick search suggests it is a very common problem, dating back to several iOS versions ago, and in my searching I didn't spot any credible theories as to cause or avoidance  :'(

Anyway, good luck with the new SSD.   Its a technology I'm tempted to try myself sometime soon.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: NewtronStar on February 27, 2014, 09:20:20 PM

I have (had) 3 drives in the pc.   
- The SSD is the system drive c:
- 1TB HDD which is split 500/500.  D: keeps my files, music, photos, website.  E backups up vital stuff from C: such as my docs, desktop and a few vital config files
- 2nd TB HDD split 500/500 .  F: mirror of d:   G mirror of e:


Oops reread...  Get another drive and put linux on that, leaving 2 totally separate system drives..


I don't think you need another physical HD when looking at your storage specs, your well protected by data loss, if you have enough space on either of the two HDD's say 80 GB you could set up a system Boot Partition for a second OS incase the primary SSD drive fails in the future.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: kitz on February 28, 2014, 11:11:26 PM
Got the new SDD.  It took me all of 5 mins to put it in the case and no joke, 10 mins to install Win7 64bit start to finish.
New disk boots in <4 seconds...  but Im now stuck at the stage of doing a zillion updates...  then the dreaded task of installing everything again.

Ive decided to abandon my Ghost copy and do a clean install due to all the messing with drivers around xmas. 

>>>  your well protected by data loss,

This was something discussed a while ago when irrc it was 7LM that brought up the subject elsewhere and I got a bit paranoid.
Besides all the disks, I also have a copy of c:/ ghosted and  D:/ mirrored on the NAS and a copy on an old disk that resides elsewhere as offsite for things like photos and website. 

Just realised my downfall was how the complete loss of the system drive took me offline totally. 
I do have 6 sata ports, only 5 usable as one is taken by the case for the integrated card reader/USB front.   If I can get some sort of PCI adapter to add a few more ports, then I could I suppose use the RMA'd SDD (if I get one back) to install linux.
 
Im also not too impressed today with my NAS.  Ive had this issue before.... it works fine as a network drive, but as soon as I install a new OS, it refuses to be seen on the network (linux).   I just wasted a joyful hour trying to access it, before deciding not to bother.  :(
I also realised why I usually turn it off..   the PC is whisper quiet..  whilst the NAS box isnt, the fan is driving me nuts  :(

Anyhows lots and lots to install yet before Im back to normal.  :)

Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: Ronski on February 28, 2014, 11:21:55 PM
Glad it's all working, having FTTC does make a lot of difference to the time it takes to update as well, but still time consuming.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: Ixel on March 01, 2014, 12:12:03 AM
...

I've had two OCZ SSD's die on me in the course of at least one year.

First one died after around 5 months. No early warnings, computer suddenly froze so rebooted only to find the BIOS no longer picking it up (tried a number of ideas but determined the drive to be dead). I put in a warranty claim and sent it back to OCZ, fairly fast process as I recall. They obviously concluded that it was dead and sent me back a replacement. I put in the replacement and found that I was unable to format it. Back that one went too, this time I was contacted to receive an apology and that I would be sent a higher series as a gesture. Received that and obviously that's been fine ever since.

I also now use a Samsung SSD, the Pro version of their options available however. Had it for quite a while and no problems at all.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: NewtronStar on March 01, 2014, 01:15:47 AM

Just realised my downfall was how the complete loss of the system drive took me offline totally. 

Well that's it in a nutshell, even with all the backups on drives if you have only one primary OS installed and it fails or gets corrupted your offline untill it's fixed (full system install) yet if you have a secondary OS on a different drive you can boot into that and do the online stuff & fix the primary OS at your leisure  :D
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: sevenlayermuddle on March 01, 2014, 08:27:39 AM
Alternatively, if all you want is to restore web access etc in an emergency, you could probably just boot from one of the Linux 'live CDs'.

I have never used one as I prefer to install my own Linux boxes by other means but AFAIK (and I know there several people who will set me straight if I'm talking twaddle  :D) these live CDs operate on a ramdisk and so should run without an hdd.

You could even set it up to boot a live CD (image thereof) system from USB, but be prepared for a very long wait.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: roseway on March 01, 2014, 10:31:01 AM
Yes, 7LM is quite correct. Something like this: http://linuxmint.com/download.php (I suggest the XFCE version) will boot directly to a working system with no configuration being necessary. It's a bit slow to start up and to launch programs, because everything is being read from the CD, but apart from that it functions just like an installed system.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: Berrick on March 01, 2014, 03:50:06 PM
Dont forget some Mobo manufactures also have an option in the bios so you can boot and access the internet
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: les-70 on March 01, 2014, 05:11:34 PM
  On the issue of emergency access I have been pleased with Puppy linux (slacko has been good).  I have that on a usb.  It loads fully to memory and runs fast and with enough features to do a fair bit.
Title: Re: SSD failure rate
Post by: NewtronStar on March 18, 2014, 08:23:40 PM
There is another way and it's the best, once you have your PC up and running with all the programs installed and updates use the free DriveImage XML, make an image of the OS and store it on one of your many HD's make sure when restoring the Image you use the same Drive letter as the Image, so 4 days worth of re-installing and updates can be done in less than 1 hour with a HD Image  ;)