Interesting SSD Reliability Study - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-15-2012, 12:00 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Found this today. First time I have seen such a thing anywhere.

Study from Holland. Use Google Chrome to easily translate it into English for an interesting read...

http://darkstone.tweakblogs.net/blog/6956/ssd-betrouwbaarheidsonderzoek-de-resultaten.html

Over 1500 people surveyed.

289

414
assassin is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 07-15-2012, 12:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lespurgeon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 42
interesting, no idea how valid the data is, but tracks with what we regularly hear.
lespurgeon is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 01:45 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Agreed. Its the only study or survey of its kind that I have ever seen.
assassin is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 02:03 PM
Advanced Member
 
flocko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 707
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Holy crap Batman . I know someone who is going wig the hell out tongue.gif

10 , 9 , 8 , 7, 6 ...... biggrin.gif
flocko is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 02:12 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by flocko View Post

Holy crap Batman . I know someone who is going wig the hell out tongue.gif
10 , 9 , 8 , 7, 6 ...... biggrin.gif

lol. I guess I should respond now.

Thanks for the countdown.
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

Agreed. Its the only study or survey of its kind that I have ever seen.

The article does not take into account the RMA process.

Example: I have RMA both a Crucial and OCZ. OCZ has no customer support required. It's as easy as filling out a form online without talking to a single person. BOOM you get RMA a new drive. Painless and easy. For sure much better than Crucial in every way possible. Easier. Faster shipping. Less hassle. Literally fill out form online and done.


Crucial will trouble shoot the crap out of it. It take a long time and is slow - for an advanced user with little patience like myself it's horrible. I know if it's broke cause I know what I am doing. Just give me the new drive already.
But- the process certainly removes a large amount of bonehead average idiot user errors and lowers the overall RMA stats with successful support resolution.


I don't think the numbers from the two different companies are statistically relevant to anything if you peel back the layers and just use your intelligence and common sense to see beyond the statistics.

Additionally- The OCZ is marketed very hard at first time buyers - and also in the ultra cheap value category which invariably is going to see more RMA issues even if the reliability in truth is no different. Crucial owners tend to be more computer people that know the name from building PC's from years of RAM sales- and I would think the average crucial owner has a higher level of technical experience or PC maturity than the average OCZ buyer. I bet the age of the buyer of the Crucial is also higher than the age of the OCZ buyer. Older people that know about PC's for a long time think the name OCZ is terrible. Before SSD existed OCZ was despised as a terrible company with terrible products. New management, a new turn around- and some good success in the SSD market seem to have turned this around quite a bit. But- it's certainly true.

So there is no doubt in my mind the ease of use and lack of technical support trouble shooting leads to higher percent of OCZ RMA's than Crucial. Factor in the buyer of the crucial vs the buyer of the OCZ on average and the chart you post is almost exactly like I would have imagined.


BUT LETS NOT TAKE IT MORE SERIOUS THAN THAT - IT CERTAINLY HAS NO EFFECT ON ACTUAL RELIABILITY OR PROBABILITY OF FAILURE ON THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL.

I think only a fool would try to draw more conclusion from the chart and data you posted above or use it accurately as defense of any purchase decision. It's interesting but ultimately irrelevant.

There is much better factors to choosing an SSD to buy in my opinion. I think that "Price" and also "Performance" would be ten fold more important in a purchase decision.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-15-2012, 02:17 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 995
Special thanks to Assassin btw...

I can't help but feel he really went searching for this one to calm down my irrational tirade of of late...

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-15-2012, 02:24 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

The article does not take into account the RMA process.
Example: I have RMA both a Crucial and OCZ. OCZ has no customer support required. It's as easy as filling out a form online without talking to a single person. BOOM you get RMA a new drive. Painless and easy. For sure much better than Crucial in every way possible. Easier. Faster shipping. Less hassle. Literally fill out form online and done.
Crucial will trouble shoot the crap out of it. It take a long time and is slow - for an advanced user with little patience like myself it's horrible. I know if it's broke cause I know what I am doing. Just give me the new drive already.
But- the process certainly removes a large amount of bonehead average idiot user errors and lowers the overall RMA stats with successful support resolution.
I don't think the numbers from the two different companies are statistically relevant to anything if you peel back the layers and just use your intelligence and common sense to see beyond the statistics.
Additionally- The OCZ is marketed very hard at first time buyers - and also in the ultra cheap value category which invariably is going to see more RMA issues even if the reliability in truth is no different. Crucial owners tend to be more computer people that know the name from building PC's from years of RAM sales- and I would think the average crucial owner has a higher level of technical experience or PC maturity than the average OCZ buyer. I bet the age of the buyer of the Crucial is also higher than the age of the OCZ buyer. Older people that know about PC's for a long time think the name OCZ is terrible. Before SSD existed OCZ was despised as a terrible company with terrible products. New management, a new turn around- and some good success in the SSD market seem to have turned this around quite a bit. But- it's certainly true.
So there is no doubt in my mind the ease of use and lack of technical support trouble shooting leads to higher percent of OCZ RMA's than Crucial. Factor in the buyer of the crucial vs the buyer of the OCZ on average and the chart you post is almost exactly like I would have imagined.
BUT LETS NOT TAKE IT MORE SERIOUS THAN THAT - IT CERTAINLY HAS NO EFFECT ON ACTUAL RELIABILITY OR PROBABILITY OF FAILURE ON THE INDIVIDUAL LEVEL.
I think only a fool would try to draw more conclusion from the chart and data you posted above or use it accurately as defense of any purchase decision. It's interesting but ultimately irrelevant.
There is much better factors to choosing an SSD to buy in my opinion. I think that "Price" and also "Performance" would be ten fold more important in a purchase decision.

Disagree completely. For SSDs in the HTPC environment

reliability >>> cost/gb >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> performance (as they are all about equal for HTPC)

Furthermore this survey has nothing to do with the quality of a particular company's return policy. I bet OCZ would help trouble shoot one of their products if you asked. In fact, this survey even points out how many SSDs had issues but were still in use (meaning that someone must have helped them "troubleshoot" it in some regard). So I think that this survey somewhat accommodates for your argument.

289
414
385

So I am not buying that argument at all. Just because OCZs return policy is easier by your measures doesn't mean anything at all about the need to return a SSD or percentage of total SSDs returned by a particular company.

I think when a component that's holding your most vital information --- your OS and programs --- are often within $10-$30 you would be a fool NOT to use real user data like this somewhere in your decision buying thought process.
assassin is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 02:45 PM
Advanced Member
 
flocko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 707
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
Man ... u must be really board to kick the devil .

You can interpret those charts any way you want to but the fact remains that OCZ has some of the highest failure rates . Weather they honor them or not . Facts are facts
flocko is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 02:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 995
We can agree to disagree. I am just not scared of reliability to the point I would use the kind of data your posting in a purchase decision.

A mfg warranty or other tangible thing perhaps.

But the data in those charts has no place or factor in any purchase decision I make.

It certainly is not going to reverse my thinking about crucial having had to Rma my first one after being defective and still over all I have never been satisfied with my M4 crucial SSD.

Plus- when is that data from?

I would imagine that near 100% of the crucial m4's should be listed in green as having had a problem. Didn't the blue screen of death firmware issue and fix effect 100% of the crucial drives ? I see nothing on that chart that shows that yet I can go into any pc forum including this one and find multiple threads from crucial owners complaining of pc crashes and BSOD errors almost hourly. Sure a firmware update fixes that but there is a high amount if drives out there without the firmware update I am sure.

Just reading various posts or a google search would confirm that yet I see no data indicating such. That makes me think it's either too old to matter anymore with a model available today or it's just plain to inaccurate to matter.

I am sure there is some owners out there right now with either small problem fixed after firmware update or some sho have yet fixed or updated and would be classified in the currently operational but not resolved category.

I am not sure I would view the charts your posting as any good indication of the quality of crucial. I know your a big crucial SSD supporter and owner and I have no doubt at all that your digging this chart up and posting was in defense of such.

I believe flocko also owns and supports crucial m4's too. I respect both you guys opinions, I really do. I just don't agree with them.

How long or hard did you go searching for this chart?
It does not seem that easy to find or popular online.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-15-2012, 03:00 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
I am not a "supporter" of anything. What do I care? I don't own stock in anything and would love to use the cheapest option out there, actually, if it was the best product. Guess how many Crucial M4s I own personally?

NONE!!!! (1 Samsung, 1 Crucual c300, 1 Intel). However, I have used all sort of SSDs including M4, OCZ, Corsair, etc.

So now the survey is too old to be relevant (even though many of the products on it are still made and sold)?

And it seems like you are accusing me of going out of my way to find it?

Interesting. Seems like more excuses to me.

It was actually on the first page of a search I did. I just search a little differently than most people on the internet so I can find things sometimes that others miss.
assassin is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 03:02 PM
Advanced Member
 
flocko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 707
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 17
@ " M "

Yes, I own a Crucial . No , I do not yet support them . The ssd has been purchased but not used yet . It is being held for a special project .

Yes, in all seriousness . We ( I) respect your knowledge and opinions as well .... for sure
flocko is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 03:44 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

I am not a "supporter" of anything. What do I care? I don't own stock in anything and would love to use the cheapest option out there, actually, if it was the best product. Guess how many Crucial M4s I own personally?
NONE!!!! (1 Samsung, 1 Crucual c300, 1 IBM). However, I have used all sort of SSDs including M4, OCZ, Corsair, etc.
So now the survey is too old to be relevant (even though many of the products on it are still made and sold)?
And it seems like you are accusing me of going out of my way to find it?
Interesting. Seems like more excuses to me.
It was actually on the first page of a search I did. I just search a little differently than most people on the internet so I can find things sometimes that others miss.

Don't read too much into my comments.

Please don't. At least not to the point you get upset.

lol- we are just having some fun bantering about SSD's. Nothing more.

Personally I don't really care what people decide to buy it is each their own.

But- I do feel passionately about correcting misinformation as do you. I know for sure that in areas where you feel HTPC in general being threatened or that it's being talked down you get passionate and defend it. You want everyone to at least know the truth. Same with other aspects of hardware. I have seen you point out facts you believe to be truths regarding AMD vs Intel, RADEON vs NVIVIA vs Igpu and such.

This is one of those areas I am passionate about. I think SSD is a must have. I am super passionate about it. Makes no sense not to own or operate a PC with SSD for your OS.

Second- and this is a the one we disagree on - that reliability is mostly myth and unpredictable. While it might be trendy to like or dislike certain products the trends have nothing to do with individual user experiences.

I am passionate about my dislike for the Crucial M4 because I feel I got "raped" by various forums and reviews on it. My fault- I put myself out there and never did the due diligence at the time.

Here is my story and I hope it makes sense. I bought a Vertex2 SSD for $244 being a very early adopter years ago. I loved it to the point I thought it was a bargain at that price. Scary yes I know:)
Some time went buy and then I was in market for a cheap OS boot drive. This was late last year when all the "BUZZ" was circling the Crucial M4. I remember reading posts like "is the Crucial M4 the best SDD for the money ?" and also like "Crucial SSD the new low cost champion"
I read a quick review that was basically positive and bought one. Admittedly I did not actually read with open mind the "buzz" threads that got me hot to purchase. But at the time I was reading so many negatives about the OCZ's and even though I had purchase with success two previously I got scared away from them for my third purchase. I choose the M4. Biggest mistake I could have made.

I later learned that the M4 was not a low cost champion and that it's benchmarks were actually worse in general speed than the Vertex3 I was looking at. I wanted to kick myself in the ass because I paid an extra $10 or $15 for the Crucial over the Vertex3 thinking it was better or worth the money. Anyways- not a big deal I said to myself since everyone was saying the Crucial was better overall and more reliable. That was also wrong in my case.

When I hooked it up I could not get it to work. After install of windows which took forever (I let it run overnight) it would not boot into screen. It just hung up. So finally I called Crucial about the problem and after a two hour annoying conversation they RMA it for me. The second did not have the issue the first had so I was at the time pleased. But every once in a while I would get a BSOD with it. Not a big deal I said at the time- and it still is that way to this day. I tried a bunch of things to fix it but never could. About once a week it crashes. It was easiest for me to move it to be the least used office PC we have with seldom use. It is reliable enough for that task- and not worth my personal time or effort to resolve any further since it is actually save me money considering my time to just build a new $300 PC.

But I kept reading about the superiority of the Crucial and the terribleness of both Sandforce drives and specifically OCZ.

When I found an OCZ on sale for $30 cheaper than the Crucial the next time I bought and verified it was indeed faster performance on benchmarks with reviews I bought a third OCZ and my first Vertex3. This was late last year about.

Since then I purchase 13 more OCZ's including vertex2 Vertex3 and Agility. I have 60GB, 120GB sizes. I even bought at premium a MAX IOPS Vertex3 for the superior Toshiba TOGGLE NAND. I have never had any issues with over 15 different OCZ SSD's I have purchased and I always bought them because they were both cheaper and faster than the other drives and brands I was considering at the time. I probably saved about $20 per drive with doing this. So in my head I have an extra $600 ready to go and buy another if one should ever fail. I even bought a $69 120GB vertex3 last month as a backup simply because the price was so good. It's still shrink wrapped and unopened.

Now perhaps I just had amazing luck with all 15 SSD drives I own- and I just had terrible luck with the only Crucial I own. It's possible. But to me this real world experience is just way more a factor in my future purchase decisions than the data you post in the above tables.

What really gets under my skin is how it seems it's always the supporters or owners of the M4 hating on OCZ and Sandforce. And- the threads I see where people act like it superior in value, reliability or performance I just know to be dead wrong.

The Crucial is seldom faster or higher performance than a drive that is the same price.
The Crucial is seldom cheaper than a drive of the same performance tier.
The Crucial I believe is not as reliable as the owner of it pretend it is. And- most important it don't really matter because it's impossible to predict on an individual user level anyways.

So when I factor in an easier RMA process- a solid 3 year warranty- a lower cost total- and as good or better performance- OCZ wins over Crucial the last 15 times I bought an SSD. I just have a hard time believing any more of the hype about both the Crucial being the best choice (I know better) or the Sandforce or OCZ being a terrible choice.


Even review sites like Tomshardware specifically spell it out- The Samsung is better choice of Crucial since it costs the same and performs better. This is in the upper price tier about $20 higher and more expensive than the Sanforce drives like the Vertex3 or the Muskin which both have been recommended multiple times.

Here is the quote from the JUNE 2012 (most recent) SSD buyers guide:
Quote:
We know that SSDs based on SandForce's DuraClass technology demonstrate different behavior depending on the information with which they're presented. That is to say incompressible data like media-oriented files and actively-encrypted partitions aren't handled as elegantly as more easily compressible files.

In contrast, the behavior of Samsung's controller doesn't change based on the information you feed it, and the 830-series drives are arguably the fastest MLC-based offerings available, generally outpacing Crucial's m4. Interestingly, the 830 and m4 are priced comparably, too, making Samsung's SSD the better deal.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-benchmark-review,3237-3.html

So even if someone hates on OCZ and even if they hate on Sanforce controller drives in general- it's pretty clear there is better choices than the Crucial.

I am sure owners will take offense to this but it's just an opinion.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-15-2012, 03:49 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
Except that Crucial is NEAR the top in all of the categories that matter (something that the OCZ, unfortunately, is not whether you can admit to it or not. If you can find some subjective (like a survey) or objective data about reliability then please do so. Otherwise the needle points to OCZ as just not being as reliable). So that's what makes Crucial an extremely popular choice for HTPC.

Find or create a survey that disputes what this survey shows. Until then this is the best "real world" evidence we have regarding what is most reliable. Despite what you may say many will use it as a decision maker or a tie breaker when they are choosing a SSD.

BTW that Tom's article is talking about performance which as I have stated on numerous occasions is largely a non-factor for SATAIII SSDs of the same size in the HTPC arena.
assassin is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 05:47 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

Except that Crucial is NEAR the top in all of the categories that matter (something that the OCZ, unfortunately, is not whether you can admit to it or not. If you can find some subjective (like a survey) or objective data about reliability then please do so. Otherwise the needle points to OCZ as just not being as reliable). So that's what makes Crucial an extremely popular choice for HTPC.
Find or create a survey that disputes what this survey shows. Until then this is the best "real world" evidence we have regarding what is most reliable. Despite what you may say many will use it as a decision maker or a tie breaker when they are choosing a SSD.
BTW that Tom's article is talking about performance which as I have stated on numerous occasions is largely a non-factor for SATAIII SSDs of the same size in the HTPC arena.

We will always disagree on the performance aspect. It's very important to me. I am buying an SSD for the increased performance it provides- otherwise I might just as well stick with an HDD.

There is not a limit on performance to me. It's like buying a corvette over a basic chevy. Assuming the performance option was the same price you would always opt for the better performance. Even if the corvette is faster than you really need, it's nice to have it nonetheless.

Price is #1
Performance is #2

reliability is important of coarse but predicting it is more based on emotion than fact. If a product comes with a 3 year warranty I don't see much left to look at.

I have said countless times that I think all SSD's are very reliable in general. It just makes no sense to assume anything other than expecting it to work perfectly.

I would buy and expect any SSD I buy to function perfectly as expected. Thinking otherwise is stupid. The irrational fear people have about reliability is fiction not fact. If your really afraid do the right thing and designate a solid back up plan like a remote backup to server or online service if your data is really precious.
For me I do that- and all I do is watch movies with mine. I can't believe I have good luck with 15+ units purchased. I have to believe that is just normal for all SSD's.

We have beaten the subject of reliability to death but I will always maintain there is no way to predict it- and anyone that thinks anything otherwise than expecting any brand and model SSD to function perfectly is certainly a fool.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-15-2012, 07:56 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
I am not going to debate this any more with you. You love OCZ and will defend them until the end of the earth even though others have very reasonable reasons to not pick them. You will also try to convince them to still use OCZ. That's your prerogative.

I will continue to use what I seem as the most reliable and best bang for the buck based on criteria that I think is most important.

In the end there is no correct or right answer. People need to pick whatever they feel comfortable with. And use ALL the data to make that choice.
assassin is offline  
Old 07-15-2012, 11:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Puwaha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Aren't you going to call him an "OCZ fanboy?"

tongue.gifbiggrin.gifwink.gifcool.gifrolleyes.gifsmile.gif
Puwaha is offline  
Old 07-16-2012, 02:20 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Addicted Member
 
assassin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 12,961
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 241
assassin is offline  
Old 07-16-2012, 05:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
captain_video's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Posts: 3,636
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked: 156
I've bought four SSDs so far and I've had no problems with any of them (two Kingston's, a Crucial, and a Corsair). I've avoided OCZ SSDs because of all the bad press. I seem to recall that the OCZ Vertex drives actually got good reviews, but that doesn't do much good if they need to be returned frequently due to failures. I've had no personal experience with OCZ drives, but I'm not getting enough of a warm fuzzy to risk purchasing one. I prefer to stick with brands that have a proven track record.

Most companies have automated RMA procedures these days. I can't recall the last time I actually had to speak to a CSR about returning a product, except perhaps an Intel motherboard, and that was only because I had to speak to a tech about the troubleshooting procedures, which I had already done. I think most drive manufacturers let you go through the RMA process on-line without having to talk to anyone.
captain_video is offline  
Old 07-16-2012, 06:24 AM
Member
 
Gorath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 15
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
About a year ago Tom's Hardware did a story about SSD vs Hard Drive reliability. It's a very interesting read.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ssd-reliability-failure-rate,2923.html
Gorath is offline  
Old 07-16-2012, 06:39 AM
AVS Special Member
 
bryansj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 6,407
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Liked: 195
My first SSD was an OCZ Agility 3 (60GB). It died within a week and I returned it to Microcenter and puchased a slightly more expensive Crucial M4. Since then I've added M4s to two other computers.

bryansj is online now  
Old 07-16-2012, 06:53 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jeffkro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

Disagree completely. For SSDs in the HTPC environment
reliability >>> cost/gb >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> performance (as they are all about equal for HTPC)
Furthermore this survey has nothing to do with the quality of a particular company's return policy. I bet OCZ would help trouble shoot one of their products if you asked. In fact, this survey even points out how many SSDs had issues but were still in use (meaning that someone must have helped them "troubleshoot" it in some regard). So I think that this survey somewhat accommodates for your argument.
289
414
385
So I am not buying that argument at all. Just because OCZs return policy is easier by your measures doesn't mean anything at all about the need to return a SSD or percentage of total SSDs returned by a particular company.
I think when a component that's holding your most vital information --- your OS and programs --- are often within $10-$30 you would be a fool NOT to use real user data like this somewhere in your decision buying thought process.

I agree, choose the drives with better reputations, I chose crucial just do to newegg reviews.
jeffkro is offline  
Old 07-16-2012, 07:04 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Zon2020's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,716
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkro View Post

I agree, choose the drives with better reputations, I chose crucial just do to newegg reviews.

Well there's a lot of argument above about what factors should or should not influence a buying decision.

I have to say that to me Newegg reviews are in the "completely meaningless, unreliable, and irrelevant" category.

BTW, I suspect that part of OCZ's problem is that because they have consistently been cheapest they probably sell a disproportionate number to people who have no idea what to do with it or how to set it up or how to troubleshoot it or how to identify if and when they have an actual problem with the drive.
Zon2020 is offline  
Old 07-16-2012, 08:54 AM
AVS Special Member
 
StardogChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 3,067
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Liked: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

The article does not take into account the RMA process.

Who cares? I am not going to choose a product based on how easy it is to return it when it's broken. I am going to choose it based on not having it break in the first place.

 

 

StardogChampion is offline  
Old 07-16-2012, 09:22 AM
Senior Member
 
dksc318's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: San Jose,CA
Posts: 453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zon2020 View Post

....BTW, I suspect that part of OCZ's problem is that because they have consistently been cheapest they probably sell a disproportionate number to people who have no idea what to do with it or how to set it up or how to troubleshoot it or how to identify if and when they have an actual problem with the drive.

Hehe, I would think it would be the other way around, rich people buy name brand and wouldn't know what to do with them.
dksc318 is offline  
Old 07-16-2012, 11:12 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by assassin View Post

I am not going to debate this any more with you. You love OCZ and will defend them until the end of the earth even though others have very reasonable reasons to not pick them. You will also try to convince them to still use OCZ. That's your prerogative.
I will continue to use what I seem as the most reliable and best bang for the buck based on criteria that I think is most important.
In the end there is no correct or right answer. People need to pick whatever they feel comfortable with. And use ALL the data to make that choice.

Actually no. I do stick up for OCZ because at least in SSD I feel they get a little extra HATE than they deserve. Usually not from owners complaining about issues- but owners of other brands defending their own purchase decision and hating on them.

I am actually more against the Crucial owners pretending the M4 is better at anything. If you hate OCZ then get a Muskin or one of the other 20 brands that are basically identical to OCZ in performance and price.

I believe with all my heart it is simply a much better and much more intelligent choice than a CRUCIAL M4.

I think that ayone that hates on Sandforce should get a SAMSUNG, otherwise get a Sandforce drive as they are the best performance value.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-16-2012, 11:21 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zon2020 View Post

Well there's a lot of argument above about what factors should or should not influence a buying decision.
I have to say that to me Newegg reviews are in the "completely meaningless, unreliable, and irrelevant" category.
BTW, I suspect that part of OCZ's problem is that because they have consistently been cheapest they probably sell a disproportionate number to people who have no idea what to do with it or how to set it up or how to troubleshoot it or how to identify if and when they have an actual problem with the drive.

+1 here.

Newegg reviews are meaningless and worthless.

+1 here. No doubt OCZ sells a disproportionate number of SSD's to people that have no idea how to set it up or trouble shoot it.

Certainly- OCZ markets and maintains competitiveness in the lower price and "value" category by having the cheapest prices. While this strategy sells drives- it certainly does not minimize RMA or cherry pick more knowledgable owners.


I would imagine Intel has a more PC intelligent buying audience, which factors into a bit their higher reliability stats. Like a Honda accord of old- which sold primarily to older more conservative adults that both had money and personal responsibility to maintain it properly and not drive them hard. VERSUS say a Chevy buyer that was younger, less mature- and had less income. Less likely to service the car regular and more likely to drive it harder. Honda is probably still more reliable than Chevy- but the stats get extended given the situations. Just like Intel is already pretty reliable but it's type of owner don't hurt that any being willing to pay a little more for them- and knowing a little more about how to set them up and trouble shoot them properly.

Crucial has I bet an older and more knowledgable ownership base too. That makes sense to me when I think about it- But it's just a guess.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-16-2012, 11:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by dksc318 View Post

Hehe, I would think it would be the other way around, rich people buy name brand and wouldn't know what to do with them.

No I disagree with PC.

People that know about PC just know- and the ones that have been at it for a while know brands like Intel and Crucial. I imagine they buy that stuff more.
The older people have more money too than the kids- so along with more knowledge is more appreciation for reliability and more income to spend a little more on say an Intel brand.

Intel gives you a 5 year warranty and is generally regarded as a pretty solid company with solid reliability and customer care. They certainly charge a little more than the cheaper brands like OCZ that market to the entry level price points. Intel is willing to make people pay a little more for an Intel and owners are willing to pay a little more too.

While I would disagree with that - nothing wrong with that thinking.

Given SSD prices today- the difference between one brand or another is often only $10 or $20 or $30. Hardly a difference that is significant for many IMO. I might not pay $20 or $30 more myself but for some that is not that much money to get what you feel you want or like.

But my biggest point of all was the higher cost does not translate to higher performance- so it's not the route for me.

I can buy literally two Vertex3's for the price of some other brands. I could literally clone my OS installation onto the second one and keep it as a back up just in case of failure for the same cost with a total guarantee of no downtime in the event of failure. Anyone has a hard time explaining to me why I should buy a more expensive slower brand until this is no longer true- or I have some serious issue with the 15 SSD drives I currently own that all function perfectly.

Thinking a Crucial or an Intel or any other brand will provide you any meaningful security against failure on a personal individual user level is foolish. Thinking this is stretching out too many facts to far to be accurate in any meaningful way. It's more likely a result of emotion or feeling in that purchase decision that it is on any statistically relevant data or information.

I don't see how owners defending their own purchase decision are so motivated to create security for their choice of purchase and own piece of mind as to stretching out meaningless data so far as to create a false belief of reliability on individual level.

The truth is sad- but any SSD at any point could fail- and regardless of the brand you choose or the model you choose at the individual level the probability of failure is so complicated as it's totally impossible to predict with any accuracy. It's borderline insane IMO to think your brand or model choice somehow effects these odds.

Here is the truth: All SSD's are reliable and even with the statistically worst reliability brand your odds of getting a perfectly working unit that maintains it's initial reliability status for many years is very, very high.
Secondly- Even if you choose the statistically most reliable brand your chance of getting a lemon is not much different.

The odds are very low you would get a bad unit and if you do strike it up as "getting hit by lightning"

The difference in odds from one brand or another translated to the individual single unit user level is both impossible to predict and 100% worthless to even try to guess with any accuracy.

So- aside from the warranty I would maintain that price and performance are much better and more important purchase decision categories than "perceived reliability"

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-16-2012, 11:53 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 24,089
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 191 Post(s)
Liked: 995
Quote:
Originally Posted by StardogChampion View Post

Who cares? I am not going to choose a product based on how easy it is to return it when it's broken. I am going to choose it based on not having it break in the first place.

My point was not that it's simply ok it breaks because it is easy to return and exchange. lol. While that might be an actual benefit for some it's not at all what I was saying.

I was saying that because OCZ RMA is as simply as fill a form out online- never talk to a single person- and BOOM you get a new drive then statistically it makes perfect sense for them to have more RMA numbers and higher percent than a company like Crucial that will force you to trouble shoot the crap out of over the phone with tech support before they issue an RMA.

I bet there is lots of user set up errors resolved in troubleshooting with tech support that removes a large percentage of RMA's that might have been issue otherwise.

OCZ does not force a support level on you- they just swap it out. You have to go out of your way to initiate a support case. It's more effort than just getting a brand new drive. People always take the path of least resistance.

I bet OCZ support gets a high number of "I swapped out my drive but I am still having the same issue" calls since support is more secondary in process. Certainly those RMA were not actually defects.

On other hand- Crucial process for exchange probably see far fewer "I swapped out my SSD but I am still having the same issue" because they remove that up front before RMA is created.


I am not saying anything like you think I am. I have exchanged both Crucial and OCZ SSD's and the ultimate result was both company's provided me a replacement in a reasonable time. Crucial took a little over a week. Probably 7 or 8 business days. OCZ took 2 days. I appreciated the speed of OCZ but I don't think it's a big deal in a purchase decision because I don't expect any SSD I buy to break down or fail.

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
Old 07-16-2012, 02:24 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Puwaha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mfusick View Post

OCZ does not force a support level on you- they just swap it out. You have to go out of your way to initiate a support case. It's more effort than just getting a brand new drive. People always take the path of least resistance.

On that note, does OCZ sell a bunch of "recertified" drives? If so, where? I'd be interested in saving a few bucks because someone couldn't figure out how to use an SSD. biggrin.gif
Puwaha is offline  
Old 07-16-2012, 06:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jeffkro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by dksc318 View Post

Hehe, I would think it would be the other way around, rich people buy name brand and wouldn't know what to do with them.

I buy generic spaghetti noodles and yogurt, computer parts I stay with known good companies.
jeffkro is offline  
 
Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off