ssd's - Page 2 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > System Upgrades
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 05-23-2012, 01:10 PM   #11 (permalink)
Mod Emeritus
 
Puddle Jumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,286
Default Re: ssd's

Quote:
Originally Posted by PP Mguire View Post
Oh man, I forgot to put inb4 OCZ is ****.

He who sells the most is more likely to have more failure rates than he who prices too high. Food for thought. OCZ is mad popular and sell good stuff. I think over half the user base here has OCZ SSD with no problem.
Do you understand how failure rates work? Judging by your statement it doesn't seem like it.

Failure rate is a perfectly acceptable way to measure quality in industry. And for the record even if you were right about the number of units sold being relevant Seagate and Western Digital sell far more drives than OCZ and have lower failure rates as well.

OCZ is certainly trustworthy though, they lied about manufacturing their own controllers then banned discussion of it on their forums when word finally got out.
__________________

__________________

AMD Phenom II x4 955 Black Edition : Asus M4A89GTD PRO : Corsair 550VX
G.SKILL Ripjaws 4x2gb DDR3 1600 : MSI Geforce GTX 770 2gb : Antec 300
OCZ Agility 2 60gb SSD (OS) : SanDisk Ultra 120gb SSD (Apps) : Crucial M500 240gb (Steam) : Win 8.1 Pro 64bit
2x Samsung 2494LW & 1x Dell U2312HM Eyefinity

Lenovo ThinkPad X220 : Core i5 2410M : 12.5" 1366x768 IPS LED display : Intel 320 Series 120gb SSD

Samsung Galaxy Note 3 stock 4.3 : Nexus 7 2 stock 4.4

Puddle Jumper is offline  
Old 05-23-2012, 01:46 PM   #12 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
MindoverMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: /home
Posts: 12,212
Send a message via MSN to MindoverMaster
Default Re: ssd's

AFAIK, WD or Seagate don't make SSds, so basing it off their HDDs is irrelevant.
__________________

__________________
Neowin.net Steam Account
MindoverMaster is offline  
Old 05-23-2012, 02:01 PM   #13 (permalink)
Mod Emeritus
 
Puddle Jumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,286
Default Re: ssd's

Quote:
Originally Posted by MindoverMaster View Post
AFAIK, WD or Seagate don't make SSds, so basing it off their HDDs is irrelevant.
HDD's are still a storage medium, albeit a slow one. Like I said though PP's statement that more sales justify a high failure rate doesn't have any basis so it was really a pointless comparison just to put how bad OCZ's quality really is into perspective.
__________________

AMD Phenom II x4 955 Black Edition : Asus M4A89GTD PRO : Corsair 550VX
G.SKILL Ripjaws 4x2gb DDR3 1600 : MSI Geforce GTX 770 2gb : Antec 300
OCZ Agility 2 60gb SSD (OS) : SanDisk Ultra 120gb SSD (Apps) : Crucial M500 240gb (Steam) : Win 8.1 Pro 64bit
2x Samsung 2494LW & 1x Dell U2312HM Eyefinity

Lenovo ThinkPad X220 : Core i5 2410M : 12.5" 1366x768 IPS LED display : Intel 320 Series 120gb SSD

Samsung Galaxy Note 3 stock 4.3 : Nexus 7 2 stock 4.4

Puddle Jumper is offline  
Old 05-23-2012, 02:35 PM   #14 (permalink)
TF's First Dry Ice User!
 
Peter.Cort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,018
Default Re: ssd's

I read about the quality concerns, but it's a super fast drive and pretty cheap so I figure I'll give it a shot. I tend to have good luck with components and them not breaking...

Also SSD's and platter HDD's are completely different mechanically so I think it's unfair to compare the two.
__________________
A notice to EVERYONE who has posted here with a computer problem, I highly encourage you to keep current with the forums, even if it's browsing for 10-15 minutes during lunch, or before you go to bed at night. There are many things that you can learn and apply to future issues. My goal is to help people get to a point where they can use their own knowledge to help themselves, and others.

Also please use the search button. You've got a 50/50 chance that someone's asked your question and we've answered it.
Peter.Cort is offline  
Old 05-23-2012, 02:41 PM   #15 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
MindoverMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: /home
Posts: 12,212
Send a message via MSN to MindoverMaster
Default Re: ssd's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.Cort View Post
Also SSD's and platter HDD's are completely different mechanically so I think it's unfair to compare the two.
Agreed. You can't compare a flash drive an external. They are both USB, yes, but the mechanism of it is different.
__________________
Neowin.net Steam Account
MindoverMaster is offline  
Old 05-23-2012, 02:44 PM   #16 (permalink)
Build Guru
 
PP Mguire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 28,285
Default Re: ssd's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puddle Jumper View Post
Do you understand how failure rates work? Judging by your statement it doesn't seem like it.

Failure rate is a perfectly acceptable way to measure quality in industry. And for the record even if you were right about the number of units sold being relevant Seagate and Western Digital sell far more drives than OCZ and have lower failure rates as well.

OCZ is certainly trustworthy though, they lied about manufacturing their own controllers then banned discussion of it on their forums when word finally got out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puddle Jumper View Post
HDD's are still a storage medium, albeit a slow one. Like I said though PP's statement that more sales justify a high failure rate doesn't have any basis so it was really a pointless comparison just to put how bad OCZ's quality really is into perspective.
My statement is perfectly relevant. OCZ sells the most SSDs period, meaning they are subjective to higher failure rates than any other SSD brand simply because more people use them. Add on to the Vertex 2 fiasco and you have your problem. Comparing SSD's (a very baby technology) against mechanical drives that have been around decades is completely irrelevant, which is why I completely ignored that.

Yes I understand how failure rates work, and I know that the company who sells more is more likely to fail more too. Still doesn't disprove the fact that over half the people here who have SSDs have OCZ. And out of all of them you are the only one screaming "failure, failure!". Just sayin. I can also say this, more idiots will buy OCZ simply because they are the Corsair of SSDs. Meaning the likelihood of user based failure is also higher.
__________________
"Resolution is just a number." #Ubisoft
Origin/Steam = PP_Mguire Twitch = pp_mguire Instagram = ppmguire PSN = PP_Mguire

Access to my Plex PM me.
PP Mguire is online now  
Old 05-23-2012, 02:58 PM   #17 (permalink)
Mod Emeritus
 
Puddle Jumper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,286
Default Re: ssd's

Quote:
Originally Posted by PP Mguire View Post
My statement is perfectly relevant. OCZ sells the most SSDs period, meaning they are subjective to higher failure rates than any other SSD brand simply because more people use them. Add on to the Vertex 2 fiasco and you have your problem. Comparing SSD's (a very baby technology) against mechanical drives that have been around decades is completely irrelevant, which is why I completely ignored that.

Yes I understand how failure rates work, and I know that the company who sells more is more likely to fail more too. Still doesn't disprove the fact that over half the people here who have SSDs have OCZ. And out of all of them you are the only one screaming "failure, failure!". Just sayin. I can also say this, more idiots will buy OCZ simply because they are the Corsair of SSDs. Meaning the likelihood of user based failure is also higher.
What you are saying doesn't make any sense. Failure_rate= number_of_failures_in_sample/sample_size. Since failure rate is the percentage of a product that fails it doesn't matter how many you sold provided that number is large enough for a reasonable sample, and it is for any relevant SSD vendor.

I'm not surprised you think it's unfair to compare SSDs to mechanical drives since it makes OCZ look bad, on the other hand Intel, Samsung and Crucial all have failure rates that are a tiny fraction of any HDD manufacturer. Clearly the problem isn't with SSD technology in general, it's with OCZ.

I don't have a problem with anyone preferring to use OCZ drives in their system but I do have a problem with people ignoring facts when they recommend products to others simply because those facts make their favorite brand look bad. There is no place for fanboyism in product recommendations.
__________________

AMD Phenom II x4 955 Black Edition : Asus M4A89GTD PRO : Corsair 550VX
G.SKILL Ripjaws 4x2gb DDR3 1600 : MSI Geforce GTX 770 2gb : Antec 300
OCZ Agility 2 60gb SSD (OS) : SanDisk Ultra 120gb SSD (Apps) : Crucial M500 240gb (Steam) : Win 8.1 Pro 64bit
2x Samsung 2494LW & 1x Dell U2312HM Eyefinity

Lenovo ThinkPad X220 : Core i5 2410M : 12.5" 1366x768 IPS LED display : Intel 320 Series 120gb SSD

Samsung Galaxy Note 3 stock 4.3 : Nexus 7 2 stock 4.4

Puddle Jumper is offline  
Old 05-23-2012, 04:11 PM   #18 (permalink)
Build Guru
 
PP Mguire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 28,285
Default Re: ssd's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puddle Jumper View Post
What you are saying doesn't make any sense. Failure_rate= number_of_failures_in_sample/sample_size. Since failure rate is the percentage of a product that fails it doesn't matter how many you sold provided that number is large enough for a reasonable sample, and it is for any relevant SSD vendor.

I'm not surprised you think it's unfair to compare SSDs to mechanical drives since it makes OCZ look bad, on the other hand Intel, Samsung and Crucial all have failure rates that are a tiny fraction of any HDD manufacturer. Clearly the problem isn't with SSD technology in general, it's with OCZ.

I don't have a problem with anyone preferring to use OCZ drives in their system but I do have a problem with people ignoring facts when they recommend products to others simply because those facts make their favorite brand look bad. There is no place for fanboyism in product recommendations.
Except, you are still missing both points to try and prove your point. First and foremost, you have to have a higher sale rate to have a higher failure rate. The less product being pushed means less product to fail and vice verse. Period. Product can't fail if it isn't being used by the public. OCZ sells more units than any other SSD manufacturer meaning they will have more units to fail. It's quite simple the concept really.
So yes, the amount of product being sold DOES have an absolute effect on the amount that CAN fail, hence leaving you with your failure rate.

I don't care if OCZ looks bad. Their sales alone make them look good no matter what you want to say. That is also fact. Another fact, is you can't directly compare mechanical drives to SSDs because they are two completely different technologies. Period. It simply isn't something you can argue over. One uses the age old platter technology and another uses relatively new flash technology. It is very typical for a technology as a whole to fail more when it is in its infancy state than something that is tried and true.

We recommend OCZ because they are fast, cheap, and simply work. They are also a well known brand because of all them units being sold previously mentioned. If OCZ was really that bad, then you wouldn't see so many OCZ SSDs sitting in a ton of enthusiast machines. I'm not ignoring facts here, you are.
If I was being a fanboy I would tell every person here to grab an Intel/Nvidia rig simply because they are best. I don't do that. I recommend product based on needs, budget, and personal experience. From what you are saying, every single rig ever being built here I would replace their SSD with an OCZ Vertex or Agility drive. I don't.
__________________
"Resolution is just a number." #Ubisoft
Origin/Steam = PP_Mguire Twitch = pp_mguire Instagram = ppmguire PSN = PP_Mguire

Access to my Plex PM me.
PP Mguire is online now  
Old 05-23-2012, 04:17 PM   #19 (permalink)
TF's First Dry Ice User!
 
Peter.Cort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 5,018
Default Re: ssd's

failure rate isn't judged by the number of total failures. it's a percentage of the total amount sold... If you're looking at absolute numbers of failed drives, then yeah what you're saying makes some sense, but people don't really look at it that way. It's all about percentages because it puts it on an even level. If OCZ had a 10% failure rate because 100 out of 1000 drives failed, it's the same rate as a company that sold 10 drives and 1 failed, and the percentage is what people look at because it gives context to the exact number of failures.
__________________
A notice to EVERYONE who has posted here with a computer problem, I highly encourage you to keep current with the forums, even if it's browsing for 10-15 minutes during lunch, or before you go to bed at night. There are many things that you can learn and apply to future issues. My goal is to help people get to a point where they can use their own knowledge to help themselves, and others.

Also please use the search button. You've got a 50/50 chance that someone's asked your question and we've answered it.
Peter.Cort is offline  
Old 05-23-2012, 04:31 PM   #20 (permalink)
Build Guru
 
PP Mguire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 28,285
Default Re: ssd's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter.Cort View Post
failure rate isn't judged by the number of total failures. it's a percentage of the total amount sold... If you're looking at absolute numbers of failed drives, then yeah what you're saying makes some sense, but people don't really look at it that way. It's all about percentages because it puts it on an even level. If OCZ had a 10% failure rate because 100 out of 1000 drives failed, it's the same rate as a company that sold 10 drives and 1 failed, and the percentage is what people look at because it gives context to the exact number of failures.
Which is exactly what is wrong with this world.

I'll make one final point on this then I'm done. Despite his "data" being shown, you still decided to get an OCZ drive. Check mate.
__________________

__________________
"Resolution is just a number." #Ubisoft
Origin/Steam = PP_Mguire Twitch = pp_mguire Instagram = ppmguire PSN = PP_Mguire

Access to my Plex PM me.
PP Mguire is online now  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
120GB SSD vs 2X 60GB SSD via RAID 0 llBradll New Systems | Building and Buying 2 02-06-2012 03:35 PM
ocz ssd vs kingston ssd? gordonie Monitors, Printers and Peripherals 4 11-11-2011 07:28 PM
Can you have a SSD 60GB as a boot drive and a 500GB HDD for storage but have smart response enabled on the SSD? matteuk New Systems | Building and Buying 2 07-27-2011 01:12 PM
mSATA SSD vs SATA SSD Jayce Laptops and Notebooks 1 06-29-2011 10:11 AM
SSD TRIM Function Intel X25 SSD thesilversavers Monitors, Printers and Peripherals 19 05-22-2011 10:04 PM



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.