Do you own an SSD (or more)? Please participate in the SSD Reliability Research.

Do you own an SSD (or several)?

Please participate in the SSD Reliability Research.

It takes less than one minute per SSD.

If you have more SSDs please answer the questions for each one.

We've got 1000 entries sofar.

 

puh, that was work.. i added my intels and others to the list. hope i got the ages more or less right..

 

What is the purpose of this survey in general and the question about PC or Mac in particular?
Does "PC or Mac" refer to the architecture (x86 or ppc) which would put modern Mac's in the PC category and mean that "Others" is for SPARC, ARM etc or does "PC" actually mean "Windows" which would mean this is suppossed to be about operating systems meaning I should pick "Others" since Linux is neither Windows nor MacOS although it runs on a PC (x86)?

btw:
It would look more professional if you could fix the typo's. I know my English is far from being perfect, but this sentence offends even my eyes.

 

The typo's are my fault.. Sorry Fixed.

The purpose of the survey is to provide insight in failure rates of popular SSD's. For example. Intel is supposed to be more releible than OCZ. But how much? The failure rate of X25-M G2 is 1.6% right now. Vertex 2 folows with 12.7%. There isnt enough data to talk about the other models (except the vertex 1: ~25% failure)

The PC/mac question refers to the operating. I admit the question is kinda useless for failure rates, but it can be used to predict witch particular drive is more popular if... well, you brought a mac. Higher capacity drives are also a lot more popular with mac's than on PC's

 

debguy: there where quite different frequencies of reports on osx than on other pc's (mostly windows, i guess). intel ssds for example reported some issues, none on pc's ever.

the main purpose is to get another statistic. they counted all the complains about buggy ssds on newegg to get some guess on the reliability of each type of drive. this is another approach for the same.

 

Yay, I put in my Crucial C300 and M225, though I noted occasional slowness in the C300 as "The drive still has some minor issues."

 

Well, I had an A-data SF1200 based SSD that sucked, blue screens every 8 or 9 boots, and absolutely refused to resume Windows from sleep on my sandybridge Thinkpad.
If this fits the inclusion criteria I will go ahead and fill it out.

Have a MyDigitalDiscount 64gb mSATA on the way right now, hopefully it fares better.

 

@Darkstone, davepermen: Thanks!

 

My Intel X-25M G2 and Samsung 470 drives have been inputted!

 

Added my Vertex 2, M4, and 320. All is great on the second 2, the V2 still works but takes a crap load of playing with to load Windows on and has slowed noticeably in the last 8 months...

 

Added in my old Intel G2 80 GB, and my current 320 series 160 GB, Vertex 2 80 GB, Agility 2 60 GB, Vertex 1 30 GB.

 

I added my Nova 128, Intel x25-m, Intel 510 and Intel 310.

 

Thanks for your contributions guys.

 

Added my intel 510, but just curious: what is going to prevent spammers or possibly, fans/affiliates of a particular brand from posting hundreds of false entries there? Limiting entries per IP address may not work for people with more than one ssd so you may have to do a manual screening to weed out the suspicious multiple entries from the same IPs...

 

Added my 160GB Intel 320 series drive. Have been using since April 14th and no issues so far...


--

 

lets hope ocz doesn't find it and spams it with thousands of perfect working ocz ssds

 

We're doing manual screening. If some company decides to screw the results, get ready for some bad PR

It does. Every drive you have or had should be inputted.

 

Added in my Intel. Hardy little drive. Has seen about two years of relatively light use (3.92TB total host writes) and it still chugs like a champ. It's been through... three different laptops I think.

 

I added mine as well

 

So did eYe...

 

added my 3.

 

Taking this survey just made me realize what little self-control I have when it comes to buying computer hardware.

 

Added Samsung PM800 and Kingston V+

 

added my x25 M and a c300

 

Interesting read on SSD reliability here.

 

I added my M4 256GB

 

40 GB Intel X25-V XPsp3 (need to run the tool once in a while)
80 GB Intel 320 Win7-Home Premium 64bit
40 GB Intel 320 Win7Ulti32-sp1 on Lat2100

 

Thanks everyone for contributing.

We've got 1258 results now. We'd like to get at least 2000.

Some facts sofar:





Are you a member of other computer related forums? Please post the info from the first post in other forums.

Let's not use SSD vendor specific fora like, Corsair, Intel or OCZ.

 

Mushkin Callisto deluxe 120GB 34nm Version (SF-1200).

No problems so far after 24/7 usage.

 

My gut feeling of getting a few Kingston's or Intel's was right! Although a few thousand $$$ could have been 'saved' - I would be pulling my hair out right now.

Actually surprised at Kingston being worse than OCZ. (But, I know there is only a small sample right now). Not surprised at all by Corsair.

Intel is (still) the reliability king.

 

Yeah samples of Kingston and Crucial are probably not large enough for any valid conclusions.

There's a lot of data on Newegg though.

 

Added my 3 Intel X25 G2s.

 

Adding Intel 510 120gb, OCZ vertex 2 120gb,Crucial m4.

 

Ocz vertex, died twice in less tan two years.
I paid 250 when I bought it.
The good thing is, oczhas super fast replacement process..

 

Any way of adding error bars representing 95% confidence intervals, etc to the graphs for that?

 

Did you add them to the database?

I'm not doing the research but we can ask the person who is.

 

added vertex 2, 120gb.

9 months so far with no issues.

 

Added corsair F120, had it for around 5 months, issues so far:

Windows - drive hangs on read and write scenarios, BSOD when coming out of sleep, boot time slower than it should

OSX - no issues

 

I can't believe how many SSDs Intel sells. Always thought the majority bought OCZ (which confirms what I suspected), though I contributed 3 of them and 2 Intels.

 

OCZ Vertex 1 30GB, ~1.5 years old
-Meets expected speed
-Drive health shows 40% (jumped from 80% after firmware upgrade)

OCZ Vertex 2 60GB , 7months old
-Meets expected speed
-Drive health shows 100%

Crucial M4 128GB , 1 day old
-Meets expected speed (for SATA II, have not tested SATA III)
-Drive health shows 100%

 

All our SSD's are entered, can't wait to see how this turns out.

 

And that was it. You can view the results here:
SSD betrouwbaarheidsonderzoek - De resultaten. - .

If there's enough demand, i'l translate it into English. The pictures should give you an idea however.

 

Well that pretty much seals what we've all been saying. Intel, Cruical, and Samsung are far above the others, though Kingston is surprisingly not that far out. OCZ is in the pits, as we figured. Good to see the stats back it up.

 

I dont think there's enough data to praise kingston and samsung. 60 and 36 samples is... nothing.

I agree with burning down OCZ though, it was a long time ago i recommended an OCZ drive to anyone. Even if they where reliable, i dont like how they mislead customers with highly compressed benchmarks that mean nothing in actual usage.

 

Intel X25M G2, the best all around line.

 

It's no surprise Samsung, Crucial (Micron) and Intel lead the pack (race) as they are the only ones who manufacture their SSD from A to Z.

Thus, they're way ahead of their competition comes the time to fix something as they own their whole process, this includes hardware (chips) and software (controllers and firmware), allowing them to be much efficient in both preventing and fixing issues.

To the contrary, other SSD vendors OEM this, ODM that, put all together and pray for the best... Then, should a problem arise, they have to look here, search there, research everywhere in order to find a fix, which often won't even fix the issue or, sometimes, will even make it worse...

But hey, don't get me wrong, I love to see innovation, which usualy comes along with competition; it's only that I am not so willing to play the guinae pig with my data, even if it's backed up on a regular basis...

 

That is the abosolute truth. This is exactly where they are beating the competitor in reliability. It's kind of like the GM's trying to compete with Toyota or Lexus.

All I have to go by is that my 2 Intels and 1 Samsung 470 have been flawless, while my Corsair has been ****. I would be willing to spend twice as much on a known rock solid SSD compared to one that freezes, BSOD's, etc. To me that is the most important aspect of any SSD; Reliabilty.

 

This is helpful. I will go for the M4..

 

Very nice choice !