|
|
|
|
|
|
by userbinator
1752 days ago
|
|
|
What do you think of the fact that 100K SLC used to be the norm, 2-bit MLC has an endurance of 10K, 3-bit "TLC" (awful misnomer) gets ~1K, and 4-bit "QLC" (even worse misnomer) in the low hundreds from what I've heard (they are very secretive about it)? That's an exponential decrease in reliability for a mere multiplicative increase in capacity. "The new product stores 4x as much but lasts less than 1/100th as long" doesn't sound good, but that's the reality of what NAND flash industry is like. Meanwhile what little SLC is still available but priced far above what the cost/capacity would suggest, encouraging use of the cheaper and less reliable stuff. Manufacturers playing tricks with things like "SLC cache" and the like. Doesn't that seem suspiciously like planned obolescence? |
|
|
The intel 670p (using 3D4 QLC) can do 370 TB of writes for the 1 TB model. [1] That makes it terrible for a DB, but perfectly fine for a media server. And other than the limit on total writes, it's overall a good performer at an affordable price. It also does clever things in converting some of QLC to SLC as a variably sized cache, so that smaller, more ephemeral written data doesn't affect it as much. [2]
If you want high endurance, you can get an Optane drive, like [3] which can do 17.52 PB on a similarly sized drive.
[1] https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/204109/...
[2] https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-ssd-670p-m-2-nvme...
[3] https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/147529/...