Small SLC SSD boot drive

[RyzenMaster.sys]

Regardless, the durability of Intel SSD's is not the question the OP posted. Let's stay focused on their request.

Simply trying to name some reccomendations for reliabile drives to an op who is concerned about reliability of their SSD.

 

[Wooden Law - Black]

The 600p was made in very late 2018, so no it's not that old.

Uhm… yes, 32L flash is old and EOL. I’m talking about the flash, not the SSD itself (even though a SSD’s fail due to the flash endurance is very rare).

 

[lexluthermiester]

Simply trying to name some reccomendations for reliabile drives to an op who is concerned about reliability of their SSD.

But you didn't pay attention to what they were asking about. So your suggestion doesn't fit the need. IF you're going to take the time to help someone, try to actually be helpful.

 

[Chrispy_]

Buying SLC outside of enterprise channels is now very difficult and buying just one, low-capacity SLC enterprise drive as private individual is not going to be cost-effective, nor worth your time. If you're looking to use it solely as an OS swapfile location, look out for an old Intel Optane M.2 accelerator on ebay or something; They came in 16GB and 32GB capacities and have huge IOPS and endurance.

If you want higher-capacity performance and endurance, you should still be able to find MLC NAND - the 970 Pro is what I normally use for write-caches in rackmount storage that gets hammered for terabytes a day, petabyte(s) a year. The downside is that they're getting harder to buy and 512GB is the smallest size they make.

 

[ThrashZone]

Given that life, speed (and price) decreases with multi-level solid state drives

• SLC (single level)
• MLC (dual level)
• TLC (tri level)
• QLC (quad level)
• PLC (five level)

are there any small SLC SSD drives that might be suited for booting and so could take the stress of memory paging? I am guessing 64-128GB

Hi,
Smallest ssd I've got is crucial mx-100 128gb still work to this day very old probably dirt cheap if around.

Crucial MX500 250GB 3D NAND SATA 2.5-inch 7mm (with 9.5mm adapter) Internal SSD | CT250MX500SSD1 | Crucial.com

Buy Crucial MX500 250GB 3D NAND SATA 2.5-inch 7mm (with 9.5mm adapter) Internal SSD CT250MX500SSD1. FREE US Delivery, guaranteed 100% compatibility when ordering using our online tools.

www.crucial.com

 

[ExcuseMeWtf]

optane can be considered as slc (technically its got different type of memory, but longevty-wise its ~ slc), currently using 32gig as os drive.


i had experienced 2 tlc and 1 mlc failures in my rig, so cant really relate. (wd green 240gb, Kingston A400 and Crucial BX300). Neither of the 3 lasted more than 2 years.

Are you sure those were related to NAND exhausting its lifetime? At this timespan I sincerely doubt that.

I had 2 Crucial M4 64GBs last 8 years, then both fail shortly one after the other, so I can be reasonably sure in my cases it was lifetime related.

FTR I have Kioxia Exceria 1TB now and if there are no specific faults I'm pretty sure it will last at least as long, despite being TLC vs MLC on previous Crucials. Keep in mind that bigger drive means more space for controller to do the wear levelling.

 

[Shrek]

Hi,
Smallest ssd I've got is crucial mx-100 128gb still work to this day very old probably dirt cheap if around.

Crucial MX500 250GB 3D NAND SATA 2.5-inch 7mm (with 9.5mm adapter) Internal SSD | CT250MX500SSD1 | Crucial.com

Buy Crucial MX500 250GB 3D NAND SATA 2.5-inch 7mm (with 9.5mm adapter) Internal SSD CT250MX500SSD1. FREE US Delivery, guaranteed 100% compatibility when ordering using our online tools.

www.crucial.com

Just an observation

250GB $50
500GB $60

So, I'd go large


Here is a thought, if QLC gives 4 times the capacity for the same cost (it's probably not as good as this) then a 128GB SLC might cost the same as 512GB QLC; if so that seems a small price to pay for 1000 times greater endurance.

 

[dgianstefani]

Optane 800p 118gb. It's what I use.

 

[ThrashZone]

Just an observation

250GB $50
500GB $60

So, I'd go large

Hi,
Saw a used 128 mx-100 on ebay for 20.us
But yes not many small ssd's anymore
But MX 500 is better than the BX 500 line just not slc so I have to agree move on to a tlc and crucial it pretty good on the mx lineup
All my old mx ssd's still in operation all pretty much from 2010-11

 

[TheLostSwede]

Here you go.

SFSA128GM1AA4TO-I-NC-616-STD Swissbit | Memory Cards, Modules | DigiKey

Order today, ships today. SFSA128GM1AA4TO-I-NC-616-STD – Solid State Drive (SSD) FLASH - NAND (SLC) 128GB SATA III M.2 Module 3.3V from Swissbit. Pricing and Availability on millions of electronic components from Digi-Key Electronics.

www.digikey.com

 

[lexluthermiester]

Just an observation

250GB $50
500GB $60

So, I'd go large

You could go Leven 1TB for $68.

https://www.amazon.com/Leven-JS600-Internal-Solid-JS600SSD1TB/dp/B07YBYZQ1V

Or TeamGroup 1TB for $69

https://www.amazon.com/TEAMGROUP-AX2-Internal-Compatible-T253A3001T0C101/dp/B08CKFDPJ3

Both drives are of good quality. Given that small SSD's are nearly half the cost of a large drive...
I know it's not want you asked for in the OP but since it's being discussed.

Keep in mind that bigger drive means more free space for controller to do the wear levelling.

There's also this to consider.

 

[Shrek]

Here you go.

SFSA128GM1AA4TO-I-NC-616-STD Swissbit | Memory Cards, Modules | DigiKey

Order today, ships today. SFSA128GM1AA4TO-I-NC-616-STD – Solid State Drive (SSD) FLASH - NAND (SLC) 128GB SATA III M.2 Module 3.3V from Swissbit. Pricing and Availability on millions of electronic components from Digi-Key Electronics.

www.digikey.com

Umm... OK, your point is made... (only $1,517.25)

Opps

You could go Leven 1TB for $68.

https://www.amazon.com/Leven-JS600-Internal-Solid-JS600SSD1TB/dp/B07YBYZQ1V

Or TeamGroup 1TB for $69

https://www.amazon.com/TEAMGROUP-AX2-Internal-Compatible-T253A3001T0C101/dp/B08CKFDPJ3

Both drives are of good quality. Given that small SSD's are nearly half the cost of a large drive...
I know it's not want you asked for in the OP but since it's being discussed.


There's also this to consider.

Wow prices are really going down.

 

[TheLostSwede]

Umm... OK, your point is made... (only $1,517.25)

Opps

Better?

SNT2A128GKKDCAA0ESA0 TDK Corporation | Memory Cards, Modules | DigiKey

Order today, ships today. SNT2A128GKKDCAA0ESA0 – Solid State Drive (SSD) FLASH - NAND (SLC) 128GB SATA III M.2 Module 3.3V from TDK Corporation. Pricing and Availability on millions of electronic components from Digi-Key Electronics.

www.digikey.com

 

[Shrek]

Better?

SNT2A128GKKDCAA0ESA0 TDK Corporation | Memory Cards, Modules | DigiKey

Order today, ships today. SNT2A128GKKDCAA0ESA0 – Solid State Drive (SSD) FLASH - NAND (SLC) 128GB SATA III M.2 Module 3.3V from TDK Corporation. Pricing and Availability on millions of electronic components from Digi-Key Electronics.

www.digikey.com

Well yes... but

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Aren't the qlc crappy out and were only said to be good for data storage in the first place ?

 

[Kapone33]

Unfortunately the race in NVME was to the bottom and not the top. QLC was the goal from the beginning but does not have the perceived endurance so the "performance" drives all have TLC. SLC are not any longer viable as they cost too much and they have software to mitigate that illusion now. Using that principle I would get a 500GB Kingston NV1 for $50 and call it George. If you want endurance buy a PCIe card(removable) with a controller but that will cost you.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Wow prices are really going down.

And those are good quality drives. They are DRAMless, but both are 3DTLC based and will not disappoint. If you're on a budget(times are tough, no shame if you are), both of those drives can serve your needs.

 

[RyzenMaster.sys]

Would not reccomend a budget dramless drive since you are very concerned about longevity for reasons I've stated before. It's worth it to spend the extra money for a higher end drive if you have the ability too. Faster and should last longer.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Would not reccomend a budget dramless drive since you are very concerned about longevity for reasons I've stated before. It's worth it to spend the extra money for a higher end drive if you have the ability too.

Nonsense. I use them all the time and have been for years. Even Kingspec dramless drives work perfectly. Context is important. Shrek is doing this on a budget. Premium drives might not fit that need.

 

[The red spirit]

I don't have experience with qlc/plc, but for a normal daily usage you are good to go with any kind/form of ssd.
If you plan to write the drive fully, on daily basis than probably stick with slc with big spare area, but other than this you should no worries.

Not at all. QLC is pretty bad as it is. It's really slow and lacks reliability. It's not even meaningfully cheaper to be worth considering.

 

[Chrispy_]

Nonsense. I use them all the time and have been for years. Even Kingspec dramless drives work perfectly. Context is important. Shrek is doing this on a budget. Premium drives might not fit that need.

Exactly - The DRAMless SN570 one of the fastest drives tested by W1zzard in ages, and it's dirt cheap.
DRAMless usually means cheap, it doesn't always mean bad.

 

[lexluthermiester]

DRAMless usually means cheap, it doesn't always mean bad.

Exactly!

 

[Chrispy_]

Not at all. QLC is pretty bad as it is. It's really slow and lacks reliability. It's not even meaningfully cheaper to be worth considering.

QLC hasn't proven any less reliable than other NAND types yet.
I'll agree that you shouldn't look at QLC unless it's significantly cheaper than TLC, because it is slower when subjected to sustained writes and you're getting lower endurance for sure.

 

[lexluthermiester]

QLC hasn't proven any less reliable than other NAND types yet.

BullMuffins! I have replaced more failing/failed QLC based drives in the last two years than any other type of drive combined in the same period, regardless of the age of the drive.

 

[The red spirit]

QLC hasn't proven any less reliable than other NAND types yet.
I'll agree that you shouldn't look at QLC unless it's significantly cheaper than TLC, because it is slower when subjected to sustained writes and you're getting lower endurance for sure.

It already has way less rated writes and they are really low for long term use. It's essentially a disposable technology.