Which SSD to use as main?

[Sptz]

Hi all,

So I've been using a Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus 2TB since April for my main PC and, well, yesterday I got a CRITICAL_PROCESS_DIED BSOD and the drive is fully dead. It detected only once in BIOS afterwards, tried to format and re-install Win11 but it crashed again and was BTFO'd completely. So I've filled in the warranty with Sabrent but I needed a drive quickly as I use my PC for work as well.

I went out and bought a Samsung 980 Pro 1TB but also purchased (forgot to cancel) a WD SN850X 2TB from Amazon which is arriving today. I've already installed Win11 on the Samsung and wasn't really that keen on re-installing, configuring software, settings etc, all over again.

My questions are as follows:

1. Keep SN850X or Rocket 4 Plus (when replacement arrives)?
2. If keeping either, is it worth to move either of those two to M2A_CPU (where Samsung is atm) and re-install everything and use that as the main drive, with either WD, or Sabrent or Samsung as secondary?
3. If I keep the Samsung as primary is the difference between it and the other two drastic? Mainly for gaming.
4. My main fear is that the Rocket 4 Plus ends up dying again. I never had an SSD fail before. When this happened I looked online and saw some videos and posts commenting on failures of this very drive.

Thanks!

 

[P4-630]

Leave OS on 980 Pro 1TB, it's fast enough. (I'm using this for just over a year for OS as well)

Maybe keep the WD SN850X 2TB for games/storage.

 

[csendesmark]

I agree with @P4-630
For system /programs drive, you should be okay with 512GB/1TB, and then you can separate your data files from the system partition.
I have a 970 PRO 512 for the same purpose for 5 years now.
Also would recommend to use the CPU_M2 for the system drive.
On faulty thing, I recently lost my Samsung 980 PRO 2TB, while I only used it as temp drive for photos and videos, used up less than 1% TBW.
It is sh*t but happens, this was my first time to lost an SSD, to be more on the safe side in the future: I bought a Gigabyte AORUS Gen4 AIC Adaptor

AORUS Gen4 AIC Adaptor Key Features | SSD - GIGABYTE Global

GIGABYTE, Chassis, Thermal Solution, Power Supply, gamer, PSU

www.gigabyte.com

To keep em colder.
So the SSD-s outside of the system drive in the CPU_M2 are now located under my 1kg copper heatsink. But only do this if your motherboard can give you at least 1 PCIe slot at least with 8 lanes while you have a VGA card in the first PCIe 16× slot.

 

[nomdeplume]

With noted care to avoid upsetting anyone. I will reposit your title.

What drive(s) should I use as a backup to main OS drive?

SATA SSD for reasonable speed transferring files to M.2 to satisfy your first (onsite copy) backup is a very reasonable practice. For the second backup HDD are more proven as cold storage capable. No matter how you go about this you will not miss but a fraction of a beat in your work and personal computing. If you keep backup copies of your files in a recent state.

 

[csendesmark]

What drive(s) should I use as a backup to main OS drive?

If you want a drive specifically for archive/backup reasons, I would not recommend any SSD-s
For the purpose I would recommend a NAS or Datacenter HDD,
HDD-s have several time better endurance and for the same buck you can have several times larger storage.
It's an absolute no-brainer.

 

[nomdeplume]

If you want a drive specifically for archive/backup reasons, I would not recommend any SSD-s
For the purpose I would recommend a NAS or Datacenter HDD,
HDD-s have several time better endurance and for the same buck you can have several times larger storage.
It's an absolute no-brainer.

I keep a full copy of OS drive on a SSD so if a failure occurs the impact is minimal. Be that total drive failure or just ease of dealing with some corrupt files.

To each their own. That step backwards to spinning HDD is a painfully slow one.

 

[csendesmark]

I keep a full copy of OS drive on a SSD so if a failure occurs the impact is minimal. Be that total drive failure or just ease of dealing with some corrupt files.

To each their own. That step backwards to spinning HDD is a painfully slow one.

Question: How often you have to do it tho?
For myself, I installed Win7 once then upgraded it to Win10, and I probably did not it since 2005 or 2006, I don't really remember the last time, and I have good memory.

And just to drive home my previous point,
None of the big tech companies using SSD for backup where data loss are not acceptable, not even on places where high availability is paramount.
Or if there are SSD backups then must be a HDD behind them.
Because the data is more secure, and you won't believe which media is the absolute best for backups, that's right, magnetic tapes, some of them are rated for 50 years.

Back on your point to say "HDD is a painfully slow"
well, my whole sys drive hold 148GB which 28.5GB is Windows
means a full backup should take around ~500s
and a Windows directory restoration about ~100s

So again, how often do you doing it?
You cannot say I have a bias against SSD-s just check my specs, but what you mentioned is highly wasteful and not even the best solution regarding the wastefulness .

 

[A Computer Guy]

Question: How often you have to do it tho?
For myself, I installed Win7 once then upgraded it to Win10, and I probably did not it since 2005 or 2006, I don't really remember the last time, and I have good memory.

And just to drive home my previous point,
None of the big tech companies using SSD for backup where data loss are not acceptable, not even on places where high availability is paramount.
Or if there are SSD backups then must be a HDD behind them.
Because the data is more secure, and you won't believe which media is the absolute best for backups, that's right, magnetic tapes, some of them are rated for 50 years.

Back on your point to say "HDD is a painfully slow"
well, my whole sys drive hold 148GB which 28.5GB is Windows
means a full backup should take around ~500s
and a Windows directory restoration about ~100s

So again, how often do you doing it?
You cannot say I have a bias against SSD-s just check my specs, but what you mentioned is highly wasteful and not even the best solution regarding the wastefulness .

I use my older SSD's like 180GB/256GB Intel for OS image backups. It's pretty fast and convenient with USB3 for a capacity that I don't otherwise use anymore other than as a gigantic USB flash drive.

 

[nomdeplume]

Back on your point to say "HDD is a painfully slow"
well, my whole sys drive hold 148GB which 28.5GB is Windows
means a full backup should take around ~500s
and a Windows directory restoration about ~100s

Great, glad things are working so well in your system.

Why the highly judgmental stance tho?

I use my older SSD's like 180GB/256GB Intel for OS image backups. It's pretty fast and convenient with USB3 for a capacity that I don't otherwise use anymore other than as a gigantic USB flash drive.

Exactly this. If it doesn't apply to the OP's situation all it would take is saying so. Common sense is to have some kind of backup if work or other critical tasks will be impacted.

 

[csendesmark]

I use my older SSD's like 180GB/256GB Intel for OS image backups.

Now that you saying this, I might still have my old Win7 installment on my very first SSD

Great, glad things are working so well in your system.

I spending too much time on deciding what to get, old habits die hard
But I still can't say that I never regret of getting a specific part.
Used to work in a computer fix and repair shop for 6 years

Why the highly judgmental stance tho?

It was you who were judgmental towards HDDs, while you agreed with @A Computer Guy who using it with USB3 which is mostly nullifies it's main advantage (speed).

And you did not answer my question, why would it be "painful" waiting even 10 minutes to have your system restored from image?
That's just a time to get a coffee or tea

 

[A Computer Guy]

It was you who were judgmental towards HDDs, while you agreed with @A Computer Guy who using it with USB3 which is mostly nullifies it's main advantage (speed).

I'm not sure what you mean here. USB 3.2 Gen1 5Gbps should be about on par to SATA SSD transfer speeds so if you have an old SATA SSD and USB3 enclosure your not really losing any speed from that.

If you are using imaging software with compression the transfer speed writing out the backup will be knocked down significantly so practically that might not be as much difference in overall backup speed between SSD and HDD (as a USB3 destination) however the verification cycle and restore after making the backup might benefit greatly from the SSD speed. Other benefits of using SATA SSD include a bit more durability in handling as a USB device, physical space savings, and not needing separate power adaptor (this might depend on the model of SSD and quality of USB port).

I'm not knocking HDD's as reliable or effective solutions as backup devices. Depending on your use case the amount of redundancy and convenience very. For example I keep two images of my PC that matters one on my NAS (with redundancy and scrubbing) and one on my USB3 SSD (with image verification). As a home user if I need a restore in a pinch I'm reaching for that USB3 with the built in tools to boot and restore. If that USB drive fails I've still got my redundant image on NAS but that takes way longer to restore.

And just to drive home my previous point,
None of the big tech companies using SSD for backup where data loss are not acceptable, not even on places where high availability is paramount.

Big companies need both redundancy and capacity. HDD's still rule in capacity per dollar. It's not practical for large companies to use SSD for backup unless there is a specific need.

Or if there are SSD backups then must be a HDD behind them.

This is a good idea if nothing more than keeping a 2nd copy (or more) of what you need.

Back on your point to say "HDD is a painfully slow"
well, my whole sys drive hold 148GB which 28.5GB is Windows
means a full backup should take around ~500s
and a Windows directory restoration about ~100s

In my case my system drive is about 128GB of data that compresses nicely to about 50GB but I do a good job of separating my OS installation from other stuff which is key for an OS only backup.
With incremental, compression, encryption, and verification it takes me under 10 minutes weekly until the next full reimage and the incremental cycle starts again.

So again, how often do you doing it?

In my case weekly.

but what you mentioned is highly wasteful and not even the best solution regarding the wastefulness .

Perhaps you can elaborate on your point of wastefulness because I don't get it. On a 180GB SSD from umpteen years ago (that was my OS drive) that's plenty of space for an initial image and quite a few incremental revisions. Many people probably have older SSD's where the drive capacity is not enough for practical use so this is a pretty good use of something that might otherwise be discarded. Eventually the nand will wear out and then it will be junk but an incremental backup usage cycle isn't writing TB per day in this scenario so endurance should be adequate for years. Even if you get a new SATA SSD a 500GB one can be had today for under $40 making SATA SSD via USB3 for OS partition backup/restore both cheap, fast, durable, and convenient.

 

[csendesmark]

USB 3.2 Gen1 5Gbps should be about on par to SATA SSD

That was my point, who would buy a sata SSD when it basically costs the same as any regular gen3 m.2 nvme.

In my case weekly.

As I understood you doing it manually via USB, are you planning to automate it with a network drive instead?

Perhaps you can elaborate on your point of wastefulness because I don't get it.

My point is I would not buy any sata SSD, except if there is a very specific need.
Would get a nice several (6 or 6+)TB sata HDD for archive data for that price.
Getting an 500GB SSD sounds like a waste, since you will be limiting yourself for storage space,
A 6TB HDD costs ~3 times more but will hold ~12× more data, and you buy these for longer periods.

 

[Solaris17]

Listen, people are saying a lot and I didn’t even read it. Throw caution to the wind buy a second drive put them in raid 0 and embrace indecision.

 

[Solid State Soul ( SSS )]

Keep the Samsung

 

[A Computer Guy]

Hi all,

So I've been using a Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus 2TB since April for my main PC and, well, yesterday I got a CRITICAL_PROCESS_DIED BSOD and the drive is fully dead. It detected only once in BIOS afterwards, tried to format and re-install Win11 but it crashed again and was BTFO'd completely. So I've filled in the warranty with Sabrent but I needed a drive quickly as I use my PC for work as well.

I went out and bought a Samsung 980 Pro 1TB but also purchased (forgot to cancel) a WD SN850X 2TB from Amazon which is arriving today. I've already installed Win11 on the Samsung and wasn't really that keen on re-installing, configuring software, settings etc, all over again.

My questions are as follows:

1. Keep SN850X or Rocket 4 Plus (when replacement arrives)?
2. If keeping either, is it worth to move either of those two to M2A_CPU (where Samsung is atm) and re-install everything and use that as the main drive, with either WD, or Sabrent or Samsung as secondary?
3. If I keep the Samsung as primary is the difference between it and the other two drastic? Mainly for gaming.
4. My main fear is that the Rocket 4 Plus ends up dying again. I never had an SSD fail before. When this happened I looked online and saw some videos and posts commenting on failures of this very drive.

Thanks!

I would go against the grain here from other recommendations and say put in the SN850X. WD provides cloning software (https://support-en.wd.com/app/answers/detailweb/a_id/19825#acronis34) so you can clone your Samsung image to the SN850X. Use your other NVMe slot to have both drives installed and perform the transfer. Then reconfigure the SN850X to the CPU's M.2. This way you won't have the hassle of a reinstall and you get the benefits of the faster and larger capacity NVMe. Then use the Sabrent as secondary and keep backups in case the Sabrent dies again.

If you keep the Samsung make sure the firmware is updated ASAP on it because there was bad firmware at some point with older 980 Pro's killing drives if I remember correctly.

That was my point, who would buy a sata SSD when it basically costs the same as any regular gen3 m.2 nvme.

That might depend if the user has any NVMe slots available. Also older laptops. Anyway this is probably drifting off topic so I'll end it here after this reply.

As I understood you doing it manually via USB, are you planning to automate it with a network drive instead?

I have it scheduled to do backup to both USB and NAS.

My point is I would not buy any sata SSD, except if there is a very specific need.

Understandable. Also on that note many AM4 boards support hotplug so using an eSata connector with an eSata Enclosure (make sure to get one with modern speeds) becomes feasible in situations where the case might not have room for full size HDD's.

 

[csendesmark]

That might depend if the user has any NVMe slots available. Also older laptops. Anyway this is probably drifting off topic so I'll end it here after this reply.

You are right, but I tried to answer specifically @Sptz 's question, he has two m.2 connectors on his Gigabyte B550I AORUS PRO AX

Understandable. Also on that note many AM4 boards support hotplug so using an eSata connector with an eSata Enclosure (make sure to get one with modern speeds) becomes feasible in situations where the case might not have room for full size HDD's.

His case should be able to handle at least 2 regular HDDs

 

[Solid State Soul ( SSS )]

Mx500, cheap, reliable, dram cache, good product overall

 

[Shou Miko]

Leave OS on 980 Pro 1TB, it's fast enough. (I'm using this for just over a year for OS as well)
View attachment 300472

Maybe keep the WD SN850X 2TB for games/storage.

I can understand for laptop use if there is only one M.2. slot for storage going for a bigger drive but for desktop limit it to 512GB/1TB is more than enough for most people when they have another one for games.

I have a Gigabyte M30 1TB Gen3 NVME with 2GB DDR3L cache and it works great no hiccups and doesn't cost an arm an a leg and runs cooler than any Samsung NVME drive I had.

I am thinking about one more for my desktop and one for my T480 as storage (Yes I use a NVME 2242 as OS drive in my T480 in the LTE M.2. slot and have the normal tray free).