Intel SSD 660p: 512GB Of NVMe Storage For $99 USD

[Vistaus]

And WHERE THE FUCK are you hurrying all the time? "Desktop boot is 7 sec instead of 16, which is major difference". Bla-bla-bla.. are you people rebooting your PC's in every 2 minutes or what? When you do it once a day it does not matter a zip if it's taking 5seconds or 15. When it indeed does bother you - please, go see a doctor over anxiety syndrome.

And WHERE THE FUCK did I say that I NEED it to boot in 7 seconds? In fact, I never said I CARE about 7 vs 16 seconds, I just CORRECTED the person I quoted about how much the boot time improves with an SSD. Whether I care or not is a different matter. In fact, I don't even care about 7 vs 16 seconds boot time.

[perpetually high]

One last update from me as I know this has nothing to do with the Intel 660p but everything to do with torsionbar28 (lol, kidding). So I got around to running CrystalMark on the HDD my pops had, with the 840 PRO I just gave him.

7200 HDD



840 PRO SSD



It's just flat out redonkulous. Do the right thing guys. Life is short, get an SSD.

[M@GOid]

But https://www.computerworld.com/articl...iscovered.html

Hard Drives usually don't die completely and suddenly like that, while it's totally the norm with SSDs, some even have self-destruct mechanisms on them. It's also more viable to have mirrors with HDDs because they're cheaper for large amounts of storage, so... you know, that counts for practical reliability.

Well, I had seeing both HDD and SSD dying without warning. Also, on the article I linked before, some of the SSDs indeed showed signs of failure before stop working. One of them ever allowed copy operations.

But indeed nothing is forever. SSD or HDD, I say we backup the entire filesystem from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

My setup is a small 240GB SSD for the OS and my /home, but all voluminous stuff like video files and games are in a 2TB HDD. A external 3TB USB HDD handles my backups. Since all those drives are approaching or surpassing 5 years of use, I thinking on a new external backup drive, you know, to not cry tomorrow.

Still, for all people out there still with cold feet about buying a SSD: just do it. Once you are used to a system with a SSD, there is no turning back.

[molecule-eye]

My laptop boots in 7 seconds with an SSD, so 7 seconds vs 16 seconds is a major difference. Maybe not major enough for you, but definitely more than the 4 second difference you mentioned.

How often do you boot your laptop? I have an HTPC that I reboot maybe a few times per year. I leave all the applications open that I need to use, so I'm never opening things from the disk, except media which opens fast enough from a spindle drive. In many cases, I can see that an SSD isn't worth the investment.

[aht0]

Business database applications benefits from a fast drive like do games in customer computers. Have you ever played a PC game and waiting it to start;-)

"Business database" is not exactly average home usage. And OEM branded "office PCs" still come with mechanical drives often enough.

Games - Precisely WHICH online games on Linux platform need to sit on SSD for better loading times? Is there even any? For single player, loading times do not matter. Emulated games run on reduced performance regardless and there loading times tend to be last of your worries. Be happy when you are not losing too much fps and game does not have too many stability issues and extra gameplay-related bugs.

On windows, there is some truth but it's game engine specific. Most load all needed data during the beginning of the round and during the round difference between having a ssd or not, is exactly zero. Because all the needed data is already in system RAM. ARMA3 is the only unoptimized exception I play that benefits from having a ssd (because it would load textures etc when it needs'em from drive) but its graphics engine is clunky anyways in more ways than this and going to be replaced in Arma4. It actually worked well enough with 2 Cheetah's in Raid0 (15krpm SAS HDDs over LSI MegaRaid controller card - but thats not "average home user" solution. Reading performance approaching that of older SSDs).

[untore]

If people claim that hdds have a usecase nowadays they must basically just copy mediafiles and archives back and forth all day. Get a raid of SSHD at least if you live and day by your magnetic storage disks with crazy spinning little heads, that should be quite competitive to cheap ssds. If only manufacturers wouldnt cheap out too much on the quality of the cache cells.
I would like to see a double cache layer plus storage with Intel optane. Something like zfs arc+l2arc+storage at a hardware level.

[Weasel]

"Business database" is not exactly average home usage.

Not to mention it'll probably be stupid to use QLC or even TLC on such a thing.

[aht0]

So precompiled textures are for nothing:-)

I fail to see how this question would relate to the discussion. It's like asking if pre-compiled programs themselves are for nothing.

Loading times for a single player do not matter simply because you are not competing with other players. It does not really matter if your game's data gets loaded in 5 seconds or 10. You do not lose advantages - like not getting into game first and getting to choose ingame assets first before other players.

[Melcar]

In this day and age we need things 5 seconds ago.

[Vistaus]

How often do you boot your laptop? I have an HTPC that I reboot maybe a few times per year. I leave all the applications open that I need to use, so I'm never opening things from the disk, except media which opens fast enough from a spindle drive. In many cases, I can see that an SSD isn't worth the investment.

I reboot my laptop every week, usually b/w 2-6 times (depending on the case - i.e. compiling latest git of my current DE needs a reboot afterwards to fully kick in, and so does a new kernel (rolling release here)).