If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Clone to a SSD
Each week I clone the 2 drives on my computer. Is there any reason NOT to use a SSD to clone TO. Thanks mega1999 |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Clone to a SSD
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Clone to a SSD
Ken1943 wrote on 12/29/2014 7:19 PM:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 19:06:59 -0500, Big_Al wrote: wrote on 12/29/2014 6:09 PM: Each week I clone the 2 drives on my computer. Is there any reason NOT to use a SSD to clone TO. Thanks mega1999 Other than SSD's have a limited # of read/writes. And for static backups IMHO a standard HD is so much cheaper than an SSD. Prices are coming down and you never will see the SPEED of an ssd. Fantastic KenW I just took advantage of those dropping prices and upgraded my laptop to SSD. No argument...it's faster! And they sure are lightweight and quiet! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Clone to a SSD
Big_Al wrote on 12/29/2014 7:59 PM:
I just took advantage of those dropping prices and upgraded my laptop to SSD. No argument...it's faster! How big a drive did you get? How big was the one it replaced? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Clone to a SSD
Alek wrote on 12/29/2014 8:20 PM:
Big_Al wrote on 12/29/2014 7:59 PM: I just took advantage of those dropping prices and upgraded my laptop to SSD. No argument...it's faster! How big a drive did you get? How big was the one it replaced? Went from a 500G HD to 120G SSD. My system was win8 dual booting with Linux mint and then about 350G of a data partition. Data had MP3's, Photos, backup images, etc. All which was duped on other drives elsewhere. So moving the 500G to an enclosure was a no brainer. When I need something it just gets plugged in. I cloned the Linux and Windows + MBR to the SSD and it's great. Linux runs like a champ, it was fast to begin with, now it screams. Makes me think long about where the road will lead me with windows 10. But that's another story. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Clone to a SSD
Ken1943 wrote:
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 19:06:59 -0500, Big_Al wrote: wrote on 12/29/2014 6:09 PM: Each week I clone the 2 drives on my computer. Is there any reason NOT to use a SSD to clone TO. Thanks mega1999 Other than SSD's have a limited # of read/writes. And for static backups IMHO a standard HD is so much cheaper than an SSD. Prices are coming down and you never will see the SPEED of an ssd. Fantastic KenW Hard drives are actually getting faster on sequential. Of the four drives available by the pull-down menu here, a couple do 210MB/sec. Which is faster than the old record of 180MB/sec for the WD 600GB drive. So if you need to clone, this isn't actually that bad. Beats the 135MB/sec of the drives I use. It's nice to see the pressure offered by SSDs, squeeze a bit more performance out of hard drives. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8772/s...-6-tb-review/3 On SSDs, the real performance is on the PCI Express card ones. Which presumably have changed from storage-chip plus SATA-drive-module, to a native PCI Express solution. Paul |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Clone to a SSD
On 12/29/2014 7:06 PM, Big_Al wrote:
wrote on 12/29/2014 6:09 PM: Each week I clone the 2 drives on my computer. Is there any reason NOT to use a SSD to clone TO. Thanks mega1999 Other than SSD's have a limited # of read/writes. And for static backups IMHO a standard HD is so much cheaper than an SSD. HDDs also have a limited number for read/writes. I have well over a dozen ssds with a zero number of failures. I would say any "limites" are not a factor what-so-ever. I also use external HHDs for backup but SSDs exclusively for clonning. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Clone to a SSD
On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 21:34:52 -0500, Paul wrote:
Ken1943 wrote: On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 19:06:59 -0500, Big_Al wrote: wrote on 12/29/2014 6:09 PM: Each week I clone the 2 drives on my computer. Is there any reason NOT to use a SSD to clone TO. Thanks mega1999 Other than SSD's have a limited # of read/writes. A once a week cloning, which is about 0.14 disk capacity per day, could be a factor, but is unlikely to be if you follow reasonable practice and have at least 3 entries in the backup set. A bigger factor would be the 3 months (typical for high performance drives*) to 1 year storage life when powered down. Connect any drives to a powered up but not booted computer every few months for a day or so. (Some drives require access every once and a while, so you may need to boot to DOS or UNIX and do reads every once in a while.) * The high performance drives are assumed to be busy and some current MLC and TLC drives are only rated for 3 months retention of data when powered down. (Perhaps the expected powered down retention time is much higher for relatively unused cells, but I didn't see any numbers for such when I was looking for 800GB drives recently.) (Flash memory started out with 15 years expected powered down retention time and went to 100 years expected, but since about 2010 capacity has trumped powered down retention time. Even camera memory cards seem to only be rated 1 year retention at end of life. Again, I haven't see estimated times for "new" cells.)) Also, probably not a factor for this use, flash memory tends to use more power when reading or writing than the same capacity spinning drive unless the capacity is "low". For example, a 2TB spinning disk probably uses more power than 2TB of SSD when being read or written. And for static backups IMHO a standard HD is so much cheaper than an SSD. Prices are coming down and you never will see the SPEED of an ssd. Fantastic KenW Hard drives are actually getting faster on sequential. Of the four drives available by the pull-down menu here, a couple do 210MB/sec. Which is faster than the old record of 180MB/sec for the WD 600GB drive. So if you need to clone, this isn't actually that bad. Beats the 135MB/sec of the drives I use. It's nice to see the pressure offered by SSDs, squeeze a bit more performance out of hard drives. http://www.anandtech.com/show/8772/s...-6-tb-review/3 On SSDs, the real performance is on the PCI Express card ones. Which presumably have changed from storage-chip plus SATA-drive-module, to a native PCI Express solution. Paul |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|