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
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
I have a plugin drive socket. Some HDD's get very hot inside it, so I
put a fan on it. Brought temperatures down dramatically. I have a SSD in a 2.5-3.5" converter box that plugs in. Whoever designed the box didn't pay any attention to air flow. I drilled it full of holes, but there's really no internal airflow path from bottom to top. This particular Kingston SV200s3256G runs at 41C with little activity. That's about 10C greater than the spinners in the box. Then I read this article: https://www.anandtech.com/show/9248/...data-retention That suggests that hotter temperatures are less stressful for SSD writes and that data retention is better. Now, I'm wondering if the fan was a bad idea. I bought a Samsung EVO 860 500GB drive, but thought I'd get the kinks worked out on the old Kingston. My rule is, "cooler is better", but seems to fail here. So, What's the optimal operating temperature for an SSD? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
On 12/28/18 2:24 AM, Mike wrote:
I have a plugin drive socket.Â* Some HDD's get very hot inside it, so I put a fan on it.Â* Brought temperatures down dramatically. I have a SSD in a 2.5-3.5" converter box that plugs in. Whoever designed the box didn't pay any attention to air flow. I drilled it full of holes, but there's really no internal airflow path from bottom to top. This particular Kingston SV200s3256G runs at 41C with little activity. That's about 10C greater than the spinners in the box. Then I read this article: https://www.anandtech.com/show/9248/...data-retention That suggests that hotter temperatures are less stressful for SSD writes and that data retention is better. Now, I'm wondering if the fan was a bad idea. I bought a Samsung EVO 860 500GB drive, but thought I'd get the kinks worked out on the old Kingston. My rule is, "cooler is better", but seems to fail here. So, What's the optimal operating temperature for an SSD? Hi Mike, Heat is the enemy of all electronic components. In the failure analysises (MBTF) I did for the military years ago, the failure curve for temperature was not linear, but exponential (e^x). It sky rockets. So I would stick with cooler is better. By the way, the same heat is better nonsense kicks around every so often for mechanical hard drives as well. -T |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
T wrote:
On 12/28/18 2:24 AM, Mike wrote: I have a plugin drive socket. Some HDD's get very hot inside it, so I put a fan on it. Brought temperatures down dramatically. I have a SSD in a 2.5-3.5" converter box that plugs in. Whoever designed the box didn't pay any attention to air flow. I drilled it full of holes, but there's really no internal airflow path from bottom to top. This particular Kingston SV200s3256G runs at 41C with little activity. That's about 10C greater than the spinners in the box. Then I read this article: https://www.anandtech.com/show/9248/...data-retention That suggests that hotter temperatures are less stressful for SSD writes and that data retention is better. Now, I'm wondering if the fan was a bad idea. I bought a Samsung EVO 860 500GB drive, but thought I'd get the kinks worked out on the old Kingston. My rule is, "cooler is better", but seems to fail here. So, What's the optimal operating temperature for an SSD? Hi Mike, Heat is the enemy of all electronic components. In the failure analysises (MBTF) I did for the military years ago, the failure curve for temperature was not linear, but exponential (e^x). It sky rockets. So I would stick with cooler is better. By the way, the same heat is better nonsense kicks around every so often for mechanical hard drives as well. -T That Kingston drive uses a Sandforce controller. And I'm sure when they wasted money on thermal pads for that SSD, it was "just cosmetic" :-) Thermal pads cost a fortune, relatively speaking. https://www.storagereview.com/kingst...ow_v200_review There are measured numbers in the StorageReview article, that don't quite align with how Kingston states their numbers. https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/SV200S3_us.pdf SV200S3/256G Power Consumption 2.0 W (TYP) Idle === controller runs hot ? 4.8 W (TYP) Write Sandforce compressor ? Those could well be numbers for the highest-capacity drive in the drive family. ******** Flash memory is actually *annealed* at high temperature. A write done at high temperature, does less damage to the gate oxide than a write done at room temperature. But the retention of what is written, is also affected by temperature. If both factors "moved in the same direction", we would not be wasting pink bubblegum to keep the controller cool. When they made that drive, they could have put a pink pad just on the side with the Controller chip. However, they elected to put pink pads on *both* sides of the PCB, including the side which just has Flash chips on it. Note that not every SSD drive has pads in it. Some designs have elected to dispense with frippery, to save a few pennies. ******* The Arrhenius equation is a tricky beast. I was taught in Chemistry, that "reaction rate doubles for every 7C rise in temp". However, in Electronics, Arrhenius is "curve fitted" to field data, to extract a and b. For example, an electrolytic capacitor reliability doubles for each 15C drop in temperature. The curve is more gradual than my Chemistry classes would have suggested. Some other capacitors happen to be 10C per doubling effect. (There isn't "two times seven" hiding in there somewhere, the exponent can assume values not consistent with that idea.) The best data to use is actual field data - quite often a PhD in reliability will reach a wrong conclusion by running with extrapolated numbers, without asking others "whether they've seen the component type, drop like flies". When the hardware engineers can vouch that a component doesn't "spontaneously burst into flame", the reliability engineer then has to go back to his desk and use some other method to compute a more (intuitively reasonable) value. Even without field data, people have some idea how often real-world components fail. I find the failure rate of my DRAM here, is pretty bad. Personally. And without any statistically-significant observations either. Mine seems to "drop like flies" here, which helps me validate conclusions others might reach. It does suggest in at least some cases, that chemical contamination is involved (I have one lot of memory that reliability is affected by what appears to be metallurgy - the memory will *die* if you leave it in the DIMM slots while the PC sits in storage - I have only three sticks of that crap left). ******* Summary: Don't leave your electronics in PCs in "thermal shadows" or dead zones. You don't have to fit squirrel cage blowers to everything in a PC. And remember that human body temp is 37C, and 41C isn't really all that hot. "If you burn yourself on something, put some cooling on it" Paul |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
In article , wrote:
By the way, the same heat is better nonsense kicks around every so often for mechanical hard drives as well. it's not nonsense. one of the best references is google's drive study, which looked at more than 100k drives from numerous manufacturers and found that cooler temperatures actually have a *higher* failure rate: http://static.googleusercontent.com/....com/en//archi ve/disk_failures.pdf The data in this study are collected from a large number of disk drives, deployed in several types of systems across all of Google¹s services. More than one hundred thousand disk drives were used for all the results presented here. The disks are a combination of serial and parallel ATA consumer-grade hard disk drives, ranging in speed from 5400 to 7200 rpm, and in size from 80 to 400 GB. All units in this study were put into production in or after 2001. The population contains several models from many of the largest disk drive manufacturers and from at least nine different models. The data used for this study were collected between December 2005 and August 2006 .... We first look at the correlation between average temperature during the observation period and failure. Figure 4 shows the distribution of drives with average temperature in increments of one degree and the correspond- ing annualized failure rates. The figure shows that failures do not increase when the average temperature increases. In fact, there is a clear trend showing that lower temperatures are associated with higher failure rates. Only at very high temperatures is there a slight reversal of this trend. figure 4: http://www.storagemojo.com/wp-conten..._temp_age_dist. png and as for ssds, heat is even less of an issue, since there are no moving parts. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
On 28/12/2018 16.00, nospam wrote:
and as for ssds, heat is even less of an issue, since there are no moving parts. I don't think heat under 100°C affects moving parts much. There is heat expansion, change of fluidity of oil... I would assume the designers would make the design best for the typical temperature range. Consider car engines: they don't work well cold. The cylinders have to expand, the oil gains fluidity. -- Cheers, Carlos. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
In article , Carlos E.R.
wrote: and as for ssds, heat is even less of an issue, since there are no moving parts. I don't think heat under 100°C affects moving parts much. that depends on the parts. there is no universal rule. There is heat expansion, change of fluidity of oil... I would assume the designers would make the design best for the typical temperature range. exactly what they do. Consider car engines: they don't work well cold. The cylinders have to expand, the oil gains fluidity. the cylinders and pistons don't expand very much, however, oil designed for lower temps would be used, and for the really cold climates, there are engine block heaters. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
Carlos E.R. wrote:
On 28/12/2018 16.00, nospam wrote: and as for ssds, heat is even less of an issue, since there are no moving parts. I don't think heat under 100°C affects moving parts much. There is heat expansion, change of fluidity of oil... I would assume the designers would make the design best for the typical temperature range. Consider car engines: they don't work well cold. The cylinders have to expand, the oil gains fluidity. The Google study neglected to record humidity. No points are awarded for bad science. ******* FDB motors can lose mass at high temperature, due to migration of the lubricant, past the seal. The amount of lubricant is so small, the hard drive companies need a milligram balance to detect the loss. They use mass measurements, to detect how much lube has left the motor. The disk drive companies do reliability studies, because at least some generations (if not all), use Nidec motors. When all the lube leaves an FDB motor, the shaft just seizes up. FDB is frictionless, "until the juice leaks out". No, holding the drive horizontal does not prevent fluid escape. It can leave via the vapor phase. ******* There's more than one failure mechanism at work in drives. On older drives, plating failure causes a "spray" of ferric oxide like material to coat the in-drive filter packs. The plating failure could be caused by humidity. At least, that's what the dirty appearance of the filter packs looks like. Modern drives have quite different platter construction. I have no idea whether the surfaces on those degrade in quite the same way as the older drives. The lubricant is a wax only three molecules thick, with a second chemical used as a free radical trap. The surface of the platter is plated up. A "keeper" layer at the bottom of the plating, completes the "magnetic circuit" in the vertically recorded data bit. I've seen no pictures of filter packs on failed drives, to comment on whether those "shred" or "shed" or not. ******* There are a few drives now, with humidity sensors *inside* the drive. No, I don't have model numbers. ******* Helium drives are sealed. The drive companies are climbing on that bandwagon big time. By doing so, it negates the need for a humidity sensor. A temperature sensor is still needed, not for "fun", but in order to compensate writes at high temperature. Disk writing is temperature sensitive and the drive adjusts. Some drives also have "high flight" detection, so if the head is bumped on a write, the drive can detect a properties change in the head during the write, and re-do the write on the next rotation. This is more likely to be an Enterprise feature, but it's pretty hard to track down all these features in an authoritative manner (don't expect datasheets, the companies aren't run by the engineers any more). Paul |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
Mike wrote:
I have a plugin drive socket. Some HDD's get very hot inside it, so I put a fan on it. Brought temperatures down dramatically. I have a SSD in a 2.5-3.5" converter box that plugs in. Whoever designed the box didn't pay any attention to air flow. I drilled it full of holes, but there's really no internal airflow path from bottom to top. This particular Kingston SV200s3256G runs at 41C with little activity. That's about 10C greater than the spinners in the box. Then I read this article: https://www.anandtech.com/show/9248/...data-retention That suggests that hotter temperatures are less stressful for SSD writes and that data retention is better. Now, I'm wondering if the fan was a bad idea. I bought a Samsung EVO 860 500GB drive, but thought I'd get the kinks worked out on the old Kingston. My rule is, "cooler is better", but seems to fail here. So, What's the optimal operating temperature for an SSD? My case has 2 drive cages: an upper cage for 5.25" drives (mostly for optical drives) and a lower cage for 3.5" drives (mostly for HDD/SDD drives). Obviously with adapters, a smaller drive can be positioned in either cage. While it is possible to mount the drives next to each other (i.e., in adjacent slots), I like to leave space between the drives for airflow around them. I do not have a front-case fan but just let the drives get airflow from what the other fans (back-case, GPU, and PSU) suck out of the case. I have 4 drives: 1 SSD, 2 HDD, and 1 optical. The optical and 1 HDD are in the upper cage. The HDD was moved up there to provide a gap in the 3-drive lower cage between the SSD and an HDD. My drives are currently at: SSD (lower cage): 42 C (0 - 70 C, 1M hours MTBF, 150 TBW), 48/52 C max HDD (lower cage): 43 C (0 - 60 C, 5 years CDL, 0.8% AFR) , 49/52 C max HDD (upper cage): 41 C (0 - 60 F, 5 years CDL, 0.8% AFR) , 47/55 C max I consider those as normal temperatures for my drives. All you need to care about is the *operating temperature range* for the devices. Mine are shown with lifespan shown parenthesized above: MTBF (mean time between failure), CDL (Component Design Life), AFR (Annual Failure Rate), TBW (TeraBytes Written). As you can see, all my drives are running at about the same temperature. The only thing I'm doing right now is writing this response. When running disk I/O intensive processes, the temperature would vary. I also listed the daily max temperature recorded for my drives over the last month and the max temperature ever for the drives. My SSD runs pretty much at the same temperatures as the HDDs. While spinners usually (but not always) indicate when they are starting to fail, SSDs usually function right up to their catastrophic failure. Regardless of which type you use, backups are still required for both data and hardware recovery. No idea what you have for a "plugin drive socket". Could be it is enclosed (no airflow). Could be it is open. Could be a hotswap bay or something else. Apparently however you are mounting the HDDs into the bay/receptable provides more airflow than however you are mounting the SDD into the same bay/receptable. My guess is the HDDs are 3.5" drives, the SSD is a 2.5" drive, and the bay/receptable is 5.25" wide. Perhaps the SSD adapter plate is solid, so airflow around it is more restrictive. Could also be that you are running more processes or more disk I/O processes when using the SSD than when you slide in the HDDs. You might want to use PerfMon to measure the read & write activity to compare the levels between when using the SSD and an HDD. As Paul pointed out, maybe your Kingston SSD is a hot drive (compared to other SSDs). I don't know under what conditions you are trying to compare temperatures between the Kingston SSD and the HDDs. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
In article , Paul
wrote: The Google study neglected to record humidity. another study did, and found that humidity was a much bigger factor than heat. No points are awarded for bad science. it's not bad science. heat is not the issue people claim it to be. it's a myth that has been busted. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 09:55:02 -0600, VanguardLH wrote:
Mike wrote: I have a plugin drive socket. Some HDD's get very hot inside it, so I put a fan on it. Brought temperatures down dramatically. I have a SSD in a 2.5-3.5" converter box that plugs in. Whoever designed the box didn't pay any attention to air flow. I drilled it full of holes, but there's really no internal airflow path from bottom to top. This particular Kingston SV200s3256G runs at 41C with little activity. That's about 10C greater than the spinners in the box. Then I read this article: https://www.anandtech.com/show/9248/...data-retention That suggests that hotter temperatures are less stressful for SSD writes and that data retention is better. Now, I'm wondering if the fan was a bad idea. I bought a Samsung EVO 860 500GB drive, but thought I'd get the kinks worked out on the old Kingston. My rule is, "cooler is better", but seems to fail here. So, What's the optimal operating temperature for an SSD? My case has 2 drive cages: an upper cage for 5.25" drives (mostly for optical drives) and a lower cage for 3.5" drives (mostly for HDD/SDD drives). Obviously with adapters, a smaller drive can be positioned in either cage. While it is possible to mount the drives next to each other (i.e., in adjacent slots), I like to leave space between the drives for airflow around them. I do not have a front-case fan but just let the drives get airflow from what the other fans (back-case, GPU, and PSU) suck out of the case. I have 4 drives: 1 SSD, 2 HDD, and 1 optical. The optical and 1 HDD are in the upper cage. The HDD was moved up there to provide a gap in the 3-drive lower cage between the SSD and an HDD. My drives are currently at: SSD (lower cage): 42 C (0 - 70 C, 1M hours MTBF, 150 TBW), 48/52 C max HDD (lower cage): 43 C (0 - 60 C, 5 years CDL, 0.8% AFR) , 49/52 C max HDD (upper cage): 41 C (0 - 60 F, 5 years CDL, 0.8% AFR) , 47/55 C max I consider those as normal temperatures for my drives. All you need to care about is the *operating temperature range* for the devices. Yes, I agree. I have the same four kinds of drives you do. But I haven't looked inside the case for a while and don't remember what the cage configuration is. My SSD is at 31.0 C, and the two hard drives at 32.0 and 33.0 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
On 12/28/2018 7:00 AM, nospam wrote:
In article , wrote: By the way, the same heat is better nonsense kicks around every so often for mechanical hard drives as well. it's not nonsense. one of the best references is google's drive study, which looked at more than 100k drives from numerous manufacturers and found that cooler temperatures actually have a *higher* failure rate: http://static.googleusercontent.com/....com/en//archi ve/disk_failures.pdf The data in this study are collected from a large number of disk drives, deployed in several types of systems across all of Google¹s services. More than one hundred thousand disk drives were used for all the results presented here. The disks are a combination of serial and parallel ATA consumer-grade hard disk drives, ranging in speed from 5400 to 7200 rpm, and in size from 80 to 400 GB. All units in this study were put into production in or after 2001. The population contains several models from many of the largest disk drive manufacturers and from at least nine different models. The data used for this study were collected between December 2005 and August 2006 ... We first look at the correlation between average temperature during the observation period and failure. Figure 4 shows the distribution of drives with average temperature in increments of one degree and the correspond- ing annualized failure rates. The figure shows that failures do not increase when the average temperature increases. In fact, there is a clear trend showing that lower temperatures are associated with higher failure rates. Only at very high temperatures is there a slight reversal of this trend. figure 4: http://www.storagemojo.com/wp-conten..._temp_age_dist. png and as for ssds, heat is even less of an issue, since there are no moving parts. This thread is spinning out of control. Detailed data on spinning drives is not relevant. I read that, in a TLC drive, the difference between stored value might be as little as 15 electrons. That ain't much margin. My engineering training taught me that... Within normal temperature ranges encountered in inhabited spaces... For most electronic things... Failure rate is an exponential function of temperature. I've taken steps to reduce the SSD temperature with a fan. It's idling at 41C. I don't have any high write rate data because, at this stage, I'm doing everything I can to REDUCE writes. I've read that SSD writes are less stressful at slightly elevated temperatures. I'm experimenting on the Kingston SSD, but the eventual drive will be a Samsung 860 EVO 500GB. The question is: Would service life of the SSD INCREASE by a significant amount if I let the temperature rise to 50C? 60C? |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
On 28-12-2018 23:06, mike wrote:
On 12/28/2018 7:00 AM, nospam wrote: In article , wrote: By the way, the same heat is better nonsense kicks around every so often for mechanical hard drives as well. it's not nonsense. one of the best references is google's drive study, which looked at more than 100k drives from numerous manufacturers and found that cooler temperatures actually have a *higher* failure rate: http://static.googleusercontent.com/....com/en//archi ve/disk_failures.pdf The data in this study are collected from a large number of disk drives, deployed in several types of systems across all of Google¹s services. More than one hundred thousand disk drives were used for all the results presented here. The disks are a combination of serial and parallel ATA consumer-grade hard disk drives, ranging in speed from 5400 to 7200 rpm, and in size from 80 to 400 GB. All units in this study were put into production in or after 2001. The population contains several models from many of the largest disk drive manufacturers and from at least nine different models. The data used for this study were collected between December 2005 and August 2006 ... We first look at the correlation between average temperature during the observation period and failure. Figure 4 shows the distribution of drives with average temperature in increments of one degree and the correspond- ing annualized failure rates. The figure shows that failures do not increase when the average temperature increases. In fact, there is a clear trend showing that lower temperatures are associated with higher failure rates. Only at very high temperatures is there a slight reversal of this trend. figure 4: http://www.storagemojo.com/wp-conten..._temp_age_dist. png and as for ssds, heat is even less of an issue, since there are no moving parts. This thread is spinning out of control. Detailed data on spinning drives is not relevant. I read that, in a TLC drive, the difference between stored value might be as little as 15 electrons. That ain't much margin. My engineering training taught me that... Within normal temperature ranges encountered in inhabited spaces... For most electronic things... Failure rate is an exponential function of temperature. I've taken steps to reduce the SSD temperature with a fan. It's idling at 41C. I don't have any high write rate data because, at this stage, I'm doing everything I can to REDUCE writes. I've read that SSD writes are less stressful at slightly elevated temperatures. I'm experimenting on the Kingston SSD, but the eventual drive will be a Samsung 860 EVO 500GB. The question is: Would service life of the SSD INCREASE by a significant amount if I let the temperature rise to 50C? 60C? No. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
In article , mike
wrote: By the way, the same heat is better nonsense kicks around every so often for mechanical hard drives as well. it's not nonsense. one of the best references is google's drive study, which looked at more than 100k drives from numerous manufacturers and found that cooler temperatures actually have a *higher* failure rate: http://static.googleusercontent.com/....com/en//archi ve/disk_failures.pdf The data in this study are collected from a large number of disk drives, deployed in several types of systems across all of Google¹s services. More than one hundred thousand disk drives were used for all the results presented here. The disks are a combination of serial and parallel ATA consumer-grade hard disk drives, ranging in speed from 5400 to 7200 rpm, and in size from 80 to 400 GB. All units in this study were put into production in or after 2001. The population contains several models from many of the largest disk drive manufacturers and from at least nine different models. The data used for this study were collected between December 2005 and August 2006 ... We first look at the correlation between average temperature during the observation period and failure. Figure 4 shows the distribution of drives with average temperature in increments of one degree and the correspond- ing annualized failure rates. The figure shows that failures do not increase when the average temperature increases. In fact, there is a clear trend showing that lower temperatures are associated with higher failure rates. Only at very high temperatures is there a slight reversal of this trend. figure 4: http://www.storagemojo.com/wp-conten..._temp_age_dist. png and as for ssds, heat is even less of an issue, since there are no moving parts. This thread is spinning out of control. bad pun. Detailed data on spinning drives is not relevant. it is when one claims heat causes mechanical drives to fail. I read that, in a TLC drive, the difference between stored value might be as little as 15 electrons. That ain't much margin. yet they're are very reliable, and there is now qlc. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
On 12/28/18 6:16 AM, Paul wrote:
T wrote: On 12/28/18 2:24 AM, Mike wrote: I have a plugin drive socket.Â* Some HDD's get very hot inside it, so I put a fan on it.Â* Brought temperatures down dramatically. I have a SSD in a 2.5-3.5" converter box that plugs in. Whoever designed the box didn't pay any attention to air flow. I drilled it full of holes, but there's really no internal airflow path from bottom to top. This particular Kingston SV200s3256G runs at 41C with little activity. That's about 10C greater than the spinners in the box. Then I read this article: https://www.anandtech.com/show/9248/...data-retention That suggests that hotter temperatures are less stressful for SSD writes and that data retention is better. Now, I'm wondering if the fan was a bad idea. I bought a Samsung EVO 860 500GB drive, but thought I'd get the kinks worked out on the old Kingston. My rule is, "cooler is better", but seems to fail here. So, What's the optimal operating temperature for an SSD? Hi Mike, Heat is the enemy of all electronic components.Â* In the failure analysises (MBTF) I did for the military years ago, the failure curve for temperature was not linear, but exponential (e^x).Â* It sky rockets. So I would stick with cooler is better. By the way, the same heat is better nonsense kicks around every so often for mechanical hard drives as well. -T That Kingston drive uses a Sandforce controller. And I'm sure when they wasted money on thermal pads for that SSD, it was "just cosmetic" :-) Thermal pads cost a fortune, relatively speaking. https://www.storagereview.com/kingst...ow_v200_review There are measured numbers in the StorageReview article, that don't quite align with how Kingston states their numbers. https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/SV200S3_us.pdf SV200S3/256G Power Consumption 2.0 W (TYP) Idle === controller runs hot ? Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* 4.8 W (TYP) WriteÂ*Â*Â*Â* Sandforce compressor ? Those could well be numbers for the highest-capacity drive in the drive family. ******** Flash memory is actually *annealed* at high temperature. A write done at high temperature, does less damage to the gate oxide than a write done at room temperature. But the retention of what is written, is also affected by temperature. If both factors "moved in the same direction", we would not be wasting pink bubblegum to keep the controller cool. When they made that drive, they could have put a pink pad just on the side with the Controller chip. However, they elected to put pink pads on *both* sides of the PCB, including the side which just has Flash chips on it. Note that not every SSD drive has pads in it. Some designs have elected to dispense with frippery, to save a few pennies. ******* The Arrhenius equation is a tricky beast. I was taught in Chemistry, that "reaction rate doubles for every 7C rise in temp". However, in Electronics, Arrhenius is "curve fitted" to field data, to extract a and b. For example, an electrolytic capacitor reliability doubles for each 15C drop in temperature. The curve is more gradual than my Chemistry classes would have suggested. Some other capacitors happen to be 10C per doubling effect. (There isn't "two times seven" hiding in there somewhere, the exponent can assume values not consistent with that idea.) The best data to use is actual field data - quite often a PhD in reliability will reach a wrong conclusion by running with extrapolated numbers, without asking others "whether they've seen the component type, drop like flies". When the hardware engineers can vouch that a component doesn't "spontaneously burst into flame", the reliability engineer then has to go back to his desk and use some other method to compute a more (intuitively reasonable) value. Even without field data, people have some idea how often real-world components fail. I find the failure rate of my DRAM here, is pretty bad. Personally. And without any statistically-significant observations either. Mine seems to "drop like flies" here, which helps me validate conclusions others might reach. It does suggest in at least some cases, that chemical contamination is involved (I have one lot of memory that reliability is affected by what appears to be metallurgy - the memory will *die* if you leave it in the DIMM slots while the PC sits in storage - I have only three sticks of that crap left). ******* Summary: Don't leave your electronics in PCs in "thermal shadows" Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* or dead zones. You don't have to fit squirrel Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* cage blowers to everything in a PC. And remember Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* that human body temp is 37C, and 41C isn't really Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* all that hot. Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â* "If you burn yourself on something, put some cooling on it" Â*Â* Paul Hi Paul, You are only taking into account he memory cells. You are leaving off the effect of temperature on all the surrounding components -T |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Does it hurt to put a fan on an SSD?
On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 15:00:02 -0000, nospam wrote:
In article , wrote: By the way, the same heat is better nonsense kicks around every so often for mechanical hard drives as well. it's not nonsense. one of the best references is google's drive study, which looked at more than 100k drives from numerous manufacturers and found that cooler temperatures actually have a *higher* failure rate: http://static.googleusercontent.com/....com/en//archi ve/disk_failures.pdf The data in this study are collected from a large number of disk drives, deployed in several types of systems across all of Google¹s services. More than one hundred thousand disk drives were used for all the results presented here. The disks are a combination of serial and parallel ATA consumer-grade hard disk drives, ranging in speed from 5400 to 7200 rpm, and in size from 80 to 400 GB. All units in this study were put into production in or after 2001. The population contains several models from many of the largest disk drive manufacturers and from at least nine different models. The data used for this study were collected between December 2005 and August 2006 ... We first look at the correlation between average temperature during the observation period and failure. Figure 4 shows the distribution of drives with average temperature in increments of one degree and the correspond- ing annualized failure rates. The figure shows that failures do not increase when the average temperature increases. In fact, there is a clear trend showing that lower temperatures are associated with higher failure rates. Only at very high temperatures is there a slight reversal of this trend. figure 4: http://www.storagemojo.com/wp-conten..._temp_age_dist. png That would be http://www.storagemojo.com/wp-conten...p_age_dist.png Otherwise I get "This page isn’t working, storagemojo.com redirected you too many times." Don't wrap links please. and as for ssds, heat is even less of an issue, since there are no moving parts. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|