(on topic as I would hope to do the job myself)
I asked previously about Windows 11 and got some good advice. I have
decided not to replace my PC meantime but to continue with Windows 10.
My setup is that I have a 256GB solid state drive and 1TB hard drive.
The operating system and programs are on the SSD and data on the HDD.

The HDD is at least 12 years old (transferred from previous PC). I am
wondering about a 1TB SSD to replace both, as this is now affordable.
However, should I be worried about the HDD at all? Can I assume use
is lighter than the SSD and that I will get warning of imminent
failure? Obviously, I keep backups.

The SSD must be at least six years old and is fairly full though
nowhere near capacity.

On 05/11/2021 13:44, Scott wrote:
> (on topic as I would hope to do the job myself)
> I asked previously about Windows 11 and got some good advice. I have
> decided not to replace my PC meantime but to continue with Windows 10.
> My setup is that I have a 256GB solid state drive and 1TB hard drive.
> The operating system and programs are on the SSD and data on the HDD.
>
> The HDD is at least 12 years old (transferred from previous PC). I am
> wondering about a 1TB SSD to replace both, as this is now affordable.
> However, should I be worried about the HDD at all? Can I assume use
> is lighter than the SSD and that I will get warning of imminent
> failure? Obviously, I keep backups.
>
> The SSD must be at least six years old and is fairly full though
> nowhere near capacity.

I would use both the old SSD and HDD as backup, and regularly make
backups. While it's not a remote backup, it should still protect you
against disk failure.

SSDs have a reputation of failing catastrophically. All my important
data is still held on HDDs.

On 05/11/2021 14:16, Fredxx wrote:

> SSDs have a reputation of failing catastrophically. All my important
> data is still held on HDDs.

I have a RAID1 setup, with 2 SSDs. I bought 2 of the same SSD, which is
the obvious thing to do, as it will always operate at the speed of the
slowest device. On reflection, though, I should have bought completely
different brands, so they are less likely to fail at the same time.

Or, perhaps, it's more likely the PSU will pull a wobbly and fry
everything in the case?

Anyway, as long as you back up the data externally, and off line, you
should be pretty bulletproof.

On 05/11/2021 13:44, Scott wrote:
> (on topic as I would hope to do the job myself)
> I asked previously about Windows 11 and got some good advice. I have
> decided not to replace my PC meantime but to continue with Windows 10.
> My setup is that I have a 256GB solid state drive and 1TB hard drive.
> The operating system and programs are on the SSD and data on the HDD.
>
> The HDD is at least 12 years old (transferred from previous PC). I am
> wondering about a 1TB SSD to replace both, as this is now affordable.
> However, should I be worried about the HDD at all? Can I assume use
> is lighter than the SSD and that I will get warning of imminent
> failure? Obviously, I keep backups.

You may get warning of HDD failure, but I would not count on it. In a
general sense you ought to be "worried" about any storage device - while
heavily used and older drives are more likely to fail, that does not
mean new ones won't.

I have pulled 12 year old drives out of NAS boxes in office environments
still going strong with no indication of a problem, and also had a "new"
4 year old drive fail on me recently.

> The SSD must be at least six years old and is fairly full though
> nowhere near capacity.

--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote

> (on topic as I would hope to do the job myself)
> I asked previously about Windows 11 and got some good advice. I have
> decided not to replace my PC meantime but to continue with Windows 10.
> My setup is that I have a 256GB solid state drive and 1TB hard drive.
> The operating system and programs are on the SSD and data on the HDD.
>
> The HDD is at least 12 years old (transferred from previous PC). I am
> wondering about a 1TB SSD to replace both, as this is now affordable.
> However, should I be worried about the HDD at all? Can I assume use
> is lighter than the SSD and that I will get warning of imminent failure?

No you can't assume that you will get warning of imminent
failure with an HDD. But there is no reason that the age
would see it more likely to fail now given how it's used.

> Obviously, I keep backups.
>
> The SSD must be at least six years old and is fairly full though
> nowhere near capacity.

It might be getting to its wear limit depending on how
much physical ram you have and so how much it swaps.

On 11/5/2021 12:35 PM, John Brown wrote:
> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote
>
>> (on topic as I would hope to do the job myself)
>> I asked previously about Windows 11 and got some good advice.  I have
>> decided not to replace my PC meantime but to continue with Windows 10.
>> My setup is that I have a 256GB solid state drive and 1TB hard drive.
>> The operating system and programs are on the SSD and data on the HDD.
>>
>> The HDD is at least 12 years old (transferred from previous PC).  I am
>> wondering about a 1TB SSD to replace both, as this is now affordable.
>> However, should I be worried about the HDD at all?  Can I assume use
>> is lighter than the SSD and that I will get warning of imminent failure?
>
> No you can't assume that you will get warning of imminent
> failure with an HDD. But there is no reason that the age
> would see it more likely to fail now given how it's used.
>
>> Obviously, I keep backups.
>>
>> The SSD must be at least six years old and is fairly full though
>> nowhere near capacity.
>
> It might be getting to its wear limit depending on how
> much physical ram you have and so how much it swaps.

The pagefile in Windows 10, doesn't work in nearly as stressful
a manner as in the Windows XP era.

In this thread, the users messed around with their Windows settings
and the result was some excessive usage of the SSD. Leaving Prefetch
enabled and as a result, leaving the Memory Compressor running,
might reduce pagefile usage. That's because the Memory Compressor
runs when there are hard faults seen in Task Manager. Memory will be
compressed to free up some pages, in preference to pushing it to the pagefile.

(bottom posting)

https://linustechtips.com/topic/1322484-page-file-causing-high-amount-of-tbw-on-ssd-when-gaming/

# Powershell, Admin, after Prefetch service running

Enable-MMAgent -MemoryCompression

When I tried to run testcases for pagefile behavior here, the
results weren't very spectacular, but I chalked that up to
not making very good testcases.

You can't expect a memory compressor to work miracles, as the
compressor has to be fast and light. It can't run 7Z quality
methods to do what it does. So you can't expect your effective
system memory to double or anything, by compressing stuff.

One experiment I ran a few years back now, was running Windows 10
in a VM, with the VM set to only 256MB of RAM. The OS could boot,
and I could run Notepad. But if you had Task Manager open, the
memory compressor was railed on one core the entire time. And the
memory usage recorded in Task Manager was "wavey gravy". It was
constantly varying by small amounts, as I suppose various maintenance
things would try to run, and they would be stymied by the lack of
resources. Still, it shows one corner of OS operation, causing in
that case, the memory compressor to be the rate limiting step.

*******

You can check the amount of wear on an SSD with its "Toolkit".
Each brand has toolkits with various levels of merit. The
Corsair Neutron toolkit, I liked, but I had to take the drive
back to the store. The following picture is the toolkit for
my Samsung drive, where the toolkit is not as nice.

I had to work out the percent used manually, as I could not find
a view in the tool that does a better job. On a previous version
of Samsung Toolkit, the Secure Erase didn't work. Whereas the
Corsair Neutron Toolkit, secure erased with one click, before
I took the drive back to the store.

[Picture]

https://i.postimg.cc/fydmPzh5/Samsung-Magician.gif

A good display, would dump the SMART table for examination.
Even though it's likely to be boring and all. And a good toolkit
should give a percent used number onscreen, for quick evaluation.

On Intel drives, like the 545S, the Intel policy is to brick the
drive, when all the write life is exhausted. That's an example, of
why a person would want to watch the write life, like a hawk.
I knew that, before I bought the Intel drive...

Paul

Yes I lost the whole lot on an ssd only 4 years in. It was one of those chip
type that sat on the motherboard, so when I replaced it I used a normal
format ssd of double the size. Both are made by Samsung, but I doubt that
this means they are any more or less reliable.
I bought a cheap 2TB western digital us b drive to back up on every Sunday
on a schedule and this happens in the background.
The 1tb drive is a normal one also, but at the moment has nothing of great
importance there, and is pretty empty. Handy though if you do need a big
file every so often.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Fredxx" <fredxx@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:sm3ecp$tkn$1@dont-email.me...
> On 05/11/2021 13:44, Scott wrote:
>> (on topic as I would hope to do the job myself)
>> I asked previously about Windows 11 and got some good advice. I have
>> decided not to replace my PC meantime but to continue with Windows 10.
>> My setup is that I have a 256GB solid state drive and 1TB hard drive.
>> The operating system and programs are on the SSD and data on the HDD.
>>
>> The HDD is at least 12 years old (transferred from previous PC). I am
>> wondering about a 1TB SSD to replace both, as this is now affordable.
>> However, should I be worried about the HDD at all? Can I assume use
>> is lighter than the SSD and that I will get warning of imminent
>> failure? Obviously, I keep backups.
>>
>> The SSD must be at least six years old and is fairly full though
>> nowhere near capacity.
>
> I would use both the old SSD and HDD as backup, and regularly make
> backups. While it's not a remote backup, it should still protect you
> against disk failure.
>
> SSDs have a reputation of failing catastrophically. All my important data
> is still held on HDDs.
>
>

On Sat, 6 Nov 2021 01:08:47 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

>On 11/5/2021 12:35 PM, John Brown wrote:
>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote
>>
>>> (on topic as I would hope to do the job myself)
>>> I asked previously about Windows 11 and got some good advice.  I have
>>> decided not to replace my PC meantime but to continue with Windows 10.
>>> My setup is that I have a 256GB solid state drive and 1TB hard drive.
>>> The operating system and programs are on the SSD and data on the HDD.
>>>
>>> The HDD is at least 12 years old (transferred from previous PC).  I am
>>> wondering about a 1TB SSD to replace both, as this is now affordable.
>>> However, should I be worried about the HDD at all?  Can I assume use
>>> is lighter than the SSD and that I will get warning of imminent failure?
>>
>> No you can't assume that you will get warning of imminent
>> failure with an HDD. But there is no reason that the age
>> would see it more likely to fail now given how it's used.
>>
>>> Obviously, I keep backups.
>>>
>>> The SSD must be at least six years old and is fairly full though
>>> nowhere near capacity.
>>
>> It might be getting to its wear limit depending on how
>> much physical ram you have and so how much it swaps.
>
>The pagefile in Windows 10, doesn't work in nearly as stressful
>a manner as in the Windows XP era.
>
>In this thread, the users messed around with their Windows settings
>and the result was some excessive usage of the SSD. Leaving Prefetch
>enabled and as a result, leaving the Memory Compressor running,
>might reduce pagefile usage. That's because the Memory Compressor
>runs when there are hard faults seen in Task Manager. Memory will be
>compressed to free up some pages, in preference to pushing it to the pagefile.
>
>(bottom posting)
>
>https://linustechtips.com/topic/1322484-page-file-causing-high-amount-of-tbw-on-ssd-when-gaming/
>
> # Powershell, Admin, after Prefetch service running
>
> Enable-MMAgent -MemoryCompression
>
>When I tried to run testcases for pagefile behavior here, the
>results weren't very spectacular, but I chalked that up to
>not making very good testcases.
>
>You can't expect a memory compressor to work miracles, as the
>compressor has to be fast and light. It can't run 7Z quality
>methods to do what it does. So you can't expect your effective
>system memory to double or anything, by compressing stuff.
>
>One experiment I ran a few years back now, was running Windows 10
>in a VM, with the VM set to only 256MB of RAM. The OS could boot,
>and I could run Notepad. But if you had Task Manager open, the
>memory compressor was railed on one core the entire time. And the
>memory usage recorded in Task Manager was "wavey gravy". It was
>constantly varying by small amounts, as I suppose various maintenance
>things would try to run, and they would be stymied by the lack of
>resources. Still, it shows one corner of OS operation, causing in
>that case, the memory compressor to be the rate limiting step.
>
>*******
>
>You can check the amount of wear on an SSD with its "Toolkit".
>Each brand has toolkits with various levels of merit. The
>Corsair Neutron toolkit, I liked, but I had to take the drive
>back to the store. The following picture is the toolkit for
>my Samsung drive, where the toolkit is not as nice.
>
>I had to work out the percent used manually, as I could not find
>a view in the tool that does a better job. On a previous version
>of Samsung Toolkit, the Secure Erase didn't work. Whereas the
>Corsair Neutron Toolkit, secure erased with one click, before
>I took the drive back to the store.
>
>[Picture]
>
>https://i.postimg.cc/fydmPzh5/Samsung-Magician.gif
>
>A good display, would dump the SMART table for examination.
>Even though it's likely to be boring and all. And a good toolkit
>should give a percent used number onscreen, for quick evaluation.
>
>On Intel drives, like the 545S, the Intel policy is to brick the
>drive, when all the write life is exhausted. That's an example, of
>why a person would want to watch the write life, like a hawk.
>I knew that, before I bought the Intel drive...
>
Thanks very much. Mind is showing 27.2TB written, which seems far
higher than yours. Could you guide me whether this is okay, some sort
of record, or no cause for concern.

On 06/11/2021 09:31, Scott wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Nov 2021 01:08:47 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 11/5/2021 12:35 PM, John Brown wrote:
>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote
>>>
>>>> (on topic as I would hope to do the job myself)
>>>> I asked previously about Windows 11 and got some good advice.  I have
>>>> decided not to replace my PC meantime but to continue with Windows 10.
>>>> My setup is that I have a 256GB solid state drive and 1TB hard drive.
>>>> The operating system and programs are on the SSD and data on the HDD.
>>>>
>>>> The HDD is at least 12 years old (transferred from previous PC).  I am
>>>> wondering about a 1TB SSD to replace both, as this is now affordable.
>>>> However, should I be worried about the HDD at all?  Can I assume use
>>>> is lighter than the SSD and that I will get warning of imminent failure?
>>>
>>> No you can't assume that you will get warning of imminent
>>> failure with an HDD. But there is no reason that the age
>>> would see it more likely to fail now given how it's used.
>>>
>>>> Obviously, I keep backups.
>>>>
>>>> The SSD must be at least six years old and is fairly full though
>>>> nowhere near capacity.
>>>
>>> It might be getting to its wear limit depending on how
>>> much physical ram you have and so how much it swaps.
>>
>> The pagefile in Windows 10, doesn't work in nearly as stressful
>> a manner as in the Windows XP era.
>>
>> In this thread, the users messed around with their Windows settings
>> and the result was some excessive usage of the SSD. Leaving Prefetch
>> enabled and as a result, leaving the Memory Compressor running,
>> might reduce pagefile usage. That's because the Memory Compressor
>> runs when there are hard faults seen in Task Manager. Memory will be
>> compressed to free up some pages, in preference to pushing it to the pagefile.
>>
>> (bottom posting)
>>
>> https://linustechtips.com/topic/1322484-page-file-causing-high-amount-of-tbw-on-ssd-when-gaming/
>>
>> # Powershell, Admin, after Prefetch service running
>>
>> Enable-MMAgent -MemoryCompression
>>
>> When I tried to run testcases for pagefile behavior here, the
>> results weren't very spectacular, but I chalked that up to
>> not making very good testcases.
>>
>> You can't expect a memory compressor to work miracles, as the
>> compressor has to be fast and light. It can't run 7Z quality
>> methods to do what it does. So you can't expect your effective
>> system memory to double or anything, by compressing stuff.
>>
>> One experiment I ran a few years back now, was running Windows 10
>> in a VM, with the VM set to only 256MB of RAM. The OS could boot,
>> and I could run Notepad. But if you had Task Manager open, the
>> memory compressor was railed on one core the entire time. And the
>> memory usage recorded in Task Manager was "wavey gravy". It was
>> constantly varying by small amounts, as I suppose various maintenance
>> things would try to run, and they would be stymied by the lack of
>> resources. Still, it shows one corner of OS operation, causing in
>> that case, the memory compressor to be the rate limiting step.
>>
>> *******
>>
>> You can check the amount of wear on an SSD with its "Toolkit".
>> Each brand has toolkits with various levels of merit. The
>> Corsair Neutron toolkit, I liked, but I had to take the drive
>> back to the store. The following picture is the toolkit for
>> my Samsung drive, where the toolkit is not as nice.
>>
>> I had to work out the percent used manually, as I could not find
>> a view in the tool that does a better job. On a previous version
>> of Samsung Toolkit, the Secure Erase didn't work. Whereas the
>> Corsair Neutron Toolkit, secure erased with one click, before
>> I took the drive back to the store.
>>
>> [Picture]
>>
>> https://i.postimg.cc/fydmPzh5/Samsung-Magician.gif
>>
>> A good display, would dump the SMART table for examination.
>> Even though it's likely to be boring and all. And a good toolkit
>> should give a percent used number onscreen, for quick evaluation.
>>
>> On Intel drives, like the 545S, the Intel policy is to brick the
>> drive, when all the write life is exhausted. That's an example, of
>> why a person would want to watch the write life, like a hawk.
>> I knew that, before I bought the Intel drive...
>>
> Thanks very much. Mind is showing 27.2TB written, which seems far
> higher than yours. Could you guide me whether this is okay, some sort
> of record, or no cause for concern.

What make and model of drive is it? The manufacturer should specify the
TBW figure for the drive.

The Total Bytes Written count will usually be expressed as a multiple of
the drive's size. For a 250GB drive this would often be in the range of
60 to 150TBW. So worst case, your drive could be "half used".

--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

On 11/6/2021 5:31 AM, Scott wrote:

> Thanks very much. Mind is showing 27.2TB written, which seems far
> higher than yours. Could you guide me whether this is okay, some sort
> of record, or no cause for concern.

SSD prices are subtly related to that TBW number.
In other words, SSDs are like bog roll, and a
"very large roll" costs more money. That's how
they work in a sense. These two devices, for example,
have the same storage capacity (amount of files), but
my 27TB of usage is 5% of the expensive one, or
10% usage of the cheap one.

512GB SSD 300 TBW £100 27TB equals approx 10% life used
512GB SSD 600 TBW £200 27TB equals approx 5% life used

The more expensive drive in that case, lasts longer before
it needs to be replaced. When you work out the percentages
for yourself, the life is exceedingly long on average.
Only a "write accident", some software in a loop for three
weeks, can burn one out in a hurry. It takes a lot of Windows Updates
to wear one out :-)

We need to know the model number of your device,
to offer any additional feedback.

in Windows, you can get something called "Caption" using wmi or
wmic, but that's just the same string seen in the picture below.
Probably the same caption string as seen in Device Management
(devmgmt.msc).

While you can Google on the Caption string and find the TBW number,
it is better to use the model number printed on the bottom label
of the SSD. As the model number isn't as common in adverts,
and so you might end up landing on the manufacturer page a bit
easier.

One reason I picked up the 860 Pro, is the consistency of the
transfer rate. Both read and write are consistent. Some other
drives, the first 20GB of a long write, go smoking fast, then
any transfers after that might be at half the speed. That
behavior really bothers me (it smacks of sales deception).

The absolute transfer rate in HDTune here, may be wrong, because
the calibration got screwed up in Windows 10 on some release,
and I don't think Windows 11 fixed that either.

The really funny part, is the Samsung Magician pretends to bench
the drive, but after it makes some animations on the screen,
it just prints out the "book values" from the datasheet. It
doesn't matter then, whether the drive is a month old or ten
years old, Magician is always going to report the same bogus
numbers.

Doing it with HDTune, like CrystalDiskMark or others of that type,
these are softwares that need constant maintenance to maintain
accurate bench numbers. While this number is low, I'm not
concerned in the least with the absolute number. And just want
to point out that the Y axis may not be perfectly accurate.
If I switched OSes, I might get a better number.

[Picture] An SSD on a SATA port, benched...

https://i.postimg.cc/qvmmnX4r/Samsung860-Pro-Read-Benchmark.gif

Summary: Get the model number off the bottom, as well as the
caption string. For example, mine would be

Samsung SSD 860 Pro 512G <== caption value DevMan
MZ-76P512 2021.05 (manufactured in May) <== model num off bottom

The serial number is unnecessary data, except when you
are doing a warranty return, so don't put that in a posting.

Paul

On Sun, 7 Nov 2021 00:17:57 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

>On 11/6/2021 5:31 AM, Scott wrote:
>
>> Thanks very much. Mind is showing 27.2TB written, which seems far
>> higher than yours. Could you guide me whether this is okay, some sort
>> of record, or no cause for concern.
>
>SSD prices are subtly related to that TBW number.
>In other words, SSDs are like bog roll, and a
>"very large roll" costs more money. That's how
>they work in a sense. These two devices, for example,
>have the same storage capacity (amount of files), but
>my 27TB of usage is 5% of the expensive one, or
>10% usage of the cheap one.
>
> 512GB SSD 300 TBW £100 27TB equals approx 10% life used
> 512GB SSD 600 TBW £200 27TB equals approx 5% life used
>
>The more expensive drive in that case, lasts longer before
>it needs to be replaced. When you work out the percentages
>for yourself, the life is exceedingly long on average.
>Only a "write accident", some software in a loop for three
>weeks, can burn one out in a hurry. It takes a lot of Windows Updates
>to wear one out :-)
>
>We need to know the model number of your device,
>to offer any additional feedback.

Thanks. It's Samsung SSD 840 Series (232GB).
>
>in Windows, you can get something called "Caption" using wmi or
>wmic, but that's just the same string seen in the picture below.
>Probably the same caption string as seen in Device Management
>(devmgmt.msc).
>
>While you can Google on the Caption string and find the TBW number,
>it is better to use the model number printed on the bottom label
>of the SSD. As the model number isn't as common in adverts,
>and so you might end up landing on the manufacturer page a bit
>easier.
>
>One reason I picked up the 860 Pro, is the consistency of the
>transfer rate. Both read and write are consistent. Some other
>drives, the first 20GB of a long write, go smoking fast, then
>any transfers after that might be at half the speed. That
>behavior really bothers me (it smacks of sales deception).
>
>The absolute transfer rate in HDTune here, may be wrong, because
>the calibration got screwed up in Windows 10 on some release,
>and I don't think Windows 11 fixed that either.
>
>The really funny part, is the Samsung Magician pretends to bench
>the drive, but after it makes some animations on the screen,
>it just prints out the "book values" from the datasheet. It
>doesn't matter then, whether the drive is a month old or ten
>years old, Magician is always going to report the same bogus
>numbers.

.... which is the one I am using.
>
>Doing it with HDTune, like CrystalDiskMark or others of that type,
>these are softwares that need constant maintenance to maintain
>accurate bench numbers. While this number is low, I'm not
>concerned in the least with the absolute number. And just want
>to point out that the Y axis may not be perfectly accurate.
>If I switched OSes, I might get a better number.
>
> [Picture] An SSD on a SATA port, benched...
>
> https://i.postimg.cc/qvmmnX4r/Samsung860-Pro-Read-Benchmark.gif
>
>Summary: Get the model number off the bottom, as well as the
> caption string. For example, mine would be
>
> Samsung SSD 860 Pro 512G <== caption value DevMan
> MZ-76P512 2021.05 (manufactured in May) <== model num off bottom
>
> The serial number is unnecessary data, except when you
> are doing a warranty return, so don't put that in a posting.
>
Thanks. I am reluctant to open up the PC at this stage if there is no
cause for concern. Can I conclude that 27.2TB and 'Good' means there
is nothing to worry about?

Also, as I mentioned, I only have the operating system and programs on
the SSD (data on a 1TB HDD). Am I protected in the sense that I can
reinstall in the event of catastrophe? I do keep backups - Macrium
and two pen drives (alternating).

If I thought a new 1TB SSD on its own would be better I would look at
one, but it seems there is no need. Am I missing something?
>

On 07/11/2021 10:55, Scott wrote:

> Also, as I mentioned, I only have the operating system and programs on
> the SSD (data on a 1TB HDD). Am I protected in the sense that I can
> reinstall in the event of catastrophe? I do keep backups - Macrium
> and two pen drives (alternating).
>
> If I thought a new 1TB SSD on its own would be better I would look at
> one, but it seems there is no need. Am I missing something?

As a general rule OS and Apps on one drive and data on another is a
"good thing" - it makes it easier to keep you data backed up and not
have it tied into a complete OS install. So should you be forced to
rebuild a machine from scratch, getting your data back is easier. Also
your data backups will not be inflated by constant OS and application
updates.

(you could argue that having two drives you have a slightly higher risk
of at least one failing - but in general the benefits outweigh the risk
IMHO)

If adding a big SSD, I would tend to do that in addition to the OS one,
and not as a replacement for it. I.e. replace the HDD with a SSD if you
need the extra file access speed. (probably not an issue unless
routinely processing large files - say video editing etc, or lots of
small ones - say software development)

--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

On Sun, 7 Nov 2021 16:04:08 +0000, John Rumm
<see.my.signature@nowhere.null> wrote:

>On 07/11/2021 10:55, Scott wrote:
>
>> Also, as I mentioned, I only have the operating system and programs on
>> the SSD (data on a 1TB HDD). Am I protected in the sense that I can
>> reinstall in the event of catastrophe? I do keep backups - Macrium
>> and two pen drives (alternating).
>>
>> If I thought a new 1TB SSD on its own would be better I would look at
>> one, but it seems there is no need. Am I missing something?
>
>As a general rule OS and Apps on one drive and data on another is a
>"good thing" - it makes it easier to keep you data backed up and not
>have it tied into a complete OS install. So should you be forced to
>rebuild a machine from scratch, getting your data back is easier. Also
>your data backups will not be inflated by constant OS and application
>updates.
>
>(you could argue that having two drives you have a slightly higher risk
>of at least one failing - but in general the benefits outweigh the risk
>IMHO)
>
>If adding a big SSD, I would tend to do that in addition to the OS one,
>and not as a replacement for it. I.e. replace the HDD with a SSD if you
>need the extra file access speed. (probably not an issue unless
>routinely processing large files - say video editing etc, or lots of
>small ones - say software development)

Thanks. I think you have found me a way of saving some money. As my
father used to say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

On 11/7/2021 5:55 AM, Scott wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Nov 2021 00:17:57 -0400, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:

>> We need to know the model number of your device,
>> to offer any additional feedback.
>
> Thanks. It's Samsung SSD 840 Series (232GB).
>>
> Thanks. I am reluctant to open up the PC at this stage if there is no
> cause for concern. Can I conclude that 27.2TB and 'Good' means there
> is nothing to worry about?
>
> Also, as I mentioned, I only have the operating system and programs on
> the SSD (data on a 1TB HDD). Am I protected in the sense that I can
> reinstall in the event of catastrophe? I do keep backups - Macrium
> and two pen drives (alternating).
>
> If I thought a new 1TB SSD on its own would be better I would look at
> one, but it seems there is no need. Am I missing something?

840 PRO
Model Name (Capacity)
MZ-7PD128 (128 GB)
MZ-7PD256 (256 GB) <=== could be this one listed capacity 238.47GB ???
MZ-7PD512 (512 GB)
Form Factor
2.5 inch
Interface
SATA 6Gb/s

The older stuff, there's no TBW listed.

https://www.samsung.com/us/business/support/owners/product/840-pro-series-256gb/

For this one, need to dig a bit.

https://ssd.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Samsung-860-Evo-250GB-vs-Samsung-840-Pro-256GB/3949vs1408

"the warrantied terabytes written (TBW) has doubled from 75 TBW ... for the 250 GB"

That's because the 840 Pro was likely pure MLC and not 3D VNAND MLC.

*******

Samsung 840 series (250GB) [lacks Pro in the name, similar to an Evo version] [Nov.2012]

So right away, we can tell from the capacity, whether we have the right
one or not.

You list 232GB, which might be a 250GB one. It's more likely to be this
one then, without the word Pro in it.

There are two models we can look at:

https://geizhals.de/?cmp=841502&cmp=977940

MZ-7TD250BW SSD 840 250GB 2D-NAND TLC, 21nm TBW=???
MZ-7TE250BW SSD 840 EVO 250GB 2D-NAND TLC, Samsung, 19nm TBW=72TB

*******

We can conclude, from all the TBW being the same, that you are at:

27.2TB/72TB = 37.8% used, roughly

*******

Since each brand includes useful items, we can look at one.

https://www.crucial.com/support/articles-faq-ssd/ssds-and-smart-data

Crucial-defined SMART attributes described

Attribute 202: Percentage Lifetime Used <=== So you don't have to look
up the TBW value, it just tells
you the answer.

The SMART definitions don't all have to be the same.
Some SMART definitions would be considered baseline,
others, less so.

*******

"Good" refers to predictive failure.

If the unit doesn't have a valid 202 style field, I wonder
how the smartctl figures it out ?

Obviously, the drive must have some way of communicating
this. It's the human that might not be in the loop.
The wear leveling count, might be a way to do it.

If it were running out of blocks to substitute, that
would figure into the predictive failure determination
as well. But drives like the Intel, which brick even when
there is no "trouble" to speak of, you could not rely
on running out of substitute blocks as an indication
of age. Having a "Percentage Lifetime Used", really
is a good SMART parameter to have. In Samsungs case, it
almost seems like they were "shy" about telling the
truth back then. I think the competition has turned up
the heat on this, so that TBW is now part of more adverts.

It would certainly help sell this 12000 TBW device,
which hasn't been seen at retail yet :-) It is $800 for 2TB.
That's a Flash device specifically engineered for Chia coin mining.
The Flash device holds "farm plots" while they are prepared,
then they are transferred to regular hard drives.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/teamgroup-12000-tbw-ssd-chia-farming

Paul