16-year-old SATA II SSD survives 1 petabyte of writes, 25x the drive's rating

tjoff

These tests are quite misleading as they typically (didn't find any details) just go through the entire drive writing to it evenly. Which, to be fair is probably not that bad of a test unless you have intimate knowledge about how the controller operates. But it means that every single cell gets even use and there are no write amplification and it doesn't expose controller or usage characteristics. Depending on use it will most likely fail way earlier under more normal conditions. Not saying that filling a drive time and time again is completely abnormal, but it the nicest thing you can do to an ssd in many aspects.

nutrientharvest

Bogus article. They didn't write anything to the drive, they faked writes to run up the drive's write counter to test whether the controller would declare the drive worn out despite the flash not being touched.

yread

I also jhave 16 year old X25-M 120GB thats still going strong nowhere near as much writes though

ThePowerOfFuet

>However, this particular case was pretty interesting, given that it was on an older drive with MLC NAND that has since disappeared from the market. Much less surprised after reading this; MLC is quite durable. Not as much as SLC, but still much better than TLC or, heaven forbid, QLC flash (which is trash).

momoraul

TBW ratings are notoriously conservative. People have been writing well past a petabyte to consumer drives for years before they give out.

prism56

I have an old sata SSD that's been my write cache and transcoding drive for 8 years. Will check the tbw

wazoox

For more serious information, in my work PC I have a cache SSD which is a 2009 Intel 32GB, it got more than 46 TB of writes over 67000 hours of uptime, and is still working fine.