The ssd haters were right

i can't believe that there would be a day when i realize that the ssd haters were right. many ssd manufacturers are indeed scammers that sell garbage with big numbers on the package but when you actually use it you will notice that it is much slower than a hdd in many cases. even the speed test programs are often designed so that they don't ever hit the limits of the fast cache that would make it actually write to the chip where the files are supposed to go

Attached: 1644422425287.png (730x607, 132.53K)

AHAHAHHAHAHA
THE ABSOLUTE STATE OF SSDKEKS

Attached: kek.jpg (586x580, 75.01K)

Another day another issue of Linux being total shit and blaming literally everything else on the planet except their garbage webserver OS

this was not a linux problem, it was a problem of a dishonest manufacturer that told someone to use their testing program that is designed to not test with a load that does not fit in the fast cache

Samsung even acknowledged the bug and fixed in a later product. Seethe and cope wintoddler

>250GB
...

what an absolute shit take

Sent from my Windows 11 PC Verified with TPM

>windows
stopped reading there

>buying consumer drives
Get what you deserve desu

Shut up prostitute.

There is no bug. Samsung commit fraud, sold SSD's with an advertised write speed that's higher than the actual write speed. I, and others, bought an SSD with an advertised storage of hundreds of gigabytes or more, at a high speed, and were sold 13GB's at that speed.

I'm looking forward to the class action lawsuit

>380 mb/sec
>slower than a hard drive
Yeah fuck off retard. Even on my cheap shit Crucial P1 you have to write 15% of the fucking drive before it drops from 2gb/sec. This is caused by a combination of cache and cooling and it's not an unsolvable problem as the 970 Pro can basically write at full speed forever. Everybody who knows their shit understood this to begin with. Don't buy garbage you fucking poorfag.

We can tell

380MB/s is not slower than a HDD. Also it's literally orders of magnitude faster in random access.

🤔😕

Attached: firefox_2022-04-02_01-23-52.png (367x97, 3.97K)

more like 380KB/s if you for example try to download a torrent

Yes around two orders of magnitude usually, sometimes more. And what most operating systems really like is random performance, not sequential.
Note that you return to full performance after a couple seconds of hammering the drive with writes so this is literally a non-problem for basically any consumer use case, except if you were shooting UHD video in a camera or something.

>acknowledged the bug and fixed in a later product.
You are supposed to... you know... fix the existing product

>when you actually use it you will notice that it is much slower than a hdd
which hdd can manage anything close to 380MB/s?

Market is not important enough to bother fixing an issue like this unfortunately

hdds can take data at full speed until its filled up but the ssd write speed starts fluctuating once the cache is full. have one of these fine things as your system drive and you will notice that everything becomes very unresponsive

Literally nonsensical. The worst case scenario for an SSD is still way faster than any HDD ever made.

>Samsung NVMe SSD
>windows 7
>crystaldiskmark
shows me exactly the advertised values, dunno what you're on about. maybe it's just a lincuck problem.

Sounds like a linux problem

Attached: file.png (800x360, 520.4K)

>hdds can take data at full speed until its filled up
>t. zoomer, pic related
>have one of these fine things as your system drive and you will notice that everything becomes very unresponsive
ssds are something like 2-5 orders of magnitudes (100-100,000x) more responsive m8, even a 99% speed reduction or if it's a decent ssd a 99.99% decrease in latency still puts it ahead of hdds
I don't know what kind of ssds you've been using where that's happening

Attached: defragging-a-disk-process.jpg (500x366, 40.51K)

I just want a storage method that is cheap and will last 50 years without corruption

you rang?

Attached: blu rays.jpg (1000x755, 76.05K)

Attached: file.png (236x288, 122.21K)

even if stored perfectly, it will decay long before 50 years

CD are the one that shit the bed and really bad dvd
BD are expensive

its not going to do that if you don't keep it powered

>Nooo, it's okay if big homo rips me off, because fine print

Attached: 1641090632821.jpg (640x784, 37.74K)

optical disks are very reliable