Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 261 posts

Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

#131

Post by SuchAnonMuchWow »

Shekelphile wrote: post #105
ricardobeat wrote: post #44

Misleading headline since after testing eight more drives, none more failed. 2/12 is not nearly as dramatic as “half”, and the ones that lost data are the cheap brands as one would expect.

2/12 is not good, especially if the drives that failed were using off the shelf phison controllers which is basically the entire market besides sandisk/samsung/intel.

It doesn't seems to be related to the controller: the same phison controller was in some model that failed and some models that passed.

(see later in the thread: https://twitter.com/xenadu02/status/1496770658750980103)

Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

#132

Post by RedShift1 »

layer8 wrote: post #102
RedShift1 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't find this? Can you link this claim?

https://nitter.net/john_p_looney/status/1495823128546746372#... https://nitter.net/lgerbarg/status/1495822123772018688#m I interpreted those as being server-grade but maybe they’re not.

This whole Twitter thread is garbage. "2 out of 35 drives passed". Alright, but which drives are that?

Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

#134

Post by cm2187 »

ricardobeat wrote: post #44

Misleading headline since after testing eight more drives, none more failed. 2/12 is not nearly as dramatic as “half”, and the ones that lost data are the cheap brands as one would expect.

To me the real thing missing is whether those drive advertise power loss protection or not. The next question is whether they are to be used in a laptop where power loss protection is less relevant given the local battery.

Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

#135

Post by sundvor »

temp112123 wrote: post #42
loloquwowndueo wrote: post #17

Twitter yuk, can somebody just post the names of the four tested drives and which passed/failed please?

The models that never lost data: Samsung 970 EVO Pro 2TB and WD Red SN700 1TB Correction: “Plus” not “Pro”. Exact model and date codes: Samsung 970 Evo Plus: MZ-V7S2T0, 2021.10 WD Red: WDS100T1R0C-68BDK0, 04Sept2021 Update 2: models that lost writes: SK Hynix Gold P31 2TB SHGP31-2000GM-2, FW 31060C20 Sabrent Rocket 512 (Phison PH-SBT-RKT-303 controller, no version or date codes listed)

Thanks, the 970 Evo Plus is a solid unit. I have one in my old PC, along with a 980 Pro. Went 990 Pros on my new, they didn't go 30 minutes before I had the firmware updated. :-) Very good performers.

(I always keep an eye on things like firmware updates).

Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

#136

Post by nraynaud »

CoastalCoder wrote: post #32

Does advertising a product as adhering to some standard, but secretly knowing that it doesn't 100%, count as e.g. fraud? I.e., is there any established case law on the matter? I'm thinking of this example, but also more generally USB devices, Bluetooth devices, etc.

I would probably use stronger words than that, data persistence is a big deal, so the missing part of the spec is a fundamental flaw. What's a disk whose persitence is random? You can probably legally assail the substance of the product.

Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

#137

Post by eviks »

Double_a_92 wrote: post #126
loloquwowndueo wrote: post #17

Twitter yuk, can somebody just post the names of the four tested drives and which passed/failed please?

We should just say X. Not "X (formerly Twitter), not X-itter, or anything. It's called X, if that name is stupid and unclear that's on them.

It's also on you since you have a choice re which name to use

Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

#138

Post by [deleted] »

andybak wrote: post #117
usr1106 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should just learn to ignore people still posting on Twitter (which is called something else now).

I'm still posting on Twitter because the people I'm trying to reach are still there and the alternatives never materialised.

[deleted]

Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

#139

Post by nraynaud »

wmf wrote: post #89
CoastalCoder wrote: post #32

Does advertising a product as adhering to some standard, but secretly knowing that it doesn't 100%, count as e.g. fraud? I.e., is there any established case law on the matter? I'm thinking of this example, but also more generally USB devices, Bluetooth devices, etc.

I wouldn't say fraud but this issue should trigger a recall.

I think it's more or less the same thing, the recall is the way to legally prove you didn't intend to disseminate the flawed product, wheras leaving it on the market after learning of the problem shows intent to keep it there. I would be surprised if a discovery at those companies would not surface an email form engineers discussing this problem.

Re: I tested four NVMe SSDs from four vendors – half lose FLUSH'd data on power loss (2022)

#140

Post by iamacyborg »

alanfranz wrote: post #59
IngvarLynn wrote: post #40

There is a flood of fake SSDs currently, mostly big brands. I've recently purchased counterfeit 1TB. It passes all the tests, performance is ok, it works... except it gets episodes where ioping would be anything between 0.7 ms and 15 seconds, that is under zero load. And these are quality fakes from a physical appearance perspective. The only way I could tell mine was fake is that the official Kingston firmware updat…

Did you get the fake in an official box? Or OEM version? This is quite a big claim.

It doesn't strike me as being a big claim, I recently bought some RAM for a NUC a few weeks ago on Amazon only to determine that it was likely counterfeit. It came in an official box with all packaging intact.
Post reply on HN