Is it dumb to store documents, videos, music etc. on an SSD?

[probablyLucky]

For context: my friends and I were having an argument the other day. They said that it's dumb to store documents, videos, music etc. on a SSD because it unnecessarily wears down the life span of the SSD. Furthermore they said it only makes sense to install programms, games etc. on a SSD and you should store documents, videos, music on a regular hard drive. 

I think that it doesn't matter, where you store your documents, videos, music etc. because modern day SSD's have such a long life span and I'd like to profit from the faster read and write speed an SSD comes along with. 

 

What's your opinion on this? 

[SkilledRebuilds]

Maybe back in the day you might care..

Plus Thousands if tiny picture file thumbnails and batch processingz..still benefit from the SSD.

 

Media Movies - I store them elsewhere anyway.

 

Id keep it far from full, and manage accordingly but it can mostly stay where it is.

[boggy77]

if you can afford to store everything on ssds, go for it. most people would store media files on hdds, because 4tb of hdds are much cheaper than 4tb of ssds, and for media files you don't need the speeds of ssds

[WereCatf]

20 minutes ago, probablyLucky said:

on a SSD because it unnecessarily wears down the life span of the SSD

That's a load of bullshit. Why would documents or such wear the SSD down any more than some other files? A modern SSD can easily handle a decade of use even as an OS-drive, so storing such files on one is a complete non-issue.

[Chiyawa]

Your friend might be correct. Here's why:

 

- Storing document files (which I assume is somewhat important) in SSD has major potential of permanent data lost or irrecoverable data if the SSD controller is faulty or the storage chip is burnt. HDD, even if the drive controller is faulty, still has a chance to recover data stored inside the platter through a 'donor controller' (if the platter is still in perfect condition), making it a little bit better in the event of drive failure.

- SSD memory chips are also prone to burning if there's sudden voltage spike or surge or if the cell is being rewritten very often, and once it is burnt, all the data in the memory chip is no longer salvageable.

- SSD has an extremely good read speed and are consider better for WORM (Write Once Read Many) application. Writing data to SSD proves to be risky as it needs slightly higher voltage to 'etch' the data to the memory cell. Initially, SSD reliability is somewhat similar to early days of USB flash drives, where the storage chip prone to burn out because memory cell usage is not balance. Thanks to the sophisticated controller SSD has, this case is virtually eliminated as the SSD could manage wear level better these days.

 

I'm guessing that your friends are aware of the dangers of using SSD, and they are correct. I do admit it is risky to store data into SSD, and because of some of the disadvantage I mentioned, most servers are still running on HDD than SSD, even if SSD proves to be very fast. However, for a consumer, this type of disadvantages are consider good trade off, and the data reliability issue can be easily overcome if you do backups often, making it ideal.

 

I hope my explanation will give you more insight. Even though I'm using SSD, but I often backup whatever files in my SSD to HDD in case if my SSD failed. I would recommend you to do the same.

 

Regards,

Chiyawa