hello, does recording 6000 1 min clips ruins the health of your HDD?

[NoobDaddy]

if so what ssd/hdd can withstand this type of punishment?

[BobVonBob]

It only hurts your drive to the extent that 6,000 clips is a lot of drive usage. It doesn't hurt your drive more than a single 6,000 minute recording, or any other way of writing that amount of data to the drive.

[mariushm]

That's nothing.  The drives don't care if it's 6000 files or 60000 files  or if it's 1 file with 6000 seconds instead of 6000 files each 1 second worth of video.

 

SSDs have a finite life ... ex 200-300 TB written on them .... the number of individual videos doesn't matter.

It's simple math... if your 1s video is 1 MB, and you're writing 6000 videos, then in theory you've written 6000 MB or 6 GB so you've used 6 GB out of 200-300 x 1000 GB of SSD life (for a 1 TB SSD, lower capacity drives have lower endurance).

 

Hard drives typically don't have a write limit, but the cheaper drives are specified as something like "recommended less than n amount of TB per year"  ... for example 50 TB read/writes per year for a 2-4 TB drive.

 

If it's temporary stuff .... you can use ram drive software to reserve a portion of your RAM and use it as a virtual drive ... for example reserve 8 GB of ram and make a 8 GB FAT32 or NTFS drive  (FAT32 would be enough, as 1s videos would not hit limitations of fat32 file system like max 4 GB per file, you'll have a few MB per each video)

 

This way the video files never touch your drives so no harm is done.

 

[Moonzy]

Nothing more than regular wear and tear for both HDD and SSD

 

If you're looking for surveillance storage, there are hard disks specifically made for those I think, WD purple was one of it

[NoobDaddy]

well cause i have an hdd and it says on crystaldisk that its caution now. and i believe i havent done that much to it. i may be wrong. so i was wondering if 6000 minutes of files is the culprit. thank you so much for your help and input guys. it means a lot

[mariushm]

Hard drives can fail for various reasons, that caution warning is a sign that the hard drive may be failing.

But the fact that you wrote 6000 video files is almost definitely unrelated, a coincidence.

[NoobDaddy]

25 minutes ago, mariushm said:

That's nothing.  The drives don't care if it's 6000 files or 60000 files  or if it's 1 file with 6000 seconds instead of 6000 files each 1 second worth of video.

 

SSDs have a finite life ... ex 200-300 TB written on them .... the number of individual videos doesn't matter.

 

if SSD have a 200-300tb per 1tb storage do you know the estimate of an hdd?

[Kilrah]

There's no such number for an HDD. 

[NoobDaddy]

1 minute ago, Kilrah said:

There's no such number for an HDD. 

thank you for the reply sir. so like its based on luck for HDD?

is that included in the "silicon lottery" term?

[NoobDaddy]

does this really mean doom? cause i need to buy another HDD or something. its a crystaldiskinfo

 

[Kilrah]

Luck, age, power-up cycles...

Depends what the actual failing parameters are, but personally if a drive gets to that state I won't store anything important on it anymore.

[mariushm]

22 minutes ago, Kilrah said:

There's no such number for an HDD. 

 

Well... yes and no... see video below.

 

There are some parameters which have a finite value.

 

 

[NoobDaddy]

ohh thank you so much  does the partition add insult to injury? cause i acquired my m.2 ssd and hdd at the same time. it has almost the same power cycle (about 1200-1400) but the hours have 4000 (m.2)and 8000(hdd). bought this sept 2020. is that normal? my m.2 has no partition but my hdd has 1tb partitions

[mariushm]

makes absolutely no difference if there are partitions or not ...  Partitions are something virtual, just a way to separate content,  the hard drive or ssd absolutely doesn't care about it. 

 

Traditionally, with hard drives, the data is physically written in an area of a disc that corresponds to the percentage the partition uses .. ex you have a 4 TB drive and you make a only a 500 GB partition, that uses the area of platters from 0% to 12%, anything you write in that 500 GB will be written on the tracks closest to the center of the drive, or closest to the edge of the drive (I forget now if they start counting data tracks from the center or from the edge, I think it's from the center).

It was actually a practice in the past in datacenters and places that had databases with lots of records to take a high speed drive and make a small partition (for example take a 300 GB 15k rpm drive and make a 30 GB partition) and only use those 30 GB, because this way the read/write heads would only have to move left and right a cm or so, between a limited number of tracks on the platters, and that would result in lower latency, getting random data from database much faster.

 

The same practice  can be used with some amount of success to isolate a weak area on a hard drive. For example, if your hard driver starts to develop bad sectors at let's say 3500 MB, there's a chance that if you read or write stuff in that area, that weakened area on the platters could expand. 

So, you could try to minimize that chance and make the drive last longer my making a partition that surrounds that area. For example, make a partition from 0 to 3250 MB, make a partition from 3250 MB to 3750 MB, and make a final partition from 3750 MB to end of drive.  Then, you simply give drive letters to first and third partition only, and the partition over the weak area is hidden from use. 

So now, when you read or write data, the read/write heads will simply jump over that unused partition. 

 

In the case of SSDs, SSDs don't even keep the data  on one, they store the data in random memory chips and random layers of the memory chips (a memory chip has 96-128-more layers, a stack of nand memory chips)

Partitions are pointless on SSDs, you can't force data to be written in a particular memory chip, or wear out a region of the SSD by only writing data to a particular partition. 

 

For SSDs the concept of partitions is really meaningless.