Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

SSD or HDD for a better chance to stand against a Lightning blast?


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 enigma

enigma

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:29 PM

Posted 05 April 2016 - 12:13 PM

Building a system where data protection against damage/loss is the crucial aspect. That being said, the budget is unfortunately very limited.

 

Space needed - minimal. 128GB SSD is not going to be filled over a hundred years in what the system will be used for.

Speed - completely irrelevant.

 

That being said, need to choose whether to RAID1 with a couple SSD's or go for a couple regular HDD's. Assume the price is the same.

 

Interested in hearing some feedback from those who experienced lightning damage and had BOTH - SSD and HDD in the machine. OR has at least heard about such an occurrence. So far managed to find only a couple online posts matching this criteria, and in both cases SDD's got fried while HDD's were completely fine. In one of those cases HDD's were in RAID5 so the evidence is even more compelling. Still, hardly a statistical proof, this.

 

There will of course be UPS for both power and ethernet, but assume there may be something accidentally connected to both - an unprotected wall socked *and* the PC.

 

I am leaning towards SSD (thinking Samsung EVO 750), but the two stories that I found seem to suggest that SSD's might be a but more vulnerable to suffer from power surge. I completely understand that it is impossible to predict anything when it comes to lightning, but it would not be vise to discredit statistics from actual events.

 

ANY info you could share will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.

 

 



BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 dc3

dc3

    Bleeping Treehugger


  • Members
  • 30,612 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sierra Foothills of Northern Ca.
  • Local time:03:29 AM

Posted 05 April 2016 - 12:31 PM

There isn't really anything that is going to work with a direct or close lightning strike because the current is so great.  About the only thing you can do is install a good lightning rod, a proper size conductor to run between the rod and a earth ground... and hope for the best.

 

Here is a short article which is well worth reading.


Family and loved ones will always be a priority in my daily life.  You never know when one will leave you.

 

 

 

 


#3 enigma

enigma
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:29 PM

Posted 05 April 2016 - 12:44 PM

Thank you dc3. I am very well aware that the power surge might go even through UPS. Hence I am not taking it's protection for granted and understand that the chance is always there. The area in question is not very prone to lightning storms in general, but the unfortunate fact is that there are no very high trees or buildings around. Lightning rods are in place, but the setup is very old and is not going to be replaced any time soon. So the chance of a lightning hitting the building is there..

 

The least I can do is to take into account actual feedback from such occurrences, and hopefully choose the option which gives us even a slightest theoretical advantage.



#4 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,402 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:01:29 PM

Posted 05 April 2016 - 12:49 PM

If you want reliable SSD, forget every TLC drive, including Samsung 750 Evo.

 

As for reliability, HDD is basically better because it's not so prone to controller level errors and HDD platter is quite durable compared NAND flash chips.. Another question is how much it will cost to read damaged HDD but still...



#5 enigma

enigma
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:29 PM

Posted 05 April 2016 - 01:40 PM

If you want reliable SSD, forget every TLC drive, including Samsung 750 Evo.

 

As for reliability, HDD is basically better because it's not so prone to controller level errors and HDD platter is quite durable compared NAND flash chips.. Another question is how much it will cost to read damaged HDD but still...

I am placing my trust on Samsung's 5year warranty.. any manufacturer that is willing to give that must have some faith in it. Chance of a drive failure is also the reason why we are doing RAID1, as the probability of both failing at the very same time is pretty slim. Well except the possible lightning strike ofc :)

 

If one goes, the info is still there on the other one. Replace the damaged one and move on.

 

As far as reading damaged HDD.. whatever the cost may be, it will definitely be less expensive than getting info out of a cooked SSD. But what we're doing is trying to not get there in the first place.

 

There must also be a reason why most HDD's come with 2 or 3 year warranty, and that's the bunch we have to choose from because of the limited budget. That's why I am leaning a little more to SSD's, although something deep inside is still whispering that HDD's might be a better choice.



#6 Drillingmachine

Drillingmachine

  • Members
  • 2,402 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:01:29 PM

Posted 06 April 2016 - 02:36 PM

 

If you want reliable SSD, forget every TLC drive, including Samsung 750 Evo.

 

As for reliability, HDD is basically better because it's not so prone to controller level errors and HDD platter is quite durable compared NAND flash chips.. Another question is how much it will cost to read damaged HDD but still...

I am placing my trust on Samsung's 5year warranty.. any manufacturer that is willing to give that must have some faith in it. Chance of a drive failure is also the reason why we are doing RAID1, as the probability of both failing at the very same time is pretty slim. Well except the possible lightning strike ofc :)

 

If one goes, the info is still there on the other one. Replace the damaged one and move on.

 

As far as reading damaged HDD.. whatever the cost may be, it will definitely be less expensive than getting info out of a cooked SSD. But what we're doing is trying to not get there in the first place.

 

There must also be a reason why most HDD's come with 2 or 3 year warranty, and that's the bunch we have to choose from because of the limited budget. That's why I am leaning a little more to SSD's, although something deep inside is still whispering that HDD's might be a better choice.

 

Samsung's warranty is worth almost nothing. Even if they offer 50 year warranty, it's valid only if drive is totally broken. If it's only like 5% from original speed, Samsung considers it works and no warranty. This is the case with Samsung 840. So that 5 year warranty is worth almost nothing.

 

HDD's come with lesser warranty because long warranty cost more and also HDD's are not getting much cheaper. After two years 1 TB HDD has probably almost same price as today while 120GB SSD cost probably about 30% of what is costs today. So it's much cheaper to replace SSD after few years than replace HDD. Also SSD's are quite immune to knocks while HDD's are not.

 

It's very common mistake to think that long warranty tells anything about durability. It mostly doesn't. Many times companies have shortened warranty times while keeping quality exactly same. That way price can be reduced as spare units are needed for shorter time. So shorter warranty=cheaper product.


Edited by Drillingmachine, 06 April 2016 - 02:36 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users