To SSD or not SSD.

A place to talk about GPUs/Motherboards/CPUs/Cases/Remotes, etc.
User avatar
newfiend

Posts: 2503
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: Earth

HTPC Specs: Show details

#21

Post by newfiend » Thu Dec 22, 2011 9:46 pm

Ya every time I try and post from work I end up messing things up too.. Its not just you Richard..lol

Sent from my WP7 using Board Express

User avatar
IT Troll

Posts: 1172
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:42 am
Location: Edinburgh, UK

HTPC Specs: Show details

#22

Post by IT Troll » Fri Dec 23, 2011 9:44 am

Another vote for SSDs are great. I have a fairly cheap Intel 40GB SSD as a system boot drive. Installation and O/S transfer went very smoothly. As a result Media Center has a much snappier response especially in the Guide and Scheduled Recordings. In Windows 7 these are SQL based databases rather than flat XML files and so tend to be more disk intensive. A prime example of this is the keyword search in the Guide which can tie the disk up whilst running the query.
Are you a Recorded TV HD user or want to give it a try? Check out the new community-made update; Recorded TV HD v2.1.1

User avatar
WarrenH

Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 8:37 am
Location: Kent, UK

HTPC Specs: Show details

#23

Post by WarrenH » Fri Dec 23, 2011 1:46 pm

+1 for SSD, system just seems that bit more responsive, although can't see any difference between my expensive OCZ and cheap Intel.

User avatar
EmirOfGroofunkistan

Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:02 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#24

Post by EmirOfGroofunkistan » Fri Dec 23, 2011 7:24 pm

to that note, I ended up buying a cheap ($50) kingston SSD and it's way faster than my 2 yr old intel SSD. Cheap is fine for the boot drive as long as it has a good lifetime...but I won't find that out for a while I hope.

barnabas1969

Posts: 5738
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:23 pm
Location: Titusville, Florida, USA

HTPC Specs: Show details

#25

Post by barnabas1969 » Tue Dec 27, 2011 7:25 pm

+1 for SSD. My OS is loaded on SSD. I have a very large recorded TV library on 3TB of storage space. I also have four extenders. I have none of the lag problems reported by some users. I attribute this to the speed at which the computer can access the data needed to display the menus, guide listings, thumb nails, etc. SSD makes complete sense for a WMC system.

Fleadh

Posts: 145
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 8:26 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#26

Post by Fleadh » Wed Dec 28, 2011 11:09 am

adam1991 wrote:Streaming server is way, WAY different than a DVR.
I think on a HTPC there just arent being pushed enough to really appriciate how much of a massive leap forward they really are.
Au contraire. Everyone recognizes that DVR use pushes SSD over the edge with writes, and that's why spinning discs rule for DVR recording storage.

And since 99% of what the DVR does is work with the recording storage system, SSD plays a minute part in the overall system.
And by 'everyone' you mean 'you'.

SSD's write times are faster then HDD's, Their documented and tested mean time between fauilures (mtbf) is massivly higher.
There is a limit to the number of writes to any one block but the fact is that this number is still huge and very much overcome by randomisation of the writes. This fact is also taken into account in all the MTBF testing and its still so far in excess of any mechanical disks that the write myth and those that subscribe to it just begger all rational belief.


Most people use mechanical disks for storage because of the capacity and cost. If SSD's were cheaper everyone should use them but they probably wont because they still believe in some write limit myth dispite all the evidence being to the contrary.

I work with both mechanical and flash based VOD servers, the mechanical disk based servers are lower cost and greater storage capacity but lower streaming rates due to limitations of their read speeds. there is also a High rate of disk failure due to wear. You're talking 10 TB per server serving 4-500 simultaneous streams (at SD 2.9mb/s)

The flash based servers are high cost, low capacity but huge streaming capacity due to the incredible read rates. The disks have an extrmley low failure rate. You're talking 3.5 TB per server streaming 2500 simultaneous streams (at SD 2.9mb/s)

richard1980

Posts: 2623
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:15 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#27

Post by richard1980 » Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:02 pm

SSD write time really depends on the SSD. My Intel X25-V SSD has a sequential write speed of "up to 35MB/s". Even a slow HDD like a WD Caviar Green can easily surpass this mark with just one write operation happening (HDD write performance suffers as you try to do more and more simultaneous operations). Now read speed...well I've yet to see any HDD that could touch even the slowest SSD's read performance.

Also, your use of MTBF appears to me to be incorrect. If I understand you correctly, you are equating MTBF to lifespan, when that is not correct. If I am misunderstanding your post, I apologize. I wrote a post some time ago that explains MTBF if anyone wants to check it out.

barnabas1969

Posts: 5738
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:23 pm
Location: Titusville, Florida, USA

HTPC Specs: Show details

#28

Post by barnabas1969 » Wed Dec 28, 2011 5:23 pm

Richard,

I remember that post well. Just curious... what do you do for a living?

richard1980

Posts: 2623
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:15 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#29

Post by richard1980 » Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:26 am

I do IT (pretty much all of it) and general administrative and contract support work at the corporate headquarters for a federal contractor that specializes in aviation and engineering services. I honestly didn't expect to work in this position as long as I have (about 4 and a half years now), as it was just a stepping stone to the FAA after I returned from a deployment to Afghanistan (I spent almost 13 years in the military...10 as a mounted Infantryman, 1 as a dismounted Cavalry Scout, and almost 2 as a mounted Cavalry Scout), but I actually ended up liking the job so I've stuck with it. It's much easier than the previous job I had, where I dodged bullets and things that go boom...plus I make more money now than I did then.

User avatar
STC

Posts: 6808
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 4:58 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#30

Post by STC » Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:41 am

Cool beans Sir. Nice to put some presence to the words :)
By the Community, for the Community. 100% Commercial Free.

Want decent guide data back? Check out EPG123

barnabas1969

Posts: 5738
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 7:23 pm
Location: Titusville, Florida, USA

HTPC Specs: Show details

#31

Post by barnabas1969 » Thu Dec 29, 2011 1:57 pm

Well Richard, as I've said before... I always appreciate what you have to say. You have a lot of good information and you always write posts in a tactful way.

I'm in IT too, but my focus is pretty narrow and specialized. Most of my work focuses on our software (implementation, identifying bugs, and basically finding a way to make our software do whatever our customer wants it do to). It's been a long time since I've been primarily responsible for Windows desktops & servers, so I'm a little rusty on some subjects... especially new stuff that has come along since way back in the late 90's.

I've been in my current job now for almost 15 years, and doing the exact same work for 19. I do a lot of reading to try to keep up with the new stuff, but it seems that you do more reading than I do. :)

User avatar
IT Troll

Posts: 1172
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:42 am
Location: Edinburgh, UK

HTPC Specs: Show details

#32

Post by IT Troll » Fri Dec 30, 2011 11:49 am

For an O/S and general applications drive the write speed is almost irrelevant. What really counts here is the random seek and read times.

When you are interacting with the Media Center interface most of the disk operations will be read ones.
Are you a Recorded TV HD user or want to give it a try? Check out the new community-made update; Recorded TV HD v2.1.1

richard1980

Posts: 2623
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:15 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#33

Post by richard1980 » Fri Dec 30, 2011 12:37 pm

Except for recording and buffering live TV. Both of those require heavy amounts of writing, but the writing can also be redirected to a HDD.

User avatar
IT Troll

Posts: 1172
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:42 am
Location: Edinburgh, UK

HTPC Specs: Show details

#34

Post by IT Troll » Sat Dec 31, 2011 12:13 am

Yes the assumption is that you use HDD for your media, SSD is purely OS and apps.
Are you a Recorded TV HD user or want to give it a try? Check out the new community-made update; Recorded TV HD v2.1.1

adam1991

Posts: 2893
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 2:31 pm
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#35

Post by adam1991 » Sat Dec 31, 2011 1:30 am

Fleadh says otherwise.

???

richard1980

Posts: 2623
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:15 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#36

Post by richard1980 » Sat Dec 31, 2011 2:05 pm

Fleadh's post doesn't really apply to this conversation, as his opinion is based primarily on his experience running a VOD server, which as you pointed out, is very different from a typical DVR. Additionally, he is/was ill informed about SSD lifespan/endurance (I'm hoping he understands MTBF now).

With that said, you are both correct about using an SSD as a recording drive in a standard HTPC/DVR. There is no hard rule that says you can't use an SSD as a recording/buffer drive. Each scenario is different. The important thing to know is how to figure it out. Take the expected write endurance (generally in TBs) and divide it by the workload for a given period of time. That will get you the expected lifespan of the drive. In some cases, you will find that the expected lifespan is so high it doesn't really matter if you write to the drive.

Here are some examples (assume an average bitrate of 12 Mbps):
  • SSD 1 has an expected write endurance of 200 TB. Your family averages 7 hours of buffering/recording per day. You can expect the drive to last approximately 14.5 years.
  • SSD 1 has an expected write endurance of 200 TB. Your family averages 14 hours of buffering/recording per day. You can expect the drive to last approximately 7.25 years.
  • SSD 2 has an expected write endurance of 50 TB. Your family averages 14 hours of buffering/recording per day. You can expect the drive to last approximately 1.8 years.
  • SSD 2 has an expected write endurance of 50 TB. Your family averages 28 hours of buffering/recording per day. You can expect the drive to last approximately 11 months.
As you can see, that first example has a projected lifespan of 14.5 years....so there's really no reason not to use the SSD as the recording/buffer drive. You'd probably buy a new SSD before that one dies anyway. But as you decrease the endurance and/or increase the workload, things start changing drastically. How many people are going to want to buy a new SSD every year or two? Not many. I'd say 5 years is probably about the average minimum lifespan consumers want.

User avatar
IT Troll

Posts: 1172
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:42 am
Location: Edinburgh, UK

HTPC Specs: Show details

#37

Post by IT Troll » Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:26 am

Above any concerns over write speed and MTBF, I would have thought that cost would rule out using SSD for media in a domestic application. That would be a very expensive way of storing what is essentially a static data archive.
Are you a Recorded TV HD user or want to give it a try? Check out the new community-made update; Recorded TV HD v2.1.1

User avatar
newfiend

Posts: 2503
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:10 pm
Location: Earth

HTPC Specs: Show details

#38

Post by newfiend » Sun Jan 01, 2012 3:27 pm

Always said Richard was a smart guy.. Now I know why. Thanks for your service to our country Richard. Glad we have you here too!

Sent from my SGH-i937 using Board Express

richard1980

Posts: 2623
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:15 am
Location:

HTPC Specs: Show details

#39

Post by richard1980 » Sun Jan 01, 2012 3:37 pm

IT Troll wrote:Above any concerns over write speed and MTBF, I would have thought that cost would rule out using SSD for media in a domestic application. That would be a very expensive way of storing what is essentially a static data archive.
I agree that having static information on the SSD is expensive, but just because the data is initially written to the SSD doesn't mean it stays there. Some people use their HTPC for recording and playback, but the recordings are transferred to remote storage locations (such as another PC, WHS, or a NAS). Also, there are some people that don't keep recordings very long, so the data isn't really static. Additionally, consider a scenario where the HTPC is primarily used as a client that watches live TV.

So if you are already going to build an HTPC with an SSD, do you really want to spend any additional money putting a HDD in the system?

Like I said, each scenario is different. All three of these scenarios have potential for an SSD being the best choice. There's no hard rule one way or another. You just have to evaluate each scenario and see what you come up with.

joevulture

Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 3:48 am
Location: Indianapolis, IN

HTPC Specs: Show details

#40

Post by joevulture » Sun Jan 01, 2012 8:14 pm

Putting a SSD in my WMC machine was probably the best hardware upgrade I have done for it.

The OS boots up in five seconds (cold boot) and the EPG is vastly faster. I have 150+ channels in the guide and scrolling through them (even with Channel +/-) was painfully slow (using MyChannelLogos may have contributed to this though). With the SSD, it's very quick.

Prior to installing the SSD, I was using ReadyBoost on a 256MB flash drive, and it helped out the EPG quite a bit also; however, I decided that I wanted the fast boot (for those times that MCE says that HDCP is broken).

The SSD is only for the OS/apps, recordings are stored on a SATA III 3TB drive.

-- Joe

Post Reply