Power-Loss-Protected SSDs Tested: Only Intel S3500 Passes

http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/W4TOk4MPwZ4/story01.htm

http://slashdot.feedsportal.com/c/35028/f/647410/s/35444cba/sc/21/l/0Lhardware0Bslashdot0Borg0Cstory0C130C120C270C20A82490Cpower0Eloss0Eprotected0Essds0Etested0Eonly0Eintel0Es350A0A0Epasses0Dutm0Isource0Frss10B0Amainlinkanon0Gutm0Imedium0Ffeed/story01.htm

lkcl writes "After the reports on SSD reliability and after experiencing a costly 50% failure rate on over 200 remote-deployed OCZ Vertex SSDs, a degree of paranoia set in where I work. I was asked to carry out SSD analysis with some very specific criteria: budget below £100, size greater than 16Gbytes and Power-loss protection mandatory. This was almost an impossible task: after months of searching the shortlist was very short indeed. There was only one drive that survived the torturing: the Intel S3500. After more than 6,500 power-cycles over several days of heavy sustained random writes, not a single byte of data was lost. Crucial M4: failed. Toshiba THNSNH060GCS: failed. Innodisk 3MP SATA Slim: failed. OCZ: failed hard. Only the end-of-lifed Intel 320 and its newer replacement, the S3500, survived unscathed. The conclusion: if you care about data even when power could be unreliable, only buy Intel SSDs." Relatedly, don't expect SSDs to become cheaper than HDDs any time soon.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.