Intel 600p locks itself after 72TB, all capcities

[Oussebon]

Apologies for the slightly clickbaity title.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/intel-600p-series-ssd-review,review-33662-3.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-ssd-endurance-600p-mwi,32731.html

The drive apparently goes into a read only mode when the MWI limit is reached and there isn't spare area left. The 600p series apparently all have the same endurance limit which intel quotes as 72TB regardless of capacity.

If there are still cells available for replacement the SSD can continue to function past the MWI counter expiration, and the user can continue to write data after the warrantied endurance rating (which Intel doesn’t recommend). However, the SSD will enter the read-only state if the spare area is exhausted. The company also outlined the data recovery process after the endurance expires:

I've managed 37TB on an SSD I got in late Nov 2014, and I'm no prosumer. So it's not necessarily a non-issue.

Anyway, worth being aware of I guess.

 

[mantadog]

72TB seems kinda ok to me, ive put just over 7TB on my SSD in a little under 2 years. Though I do use my SSD sparingly and the HDD takes most of the battering for video etc.

The drive for lower cost flash memory is the main issue, at least if you know its good for 72TB (and with intel you can assume it will be) you can take steps to swap it out as you approach the limit. I have no doubt it will catch some people out but at least you know what you are getting, which IMO is a good thing. How many people would suffer a failed HDD inside a year or expect the HDD to go on forever, its the same problem just probably explained better.

 

[Oussebon]

72tb is pretty pathetic for a 1TB drive tbh. If I've managed to hit over half of that on mine in less than 2 years..

Compared to SSDs that can eat hundreds of TB of writes even 120gb capacity before dying (i.e. before you can't use them any more) it's quite a sharp contrast imo.

 

[ubuysa]

That quoted 72TB sounds suspiciously like lawyer speak to me. It's probably all their lawyers will allow them to claim even though in reality it's probably a lot higher. Either that, or they just can't be bothered to accurately determine the real lifespan of each capacity of drive

 

[mantadog]

Intel have come forward with a fairly fast drive at a low price point, you have to expect a compromise somewhere. I don't think 72Tb is unreasonable for most people over the average lifespan of a computer. it is a decent drive but basically sold as a value product. That said it is possible a bit cheeky to not scale it with the size of the drive but at least its black and white.

That's how I see it anyway.