Hello all, I am interested in a ssd. But the prospect of simply one day & not having a drive is not something I am looking forward to. Yes all drives fail, but ssd's do without warning. Normal HD's at least give you a warning ( in most cases at least). So what would the forum choose a Western Digital Velociraptor or a ssd? thanks
That is what I am thinking about. But how would the Western Digital Velociraptor compare speed wise to a ssd? I know that a ssd is much faster but the Western Digital Velociraptor is not a slow drive.
In this case you are concerned about failures warnings, then you could sacrifice some performance. IMO your choice should be Velociraptor.
No way a Raptor over a SSD. For storage yes, but simply not for boot. SSDs are usually reliable. I have had great experience with Intel and Samsung, though Crucial and Plextor are also good.
WD Velociraptor: Sustained Transfer Speed: 145MB/s Crucial M500 SSD: Sustained Transfer Speed: 500MB/s As you can see, this is the main difference among them, data transfer speed. Crucial SSD is more than three times faster over WD Velociraptor. But as you said, failure warnings are your priority, I suggest you to purchase the latter, all the more reason if you are planning to use it for storage purposes. However, if you want it to install Windows and Programs (not for personal data such as documents or photographs) Crucial is the best choice. You shouldn't be concerned about a sudden death, without warnings, because Windows and Programs are replaceable, your personal info not.
True, especially the point about personal data which is backed up to three internal hard drives & two usb 3.0 external HD's.