It's a great budget option with good price-to-performance value.
PCIe Gen4, 600TBW and TLC drive with 4150 MB/s R/W speeds, $75 is a good price for it.
Surcharges: 0% for bank deposit, Afterpay & Zip Money. 1.2% for VISA / MasterCard & PayPal. 2.2% for AmEx.
Free shipping excludes WA, NT & remote areas.
$75 for premier, $65 using code
$75 isn't bad for it. $75 + delivery+ surcharge is very average. You'll literally come out ahead by not using the coupon unless you buy something else as it brings it below $79.
Centrecom prices are never good unless click and collect or you order enough for free delivery, and while this gets you most of the way there, you need to buy an additional item.
I don't have anything against centrecom as a business and have purchased from them before.
They have however reduced their shipping offering in the last couple of years - more items intelligible for free shipping regardless of spend, more postcodes intelligible for the standard rate shipping or free shipping, increased minimum spend.
As a business they're entirely within their rights to set their prices and shipping rates as they choose - conversely that means deals from them are now few and far between.
In this case when using the coupon code results in a higher price than not using it, it's hardly a great coupon code - hey here's a coupon code customers! By the way it will cost you more not less. Where's the deal there?
This or the MSI?
MSI is $59 with VIPER.
Seems to be Phison controller and Micron TLC according to:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/msi-spatium-m450-1-tb/
Depends on what your preference is. WD is Sandisk, that says it all for me, not to mention more than 25% faster
It's not like the speed difference is significant.
They're both DRAM-less PCIe 4 TLC drives operating at PCIe 3 speeds.
Main thing is reliability… if the MSI and this drive are equal in reliability, I'll go for the MSI and save $16.
But I don't know how reliable MSI is with their SSDs.
If reliability is your criteria then din't buy $50 nvme. 25% is hardly insignificant. WD has been making hard drives since long before you were born. You decide
Where do you get that for $59?
What's the most reliable brand to get a bunch of these to have as a backup of photos/video? I'm curious as I have about 5tb of data that I want a second back up of and don't know if it's better to get a single SSd or get a few of these and put them in a case?. Thanks
HDD over SSD for archive. Optical media above both, but this little thing called the cloud is ultimately the safest.
SSDs are atrociously bad value for reliable/bulk storage, especially now the manufacturers are using mainly QLC in their largest drives; the best bang for your buck would probably be buying a bunch of external HDDs and keeping multiple backup copies of your data (including an extra drive left at a relative/friend's house in case of a fire or other emergency).
Yeh i didn't have the motivation to explain backupp is a procedure, not an instance/copy
That's not the reason why SSDs are bad for backups.
SSDs, and flash in general, are bad for backups stored in a safe because the charge that the cells hold is the data, and when left unpowered, they lose charge over time.
SSD endurance is all about how long they can do writes before the duration that the cells holds charge falls below a specific level (i.e. AFAIK, a brand new SSD should hold charge for 2+ years unpowered, whereas one that has exhausted its endurance will only last several hours/days unpowered).
Using SSDs in a powered backup environment (i.e. 24/7 on server disconnected from the network except during backup) is fine.
I'm aware of those considerations, but what's good practice in the context of a data centre environment may not be necessarily relevant to a user looking to backup 5TB of private/precious photos and videos on ozbargain; the OP of that comment probably isn't going to be interested in conversations about drives with PLP or high DWPW, nor may they want to purchase a UPS,
but cramming 4x bits into a NAND cell instead of 3x makes them suck a lot more at retaining data and it's one factor that's relatively easy to control for by not buying a QLC drive.
@Proliferation: Explain how cramming 4bits per cell is any worse than 3 for retention?
TLC vs QLC is irrelevant.
PLP and DWPW are also mostly irrelevant.
Main thing is SSDs suck in an unpowered environment, period, due to what I said above… that data is naturally lost over time when left unpowered. Even a brand new SSD only written to once will lose all its data after being left unpowered for "long enough". And each time the cell is written to, this duration decreases a little bit. Endurance is all about how many writes it takes for this duration to fall to a specified time span deemed unacceptable for ordinary use.
If they want to back up in an unpowered environment (i.e. stored in a safe), they need to look at other media.
If they want to back up to SSDs, they need to do so in a powered environment.
And you do NOT need a datacentre to have a powered backup environment.
A corner in your parent's/sibling's/child's house with a UPS attached NAS is enough, configured so that the NAS only accepts SSH connections from a single IP on the VPN (between your home and the remote home) with valid private certificates is a "powered backup environment".
And you'll note there are plenty of UPS and NAS posts on OzBargain, so it's not a stretch to say many people here have invested in these devices.
@jkim: Ok yeah, so I'm going to be going abroad for 18 months and want my backups to be stored in a drive that isn't likely to fail after that long period.
@talxx: 18 months isn't that long. I thought you were going to store it in the safe until you need recovery, which is an indefinite period.
Relatively new ssd with plenty of endurance left should easily be fine for 18 months. An old worn one probably won't be.
Hdd will be fine, assuming no shocks are applied (i.e. earthquake while you are away).
Optical will be fine if left away from light or heat (light and heat can erode the ink).
Even a usb flash stick (which will also lose data when left unpowered for a "long time") should also be fine (for 18 months), assuming it's relatively unused.
Main thing is why do you need the speed for backup media?
SSDs are an expensive form of backup, and really only justified in a powered environment where regular backups are being fed from multiple machines over the network.
Also best to make 2 or more copies and leave half at someone else's place in case of arson, flood and other catastrophic events. If you don't have access to someone else's place that you can trust (parent's, child's, sibling's, etc), you can always pay the bank to store them for you.
Another thing you can do is leave the hdds at home and take 1 copy with you (i.e. external usb ssd, just plug it in your laptop once every few months to feed it power).
@jkim: Would like the speedy hard drive as I like to edit videos from the 4k footage and the SSDs seem to be fastest way too do this?
I was planning on making multiple back ups, one on cloud, another on a hard drive/SSD but dont know if it's better to buy a few internal hard drives and buy a case for them and then store them somewhere safe, or just buy a single external hard drive and copy it all on to that.
@talxx: But you shouldn't be editing off your backups? You edit on your device storage and have a job to copy the changed files to your backup storage device regularly.
As for exactly what type of solution you want to pursue is dependent on what types of risk you want to insure against and how much you're prepared to spend to protect that data.
Couple of examples of risks and mitigations:
- Device failure = n copies/duplicates on redundant storage devices.
- Theft, fire, arson, flood, etc = off-site backup / back up in 2 discrete physical locations.
- Earthquake, bombing, etc = larger distance between backup locations (min 50kms)
Although cloud is the "big thing" these days, cloud is not infallible. It comes with its own set of risks. i.e. cloud service provider compromise, malicious employee at service provider, etc. You just need to think through and make your own judgment on which risks you are willing to bear and on how much you want to spend to insure against each of the risks you don't want to bear.
Any recommendation for SSD in sata form from 1TB and up. Mostly for playing games but I'm an occasional player so not performance heavy focused.
This, NV3 is QLC, TLC > SLC
Guys i have been pondering between this or pay a bit and get higher grade ssd wirh dram.
I already have 2TB Samsung 990 pro for secondary, i want a 1TB for boot drive and to install windows 11 and some other basic desktop apps.
Would this be good for main boot drive or should I get better one?
If you are not doing things like video editing. Almost any TLC SSD would work fine
Yeah just to hold boot file and basic apps. I'll go with this one then, seems reliable
Looking for something for cache for my unraid server. Any recommendations ?
SATA? U2? NVME?
https://www.mwave.com.au/product/wd-red-sn700-wds500g1r0c-50…
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/176778485656
msg seller and check TBW
Thanks. Would prefer nvme but I’m guessing I’ll really need u2 if I want high endurance
Sn700 has 2,000 TBW , not enough?
Would be good if my m.2 isn't behind my motherboard
Does anyone have Premier? I'm curious as to the kind of savings that are hiding behind that pay wall lol