You SSD outnumber hard drives in several categories, but so far no study has been done to show how much more reliable the new technology actually is compared to older drives. To solve this black blaze did a test with 2558 SSDs used in the company’s servers and found that their failure rate is much lower than hard drives.

SDD fail less often than HD?

This is the second test conducted by the same company using two storage options. in the first test, SSDs were already more reliable, but these were new drivers, so the company discussed the results with caution. Now it has retested drivers that have been in use for years by analyzing the difference in annualized failure rate (AFR) between them.

From the first year of use, the results have already begun to show discrepancies between technologies: SSDs show 0% AFR, and HDDs 0.66%. Over the years, both solutions show similar error rate curves, with HD Shows AFR Of 1.8% And SSD Hits 1.05% In Four Years:

Credits: Replay/Blackblaze

SSDs fail less even after five years of use

The big question for the company is how the newest solution will perform in its fifth year of use, which is when hard drives start to fail more frequently and start to fail. 3.55% bounce. Now the company has finally unveiled this year’s test results, indicating that after five years of use SDD reached ARF 0.92%being fairly stable compared to the performance shown when using one year less:

Credits: Replay/Blackblaze

With this data, it can be established that the best solution for medium-term storage is SSDs, which will experience fewer failures over the years. now black blaze will continue to monitor driver behavior and see if SSDs will continue to be more reliable than HDDs, which, half a century later, are reaching the point where they start to fail constantly.

Buying a mobile phone with 32 GB of memory is a mistake! Not worth it!
We explain why you just shouldn’t buy such smartphones

Via: Adrenaline Source: Backblaze

…..