R0H1TAccording to some specs or projections, when was the last time you saw an endurance test with SLC NAND like ~ SSD Endurance Test: BX200 dead after 187TB, 850 Pro after 9.1PB

In essence good NAND, SLC or MLC, will outlast most human attempts to exhaust their PE cycles.The QLC yields were never disclosed, probably because there's only a handful of drives using it.

. I'm on mobile at the moment so hard to search but Optane would still beat out SLC regardless. And it's not prone to power loss corruption among other benefits. There's also a reason you haven't really seen a consumer test on them, they're damn expensive. You might find some enterprise SLC drives from FusionIO or fairly small sub 100GB but that's it (and a lot of those FusionIO cards get beat now by TLC drives for various reasons or cost more than they should at this point). Good luck affording and waiting on anything close to as useful as most available MLC / TLC drives in the traditional way. The only thing coming close is Samsung's Z-NAND which is using other NAND cells in SLC mode with driver, controller and a large amount of RAM in some special sauce blend. And since you included that post with TLC and MLC endurance from torture tests, I can't see how any one of us enthusiasts would still be worried at all. FYI QLC is aimed for 1000 P/E cycles, same as most TLC, particularly planar TLC. I see absolutely zero issue with using it for my bulk storage, especially doing what I do now with traditional drives. It'll still outlive probably 99% of 3.5" HDDs. Honestly anything other than cost is a dumb reason to dislike or distrust TLC and QLC. Everything else can be worked around or handled or perfectly acceptable. Hell even enterprise is going all in with TLC and QLC, especially with 16Tb M.3 (NGSFF?) form factors in 1U servers. I mean, are you planning to only ever use ONE drive for your entire system? Is that your goal? Are we talking basic laptop here for a decade of usage or something or what? That's the only way I'd understand the critique of QLC and TLC.

QLC = crap.

This stuff makes MLC look amazing... Those were the days.

TheGuruStudDon't buy intel junk, problem solved lol.

If Intel is junk, then what do you consider good? :rolleyes: Not Samsung with their junk firmware, and not Toshiba either I guess.

TheGuruStudThe point is that they're many times more reliable than a mechanical.

SSDs are very durable in terms of physical wear, but once sectors starts failing they are usually garbage.

efikkanNot Samsung with their junk firmware

Uh... no. Samsung makes some of the best damn SSDs on the market man. They're number one in the consumer SSD market for a reason. I'd buy a Samsung SSD before anyone else, Crucial is a very close second.

trparkyUh... no. Samsung makes some of the best damn SSDs on the market man. They're number one in the consumer SSD market for a reason. I'd buy a Samsung SSD before anyone else, Crucial is a very close second.

Samsung sell the most SSDs because they offer very good value on paper.
But their controllers are well known for causing problems on Linux, I've seen them bricked myself.

efikkanBut their controllers are well known for causing problems on Linux, I've seen them bricked myself.

I thought that they fixed those issues. I'm referencing this issue. I don't play with Linux though, I'm more a Windows guy.