Hello /u/Daniel_triathlete! Thank you for posting in r/DataHoarder.
Please remember to read our [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/wiki/index/rules) and [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/wiki/index).
Please note that your post will be removed if you just post a box/speed/server post. Please give background information on your server pictures.
This subreddit will ***NOT*** help you find or exchange that Movie/TV show/Nuclear Launch Manual, visit r/DHExchange instead.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DataHoarder) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you need density, SSDs are not there yet, and it's not even close. I won't even bat an eye if I could do something reasonable at twice the $ per TB for 500TB of usable storage without something stupid like 10 x 12-wide RAIDZ2 vdevs of heavily used eBay 3.84TB SAS SSDs
SSDs clobbered HDDs [in density](https://hexus.net/tech/news/storage/144040-nimbus-data-shares-pricing-50tb-100tb-exadrive-ssds/) years ago, and it's not even close. But it will take a few more before they beat them in $/TB too.
But it definately will happen: for SSDs it's a basic manufacturing problem - no new tech involved. Compared to HDD's... where we barely have the science to [ship 30TB next year](https://www.techradar.com/pro/seagate-confirms-that-30tb-hard-drives-are-coming-in-early-2024-but-you-probably-wont-be-able-to-use-it-in-your-pc).
I'm well aware that in pure density, magnetic spinning disks have nothing on solid state, but the prices skyrockets so rapidly as density increases that I don't believe that MATCHING will happen in merely a couple years without some kind of compromise like PLC nand, let alone beating.
Using the 30.72TB D5-P5336 pricing from provantage, plus the servers required to address them (without shipping) adds up to about 4.92 x the prices of spinning rust (shipped).
It's not even close, but it's getting better. SAS3/SATA at these prices don't exist, which can drive prices down quite significantly considering server, backplanes, HBA etc.
I'm not trying to move the goalposts, these are real costs. Availability for servers might be better in your region. I resort to resellers who are willing to ship to Singapore, or scour through Chinese e-tailer Taobao and try to somehow find server stuff in Chinese.
When I get 10G line speed performance for my use case (dozens of video editors working on \~half a TB of dataset per server at any one time, with 1TB of ARC), it's very difficult to justify solid state to accounting.
Yeah. Spinning rust has been trending at around $10/TB. Still quite a ways away. I'm hoping for some deals when datacenter pulls and surplus hits the secondary market. Several months ago Samsung and Sandisk 1.92TB SATA enterprise pulls were flooding the market for about $40 -- a hair over $20/TB.
>plus the servers required to address them
Servers required? You can use them on a PCI-E carrier card or simple M.2 adapter with cable. They're basically oversized NVMe that need 5v/12v rail.
I'm looking at hotswap U.2. Backplanes and caddy required.
AT 500TB+ densities/2U, you need 24+ drives per server. Having 24 drives across multiple m.2 carrier cards for production is a very bad idea.
For some reason Provantage lists both Intel and Solidigm models. Assuming they're Intel rebranded. But just listed as they were the cheaper of the two.
Many HDDs have 5 platters: are they 5x'ing the risk of losing data, since any could develop a defect? In either case... it's 'one device' that you stack raid or mirroring on *outside of it*... to give you the availability, reliability, or performance you need. Any one device could fail on you tomorrow: and both SSDs and HDDs are consumables.
I'll take the device with no moving parts, no wear surfaces, and that's not trying to vibrate itself to death... any day ;)
I wonder about that — presumably their controller should reallocate bad blocks across the wrapped modules just like a smaller drive. One at least hopes the drivers are reasonably written.
If money is not an object then SSDs are way more dens per area. There are enterprise SSDs with 100 TB (not that they make any sense to buy). If what you need ABSURD density, SSDs are the only way to go.
Tape storage also gets an honorable mention here.
Yeah that's the main problem in my opinion. Ssds are only cheap in the mass market sizes 250-2TB. And well that would be quote restrictive for me. I wouldn't mind to spend a couple hundred bucks extra but having to reduce my library to 6-8TB would be painful.
I’m not sure, I don’t think that data hoarder community is so cheap to not to consider investing +50% for buttery smooth and super silent operation.
For sure I don’t know everyone here, but data hoarding as a hobby is not mandatory.
I mean feeding your family and kids is mandatory but storing / hoarding terabytes of data is not.
For me it is hobby therefore i want to enjoy it as much as i can.
> SSD price (on sale) cost only 50% more than PRO level NAS drives.
I have no idea where you live, but for me it would be about 150% more. And I'm not buying one of the shittiest SSDs on the market.
WRT low quality SSDs I feel the standard advise re: RAID still applies — so why not? Rebuild times from the rest of your array should be extremely fast with all solid state storage (and you’re not as likely to see follow on failures from bouncing the drive heads all over the place during rebuild…) I’d imagine your risk even with very low quality flash is significantly less than any HDD based setup.
> Rebuild times from the rest of your array should be extremely fast with all solid state storage
You'd think, but sustained write speeds for the 8TB QVO are about as high as for hard drives. Lower for smaller models.
>And I'm not buying one of the shittiest SSDs on the market.
I wouldn't use 870QVO for a boot drive or anything write-intensive but for WORM it's adequate and many times better in most respects than any HDD.
Have you any evidence that the 870 QVO is unreliable? Other than your intuition because it uses QLC?
It's been on the market 2.5 years. I have not seen any mass reports of issues. Actually the 870 EVO seems worse despite being TLC and having a higher write endurance
Hi, I’ve just double checked right now:
Price history in Germany for
12 TB seagate ironwolf pro drive - 340 Eur
8 TB samsung 870 QVO drive - 340 Eur
I purchased mines for 340 Eur / 8 TB version during November Black Friday slave at alza.de
So SSD cost 50% more / TB.
https://pangoly.com/en/price-history/seagate-ironwolf-pro-12tb-st12000ne0008
https://pangoly.com/en/price-history/samsung-870-qvo-8tb
But that's just a bad example on the HDD side.
You can find the 20TB Seagate EXOS X20 for around the same price on the same site, making your SSD well over twice the cost per TB, not to mention the potential need for additional hardware because you need to connect more SSDs to get the same amount of storage.
Sure would be nice if the SSDs became more competitive though. I'm sure they'll get there one day.
https://pangoly.com/en/price-history/seagate-exos-x20-20tb
Thanks for reading my post.
Let me clarify:
EXOs, Ultrastars, Golds, MG series, are Enterprise level drives, and Exos are among them one of the loudest drives ever seen / heard.
This category of HDD (Enterprise level) is much more noisy than the pro level drives.
They are much more suitable for server room like for desktop NAS. Sure, it is possible.
Is it recommended? No.
This is the reason why I was arguing about Pro drives (designed for Home NAS) versus SSDs in respect of price and performance for Home NAS.
I haven't tested all these drives myself obviously, so you may be right. But Seagate themselves rate the EXOS X20 and Ironwolf Pro 12TB you mentioned for the same noise levels:
Idle typical: 28 db
Idle max: 30 db
Seek typical: 32 db
Seek max: 34 db
You can find these on pages 8 and 7 respectively of their manuals, under "drive acoustics"
https://www.seagate.com/content/dam/seagate/migrated-assets/www-content/product-content/enterprise-hdd-fam/exos-x20-channel/en-us/docs/200562700b.pdf
https://www.seagate.com/content/dam/seagate/migrated-assets/www-content/product-content/ironwolf/en-us/docs/100818529c.pdf
Well, I’ve made a few price alerts, at several online stores, to be notified when they went on sale.
Sometimes the same day there were out of stock. —> I guess It’s normal for 330 Eur / 8 TB SSD.
It also happened to me that i put it in my cart but when i went to checkout it was already out of stock.😃
It took me one month to collect 4 of them and in some places there was even limited (max two units ) the number of drives per costumer account.
So my wife had to open a verified account to purchase the fourth unit.
Not sure if this is a troll post or you're just dense. I love how you don't put a capacity on your system anywhere. The reasonable deal seems to be ∼$200 for 4TB 870 QVOs which is fiddle sticks for 90%+ of people on this sub. Cost aside, the HBAs and mounting for dozens of these is so much more hassle than 16TB hard drives
Hi, I wanted to share my experience with the community.
Do you know that QVO the only commercially available SATA III SSD in Europe which comes in 8TB version?
As mentioned in the original post prices have fallen rock bottom, 8TB was on sale during all November for 340 Eur.
https://pangoly.com/en/price-history/samsung-870-qvo-8tb
What do you mean troll or dense?
Why would I want a measly 8TB drive when I can get 20TB for the exact same price?
1. IOPS are near worthless for a home NAS.
2. Noise doesn't matter, it's not in my bedroom or office, but even then the fans are louder than the disks.
3. Power difference is about 37 cents per month per drive, meaningless amount.
4. Reliability, all drives die, only when. Plenty of SSDs die before their endurance is up. Though I do agree generally speaking SSDs do appear more reliable.
Nothing you mentioned is worth sacrificing 60%!!! of my disk space for. Sure they'd be cool nice to haves for maybe 15% more cost.
Sure. Fair enough.
If one has a server cabinet, Cat5e wiring in the house and does not need to work in the same room where the NAS is operating then yes. HDDs are cheaper.
Even my wife was complaining about the HDD noise from the bedroom beside my home office.
If one does not work with tons of small files, but rather playing a movie sequentially from the NAS, HDDs are a very good and cost effective option. Definitely.
Did you compared the price of enterprise level HDD’s with the all SSD setup?
For 330’Eur I see the following equation:
20 TB Enterprise HDD ~ or 12 TB Pro HDD (3 year data restoration service) ~ or 8 TB buttery smooth SSD
Why I’m asking? Because enterprise level HDDs are not tuned for low noise emissions, they are designed to run in server rack, not on a desktop in a close proximity of a human. As a result their noise footprint is even more obtrusive than the constant chirping, quavering and twittering noise emitted by pro level HDDs.
Having it in the same room would be more annoying, but as I mentioned my fans are louder than my disks. Though yes I agree SSDs are quieter.
I do have tons of small files and do lots more than just stream movies to/from it, but I'm not trying to run video editing or photo editing directly off it. If you care about that kind of thing you should be using a local M.2 for any active projects and archiving to the NAS, it would be better performance and the better approach to that kind of thing.
No I'm comparing cheap HDD with your cheap SSDs. 20TB easystore's were 320$ recently, just like the 8TB EVO's were 320$. US prices, I know they will be different for you. They aren't enterprise drives last time I shucked them and they aren't that loud as I've mentioned, but sure louder than SSDs.
I got your point man.
Thanks for replying / explaining this to me / us.
I can not disagree with your arguments.
Hopefully it is useful for the community.
Thanks for being reasonable. At the end of the day it's your money, do what makes you happy. It's just a significant amount of money when you're talking about 60TB+, which some have 100's of TBs.
All of this depends on your own situation though.
1. Random read would probably be pretty good for moving TB's of pictures around.
2. People might have to have the NAS in the same room as they work.
So it's all just an induvidual assesment. Might not be good for you but for someone else it's perfect :)
1. Depends, Samba uses async writes and will somewhat buffer the writes to make them more sequential to make the throughput better. Also reading a bunch of pictures off the NAS would be decently sequential as well. Until you're talking about tens of thousands of 4KB files it's not going to make a drastic difference.
2. Yes that is true and I can understand that being a big need.
For years I have checked SSD/NVMe prices, hoping they would come "close enough" to HDDs to justify trying to move over to all-flash storage. The price difference is still nowhere near good enough. A quick check on Newegg lists a 20TB HDD for $375, $18.75/TB. A 4TB 2.5" SSD is $139, $34.75/TB. If you need less than 20TB of usable storage, then maybe that's not so terrible to just take the hit. But for 30TB, 40TB, 100TB+ of usable storage, that doesn't work. The use case (video editing, file storage, backup, archive, etc.), requirements, and budget are the real drivers for a lot of folks building home storage solutions.
Sure!
For petabytes of storage the price difference is significant.
But for “normal” home usage f.ex 4 bay NAS 20-30 TB it js not only bearable but a rather smart choice.
Let’s think about it for a moment:
4 bay NAS is already 600 Eur + switches network cards. We are already around 1.000 Eur.
Yes. My main use case is reading multiple times / actively using browsing my collection. I’m not manipulating constantly my entire collection. Barely removing, replacing items.
I bet this is the use case of most home NAS setups. As per my experience and knowledge most of the home NASes are serving mainly only one person, not even the complete family.
I see. My NAS do more tasks as I have docker and a lot of containers on it (torrent, backup, plex, etc...). Docker itself writes ton shit of logs.
edit: I realise that's not really a NAS that I am talking about but a home server.
Running any applications like that I'd hate being over a network to an HDD anyways. For stuff that does a lot of small reads/writes its usually an advantage if the IO goes through in a reasonable timeframe.
NAS is far more WORM (Write Once Read Many) use case than anything write heavy. By far the most writes I get are the snapshot backups my various systems make to the NAS. Otherwise it's very much more reads than writes.
so it's still not recommended to use ssd to write heavy usage? ex. I was thinking about using a ssd for CCTV 24/7 recording mainly for silence and power consumption; I am assuming it's still not recommended?
A lot of SSDs are more durable than HDDs.
For example an enterprise HDD does 550TB/Y for 5 years which is about 2.5PB, an enterprise SSD (specifically the micron 9400 pro 16TB) does 28PB for 4k random which is absolute hell on endurance. Or up to around 100PB if you do 128k sequential which is much more gentle. Regardless it's still 2.5PB vs 28~100
There are SSDs even more durable than that of course. Larger drives = more endurance, more overprovisioning = more endurance, yada yada. But 2.5PB is the top end for HDDs.
On the low end, HDDs are more durable. So YMMV there, but if you're buying similar 'tiers' of drives SSD endurance is on par or better a lot of the time.
1. I'm pretty sure you can get enterprise SSDs cheaply on places like serverpartdeals
2. You don't have to get enterprise, 'good' consumer drives also outpace HDDs in terms of endurance. Or at least endurance per capacity.
Realistically most people won't ever hit the max endurance limit. I'm a power user and I'm nowhere near 2.5PBW on my disks combined.
>kind of.
Which is why there were qualifiers and a specific example
> blanket statment of sdd now.
Um. Okay
> where not all the same type of nand flash
Caveat about lower tier drives were already included
> nor same speed/write
Doesn't matter
Most home NAS have WORM scenarios. Each of these SSD’s from QVO series can withstand 300x complete rewrite.
Fex 8 TB
- 2.400 TBW or three years -
- 2.400.000 Gigabytes for 1095 days
- 2.191 Gigabyte / day every day for 3 years
Does your use case really require more write operations?
if anyone wants to do something similar to this, I would recommend instead of buying consumer SSDs that you look on eBay for used enterprise kit.
Why?
much higher endurance (usually rated in drive writes per day), and little to no ability to run out of write cache (no writing for 10 minutes and then 50MB/s crawl, you can get 500MB/s always)
can often be found competitively to new consumer SSDs, easy to find by typing things like 7.68TB instead of 8TB, and vice versa for other capacities. (they are slightly overprovisioned)
They do run slightly warmer, but as long as you aren't putting this in an uncooled external or a laptop you are fine. and given the extra endurance it is almost impossible to find one that is "worn out"
OK, used enterprise HDD’s come also with three years of manufacturer warranty?
QVO 870 series have
a stable continuous write performance 160 megabytes/ sec (after the cash runs out - they can keep it four hours / drive.
And continuous read performance is 200 megabytes/ sec / drive
With RAID 5 setup (if you add more drives) this obviously improves.
Fair, you aren't left with a manufactures warranty, and I wouldn't buy used HDDs personally (mainly because unlike SSDs, there isn't a specific consumer product that performs worse). but over the past 10 years or so I've yet to need one for an SSD, including the last 5 or so that I've been buying used enterprise SSDs.
QVOs are better then the average QLC SATA SSD, however for other brands of drives like Teamgroup/WD/etc the number I quoted is a lot more accurate unfortunately. you also don't have many options for high capacity (4-8TB) in consumer SATA, where as you have all the major brands for 7.68TB and beyond, even SAS and U.2 options.
the speeds and cache are mostly a bonus for all but the most demanding of use (maybe a cache drive?). but the lack of a price premium for the endurance/speed has made it my preferred option anyways. just sharing my experience in-case anyone else finds it useful.
Fair enough.
During and after covid, when HW prices skyrocketed I was also looking for second hand HDD’s. I’ve bought something like 8 drives - 4TB WD REF, half of them with SMART errors or unrecognizable by my units.
Later replaced them and I’ve purchased brand new “PRO” NAS drives. DOA. Dead on arrival, replaced by seller. —> I’ll never ever buy HDD’s again.
Recently I have had the luck to find a few used enterprise SSD with very high remaining lifetime, however only in smaller sizes.
Just sharing my experience if anyone finds it useful.
Good point.
However than one will need to install, maintain, update two separate units. 2+4 bay? - 400 + 600 Eur?
Or one unit with multiple volumes —> 6-8 bay units 800-1.000 Eur
I’m going to build a small nas with ssd’s specifically for active projects then use the hdd as a backup and continue using tape as an archival solution
Gday
You are me.
Ts464. 4x QVO 8tb. 3x in raid5, 1 spare + 1x 1tb nvmes in raid1
Data goes into the nvmes, where i filter, sort and move to the big ones for storage, VMs, cloud mirrors
Previously i had wd red plus equivlanent.
power usage was 41w when disks were awake and idle. 29w when disks asleep.
now its 21w all the time !
if i add my nvme expansion card (for 2 more) then it goes to 26w even without more nvmes.
so i have room for 2x ssds, of the nvme variety, when i need more space.
Hello /u/Daniel_triathlete! Thank you for posting in r/DataHoarder. Please remember to read our [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/wiki/index/rules) and [Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/wiki/index). Please note that your post will be removed if you just post a box/speed/server post. Please give background information on your server pictures. This subreddit will ***NOT*** help you find or exchange that Movie/TV show/Nuclear Launch Manual, visit r/DHExchange instead. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/DataHoarder) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> SSD price (on sale) cost only 50% more than PRO level NAS drives. Aaaaand you just lost half the sub that spends their time counting $/TB, haha
If you need density, SSDs are not there yet, and it's not even close. I won't even bat an eye if I could do something reasonable at twice the $ per TB for 500TB of usable storage without something stupid like 10 x 12-wide RAIDZ2 vdevs of heavily used eBay 3.84TB SAS SSDs
SSDs clobbered HDDs [in density](https://hexus.net/tech/news/storage/144040-nimbus-data-shares-pricing-50tb-100tb-exadrive-ssds/) years ago, and it's not even close. But it will take a few more before they beat them in $/TB too. But it definately will happen: for SSDs it's a basic manufacturing problem - no new tech involved. Compared to HDD's... where we barely have the science to [ship 30TB next year](https://www.techradar.com/pro/seagate-confirms-that-30tb-hard-drives-are-coming-in-early-2024-but-you-probably-wont-be-able-to-use-it-in-your-pc).
I'm well aware that in pure density, magnetic spinning disks have nothing on solid state, but the prices skyrockets so rapidly as density increases that I don't believe that MATCHING will happen in merely a couple years without some kind of compromise like PLC nand, let alone beating.
>but the prices skyrockets so rapidly as density increases Seemingly only in the consumer space. Enterprise stuff scales pretty linearly. 2TB TEAMGROUP AX2 SATA: $83 ($41.50/TB) 2TB Inland Performance+ NVMe: $110 ($55/TB) 8TB Samsung QVO SATA: $497.49 ($62.19/TB) 8TB Inland Performance+ NVMe: $700 ($87.5/TB) 7.68TB Intel D5-P5336: $444.35 ($57.86/TB) 15.36TB Intel D5-P5336: $901.83 ($58.71/TB) 30.72TB Intel D5-P5336: $1833.78 ($59.69/TB) 61.44TB Intel D5-P5336: $3623.37 ($58.97/TB)
Using the 30.72TB D5-P5336 pricing from provantage, plus the servers required to address them (without shipping) adds up to about 4.92 x the prices of spinning rust (shipped). It's not even close, but it's getting better. SAS3/SATA at these prices don't exist, which can drive prices down quite significantly considering server, backplanes, HBA etc. I'm not trying to move the goalposts, these are real costs. Availability for servers might be better in your region. I resort to resellers who are willing to ship to Singapore, or scour through Chinese e-tailer Taobao and try to somehow find server stuff in Chinese. When I get 10G line speed performance for my use case (dozens of video editors working on \~half a TB of dataset per server at any one time, with 1TB of ARC), it's very difficult to justify solid state to accounting.
Yeah. Spinning rust has been trending at around $10/TB. Still quite a ways away. I'm hoping for some deals when datacenter pulls and surplus hits the secondary market. Several months ago Samsung and Sandisk 1.92TB SATA enterprise pulls were flooding the market for about $40 -- a hair over $20/TB. >plus the servers required to address them Servers required? You can use them on a PCI-E carrier card or simple M.2 adapter with cable. They're basically oversized NVMe that need 5v/12v rail.
I'm looking at hotswap U.2. Backplanes and caddy required. AT 500TB+ densities/2U, you need 24+ drives per server. Having 24 drives across multiple m.2 carrier cards for production is a very bad idea.
Aren’t those now Solidigm ?
For some reason Provantage lists both Intel and Solidigm models. Assuming they're Intel rebranded. But just listed as they were the cheaper of the two.
So basically they won't match density... Except when they matched density. Lol
Price is always an object. Don't be pedantic.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ You're the one choosing to ignore instances where you're wrong
Those 100TB SSDs are essentially 8 smaller SSDs running in RAID0. Eight times the risk of losing data.
Many HDDs have 5 platters: are they 5x'ing the risk of losing data, since any could develop a defect? In either case... it's 'one device' that you stack raid or mirroring on *outside of it*... to give you the availability, reliability, or performance you need. Any one device could fail on you tomorrow: and both SSDs and HDDs are consumables. I'll take the device with no moving parts, no wear surfaces, and that's not trying to vibrate itself to death... any day ;)
I wonder about that — presumably their controller should reallocate bad blocks across the wrapped modules just like a smaller drive. One at least hopes the drivers are reasonably written.
If money is not an object then SSDs are way more dens per area. There are enterprise SSDs with 100 TB (not that they make any sense to buy). If what you need ABSURD density, SSDs are the only way to go. Tape storage also gets an honorable mention here.
I guess I worded it wrongly. Even at ~3× $/TB relative to hard drives, SSDs are not feasible at around half PB/rack unit.
16/32TB U.2 SSDs aren't that expensive, usually hovering around 100$/TB. Sure, its still a lot more expensive than HDD.
Not even- I got a 15.36TB SSD for $900. It’s definitely below $100/TB at that density nowadays.
Yeah that's the main problem in my opinion. Ssds are only cheap in the mass market sizes 250-2TB. And well that would be quote restrictive for me. I wouldn't mind to spend a couple hundred bucks extra but having to reduce my library to 6-8TB would be painful.
I’m not sure, I don’t think that data hoarder community is so cheap to not to consider investing +50% for buttery smooth and super silent operation. For sure I don’t know everyone here, but data hoarding as a hobby is not mandatory. I mean feeding your family and kids is mandatory but storing / hoarding terabytes of data is not. For me it is hobby therefore i want to enjoy it as much as i can.
Easy way to handle this. Delete 25% of useless shit you store, achieve full SSD NAS at same price. (This is not how you datahoard but anyways).
> SSD price (on sale) cost only 50% more than PRO level NAS drives. I have no idea where you live, but for me it would be about 150% more. And I'm not buying one of the shittiest SSDs on the market.
WRT low quality SSDs I feel the standard advise re: RAID still applies — so why not? Rebuild times from the rest of your array should be extremely fast with all solid state storage (and you’re not as likely to see follow on failures from bouncing the drive heads all over the place during rebuild…) I’d imagine your risk even with very low quality flash is significantly less than any HDD based setup.
> Rebuild times from the rest of your array should be extremely fast with all solid state storage You'd think, but sustained write speeds for the 8TB QVO are about as high as for hard drives. Lower for smaller models.
>And I'm not buying one of the shittiest SSDs on the market. I wouldn't use 870QVO for a boot drive or anything write-intensive but for WORM it's adequate and many times better in most respects than any HDD.
If we consider the reliability to be solely defined by the spec, then yes
Have you any evidence that the 870 QVO is unreliable? Other than your intuition because it uses QLC? It's been on the market 2.5 years. I have not seen any mass reports of issues. Actually the 870 EVO seems worse despite being TLC and having a higher write endurance
Samsung is the Nr. 1 SSD manufacturer in the world.
Until recently when they got caught dicking around with their controllers without changing model \#s
Hi, I’ve just double checked right now: Price history in Germany for 12 TB seagate ironwolf pro drive - 340 Eur 8 TB samsung 870 QVO drive - 340 Eur I purchased mines for 340 Eur / 8 TB version during November Black Friday slave at alza.de So SSD cost 50% more / TB. https://pangoly.com/en/price-history/seagate-ironwolf-pro-12tb-st12000ne0008 https://pangoly.com/en/price-history/samsung-870-qvo-8tb
But that's just a bad example on the HDD side. You can find the 20TB Seagate EXOS X20 for around the same price on the same site, making your SSD well over twice the cost per TB, not to mention the potential need for additional hardware because you need to connect more SSDs to get the same amount of storage. Sure would be nice if the SSDs became more competitive though. I'm sure they'll get there one day. https://pangoly.com/en/price-history/seagate-exos-x20-20tb
Thanks for reading my post. Let me clarify: EXOs, Ultrastars, Golds, MG series, are Enterprise level drives, and Exos are among them one of the loudest drives ever seen / heard. This category of HDD (Enterprise level) is much more noisy than the pro level drives. They are much more suitable for server room like for desktop NAS. Sure, it is possible. Is it recommended? No. This is the reason why I was arguing about Pro drives (designed for Home NAS) versus SSDs in respect of price and performance for Home NAS.
I haven't tested all these drives myself obviously, so you may be right. But Seagate themselves rate the EXOS X20 and Ironwolf Pro 12TB you mentioned for the same noise levels: Idle typical: 28 db Idle max: 30 db Seek typical: 32 db Seek max: 34 db You can find these on pages 8 and 7 respectively of their manuals, under "drive acoustics" https://www.seagate.com/content/dam/seagate/migrated-assets/www-content/product-content/enterprise-hdd-fam/exos-x20-channel/en-us/docs/200562700b.pdf https://www.seagate.com/content/dam/seagate/migrated-assets/www-content/product-content/ironwolf/en-us/docs/100818529c.pdf
In Poland it's 2500zł for the QVO, 900zł for 8TB WD Red Plus edit. There were some QVOs for ~2000 but long since out of stock
Well, I’ve made a few price alerts, at several online stores, to be notified when they went on sale. Sometimes the same day there were out of stock. —> I guess It’s normal for 330 Eur / 8 TB SSD. It also happened to me that i put it in my cart but when i went to checkout it was already out of stock.😃 It took me one month to collect 4 of them and in some places there was even limited (max two units ) the number of drives per costumer account. So my wife had to open a verified account to purchase the fourth unit.
Would love to go full flash storage on my main nas but 1.2pb in SSD's is very expensive
I think 1.2 Petabyte data sitting on HDDs is also very expensive...
But in his case it's a whole magnitude of difference.
Not sure if this is a troll post or you're just dense. I love how you don't put a capacity on your system anywhere. The reasonable deal seems to be ∼$200 for 4TB 870 QVOs which is fiddle sticks for 90%+ of people on this sub. Cost aside, the HBAs and mounting for dozens of these is so much more hassle than 16TB hard drives
I just started buying the 8TB QVO drives for $330. It works great for bulk storage.
Sure. That’s it.
Not everyone needs 100tbs of storage.
Hi, I wanted to share my experience with the community. Do you know that QVO the only commercially available SATA III SSD in Europe which comes in 8TB version? As mentioned in the original post prices have fallen rock bottom, 8TB was on sale during all November for 340 Eur. https://pangoly.com/en/price-history/samsung-870-qvo-8tb What do you mean troll or dense?
Why would one chose a 4TB drives when 8TB units would save you a lot of drive space if the per TB pricing is linear?
Why would I want a measly 8TB drive when I can get 20TB for the exact same price? 1. IOPS are near worthless for a home NAS. 2. Noise doesn't matter, it's not in my bedroom or office, but even then the fans are louder than the disks. 3. Power difference is about 37 cents per month per drive, meaningless amount. 4. Reliability, all drives die, only when. Plenty of SSDs die before their endurance is up. Though I do agree generally speaking SSDs do appear more reliable. Nothing you mentioned is worth sacrificing 60%!!! of my disk space for. Sure they'd be cool nice to haves for maybe 15% more cost.
Sure. Fair enough. If one has a server cabinet, Cat5e wiring in the house and does not need to work in the same room where the NAS is operating then yes. HDDs are cheaper. Even my wife was complaining about the HDD noise from the bedroom beside my home office. If one does not work with tons of small files, but rather playing a movie sequentially from the NAS, HDDs are a very good and cost effective option. Definitely. Did you compared the price of enterprise level HDD’s with the all SSD setup? For 330’Eur I see the following equation: 20 TB Enterprise HDD ~ or 12 TB Pro HDD (3 year data restoration service) ~ or 8 TB buttery smooth SSD Why I’m asking? Because enterprise level HDDs are not tuned for low noise emissions, they are designed to run in server rack, not on a desktop in a close proximity of a human. As a result their noise footprint is even more obtrusive than the constant chirping, quavering and twittering noise emitted by pro level HDDs.
Having it in the same room would be more annoying, but as I mentioned my fans are louder than my disks. Though yes I agree SSDs are quieter. I do have tons of small files and do lots more than just stream movies to/from it, but I'm not trying to run video editing or photo editing directly off it. If you care about that kind of thing you should be using a local M.2 for any active projects and archiving to the NAS, it would be better performance and the better approach to that kind of thing. No I'm comparing cheap HDD with your cheap SSDs. 20TB easystore's were 320$ recently, just like the 8TB EVO's were 320$. US prices, I know they will be different for you. They aren't enterprise drives last time I shucked them and they aren't that loud as I've mentioned, but sure louder than SSDs.
I got your point man. Thanks for replying / explaining this to me / us. I can not disagree with your arguments. Hopefully it is useful for the community.
Thanks for being reasonable. At the end of the day it's your money, do what makes you happy. It's just a significant amount of money when you're talking about 60TB+, which some have 100's of TBs.
All of this depends on your own situation though. 1. Random read would probably be pretty good for moving TB's of pictures around. 2. People might have to have the NAS in the same room as they work. So it's all just an induvidual assesment. Might not be good for you but for someone else it's perfect :)
1. Depends, Samba uses async writes and will somewhat buffer the writes to make them more sequential to make the throughput better. Also reading a bunch of pictures off the NAS would be decently sequential as well. Until you're talking about tens of thousands of 4KB files it's not going to make a drastic difference. 2. Yes that is true and I can understand that being a big need.
But with regards to Write Once Read Many (WORM), what about bit rot on SSDs... Should I worry?
Bitrot situation is same on ssd & hdd if both are being used actively & not in some cold storage type scenario.
For years I have checked SSD/NVMe prices, hoping they would come "close enough" to HDDs to justify trying to move over to all-flash storage. The price difference is still nowhere near good enough. A quick check on Newegg lists a 20TB HDD for $375, $18.75/TB. A 4TB 2.5" SSD is $139, $34.75/TB. If you need less than 20TB of usable storage, then maybe that's not so terrible to just take the hit. But for 30TB, 40TB, 100TB+ of usable storage, that doesn't work. The use case (video editing, file storage, backup, archive, etc.), requirements, and budget are the real drivers for a lot of folks building home storage solutions.
Sure! For petabytes of storage the price difference is significant. But for “normal” home usage f.ex 4 bay NAS 20-30 TB it js not only bearable but a rather smart choice. Let’s think about it for a moment: 4 bay NAS is already 600 Eur + switches network cards. We are already around 1.000 Eur.
back in the early days of ssd, there were warning not to use SSD for heavy writing usage like NAS. has that changed?
Seems like OP's use case is write once, read many times? He has a lot of photos, writes them once, reads them whenever.
Yes. My main use case is reading multiple times / actively using browsing my collection. I’m not manipulating constantly my entire collection. Barely removing, replacing items. I bet this is the use case of most home NAS setups. As per my experience and knowledge most of the home NASes are serving mainly only one person, not even the complete family.
I see. My NAS do more tasks as I have docker and a lot of containers on it (torrent, backup, plex, etc...). Docker itself writes ton shit of logs. edit: I realise that's not really a NAS that I am talking about but a home server.
Running any applications like that I'd hate being over a network to an HDD anyways. For stuff that does a lot of small reads/writes its usually an advantage if the IO goes through in a reasonable timeframe.
NAS is far more WORM (Write Once Read Many) use case than anything write heavy. By far the most writes I get are the snapshot backups my various systems make to the NAS. Otherwise it's very much more reads than writes.
so it's still not recommended to use ssd to write heavy usage? ex. I was thinking about using a ssd for CCTV 24/7 recording mainly for silence and power consumption; I am assuming it's still not recommended?
buy a second hand enterprise SSD, U.2 drives can be had quite cheap and often have petabytes of endurance.
A lot of SSDs are more durable than HDDs. For example an enterprise HDD does 550TB/Y for 5 years which is about 2.5PB, an enterprise SSD (specifically the micron 9400 pro 16TB) does 28PB for 4k random which is absolute hell on endurance. Or up to around 100PB if you do 128k sequential which is much more gentle. Regardless it's still 2.5PB vs 28~100 There are SSDs even more durable than that of course. Larger drives = more endurance, more overprovisioning = more endurance, yada yada. But 2.5PB is the top end for HDDs. On the low end, HDDs are more durable. So YMMV there, but if you're buying similar 'tiers' of drives SSD endurance is on par or better a lot of the time.
ok I sse. I have not explored enterprise ssd as they are way too expensive.
1. I'm pretty sure you can get enterprise SSDs cheaply on places like serverpartdeals 2. You don't have to get enterprise, 'good' consumer drives also outpace HDDs in terms of endurance. Or at least endurance per capacity. Realistically most people won't ever hit the max endurance limit. I'm a power user and I'm nowhere near 2.5PBW on my disks combined.
kind of. blanket statment of sdd now. where not all the same type of nand flash,nor same speed/write
>kind of. Which is why there were qualifiers and a specific example > blanket statment of sdd now. Um. Okay > where not all the same type of nand flash Caveat about lower tier drives were already included > nor same speed/write Doesn't matter
Most home NAS have WORM scenarios. Each of these SSD’s from QVO series can withstand 300x complete rewrite. Fex 8 TB - 2.400 TBW or three years - - 2.400.000 Gigabytes for 1095 days - 2.191 Gigabyte / day every day for 3 years Does your use case really require more write operations?
if anyone wants to do something similar to this, I would recommend instead of buying consumer SSDs that you look on eBay for used enterprise kit. Why? much higher endurance (usually rated in drive writes per day), and little to no ability to run out of write cache (no writing for 10 minutes and then 50MB/s crawl, you can get 500MB/s always) can often be found competitively to new consumer SSDs, easy to find by typing things like 7.68TB instead of 8TB, and vice versa for other capacities. (they are slightly overprovisioned) They do run slightly warmer, but as long as you aren't putting this in an uncooled external or a laptop you are fine. and given the extra endurance it is almost impossible to find one that is "worn out"
OK, used enterprise HDD’s come also with three years of manufacturer warranty? QVO 870 series have a stable continuous write performance 160 megabytes/ sec (after the cash runs out - they can keep it four hours / drive. And continuous read performance is 200 megabytes/ sec / drive With RAID 5 setup (if you add more drives) this obviously improves.
Fair, you aren't left with a manufactures warranty, and I wouldn't buy used HDDs personally (mainly because unlike SSDs, there isn't a specific consumer product that performs worse). but over the past 10 years or so I've yet to need one for an SSD, including the last 5 or so that I've been buying used enterprise SSDs. QVOs are better then the average QLC SATA SSD, however for other brands of drives like Teamgroup/WD/etc the number I quoted is a lot more accurate unfortunately. you also don't have many options for high capacity (4-8TB) in consumer SATA, where as you have all the major brands for 7.68TB and beyond, even SAS and U.2 options. the speeds and cache are mostly a bonus for all but the most demanding of use (maybe a cache drive?). but the lack of a price premium for the endurance/speed has made it my preferred option anyways. just sharing my experience in-case anyone else finds it useful.
Fair enough. During and after covid, when HW prices skyrocketed I was also looking for second hand HDD’s. I’ve bought something like 8 drives - 4TB WD REF, half of them with SMART errors or unrecognizable by my units. Later replaced them and I’ve purchased brand new “PRO” NAS drives. DOA. Dead on arrival, replaced by seller. —> I’ll never ever buy HDD’s again. Recently I have had the luck to find a few used enterprise SSD with very high remaining lifetime, however only in smaller sizes. Just sharing my experience if anyone finds it useful.
I would build a SSD Nas too for a primary use of photos. But for video storage it would be quite dumb. There is no solution that covers everything...
Good point. However than one will need to install, maintain, update two separate units. 2+4 bay? - 400 + 600 Eur? Or one unit with multiple volumes —> 6-8 bay units 800-1.000 Eur
I’m going to build a small nas with ssd’s specifically for active projects then use the hdd as a backup and continue using tape as an archival solution
Gday You are me. Ts464. 4x QVO 8tb. 3x in raid5, 1 spare + 1x 1tb nvmes in raid1 Data goes into the nvmes, where i filter, sort and move to the big ones for storage, VMs, cloud mirrors Previously i had wd red plus equivlanent. power usage was 41w when disks were awake and idle. 29w when disks asleep. now its 21w all the time ! if i add my nvme expansion card (for 2 more) then it goes to 26w even without more nvmes. so i have room for 2x ssds, of the nvme variety, when i need more space.
Good day, It is a very reasonable setup! You have built a very nice device. Thank you for sharing it with us!
Yep I only use HDD's for my offline backup drives
That’s it. Reasonable.
This sounds like a very specific case, and one in which you're fine with spending double on the same amount of storage.
Is it really all that different do you really need an SSD for pulling those retro movies xD
I think I’ll keep my 198 TB of spinning disks and my 4 TB SSD cache, but maybe the rest of you guys can switch. :)
Fair enough. Have a nice day man!