Backing up with 16TB SSD Mobile external drives

I bought several of these from sellers on eBay and they seem to be working well. They are not the fastest in the world that I would expect from SSDs - hwvr there may be intervening factors that have little to do with the drives, but so far more than good enough. Much much faster than the I-Drive that I subscribe to. You are not going to believe the price - so low that it's ridiculous; that's why I won't mind gambling (oops, testing) with several. So just 1 drive should be able to backup two of my laptop filled with images and still have TBs of leftover space. However, I will make several copies - just in case "you get what you pay for" is a genuine adage as it usually is. And I will always leave the cable connected to the drive for fear that the port may not handle constant plugging in and out very well. As I write, I am using the DOS prompt to xcopy with the /s parameter so all subsequent folders would be copied as well. I tried using windows' copy and paste and found some folders contents were not copied. DOS seems more efficient.

 

Just to let you know.

What is SSD write cycle? - Definition from WhatIs.com

 

I'm not sure SSDs, high capacity ones in particular, are a good choice for backups.

If a deal looks too good to be true, it usually is. Or as Robert Heinlein wrote, TANSTAAFL - There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

 

Why do we make backups? To be able to retrieve otherwise irreplaceable data in case it is destroyed. The one property backup media MUST have is reliability. If you need your backups, it is because the primary data is unreadable. At that point the backup media must be reliable and readable. I realize you said you take multiple backups. Although this is a good practice, it is far from foolproof, especially if you are backing up large datasets to questionable media.

 

An example. Suppose you are taking a System Image of your boot drive. (My boot image is about 125 GB. Let's use that as an example) Your boot drive fails. No problem you have your System Image backup and multiple copies of it on separate media. You replace the failed System Drive, boot your stand-lone recovery software, point it at one of your backup drives and begin the restore. 25 GB into the restore, the restore fails due to a data error on your backup drive. You start the restore again and use another copy of the backup on another drive. This time the restore runs for 55 GB and again fails due to a data error on the second drive. You try again with the third drive; this time it fails at 120 GB. That was your last copy You are now SOL - Sorry, Out of Luck.

 

Invest in decent hardware. Otherwise, you are just fooling yourself thinking you have a backup.

 

About ten or so years ago, BH had a sale on 32 GB Kingston flash drives. I believe the price was $10 per drive, a real bargain at the time. I bought four drives. What could go wrong? BH is a reputable vendor and Kingston is a well-respected manufacturer. I copied some data to the drives. They were a bit slow, but acceptable. All four of those drives failed when I tried to read the data a few days later. Since the data was financial data, I took a five pound hammer to the drives insure no data could ever be recovered and consigned them to the garbage can. I wrote a bad product review on the BH site, and I have never bought a Kingston product since. Lesson learned.

 

Another point in your post that I think is a bad choice. Never leave your external backup drives connected to your computer unless you are accessing them for backup or restore. If your backup drive is connected, that data is vulnerable to destruction through user error, malware, or even electrical problems (think lightning strike or the like). I have yet to see malware that can beat air gap.

 

For copying files to backup media, I use Microsoft's SyncToy. Unfortunately, Microsoft withdrew the free package this past February. If you know anyone who has the software, perhaps they will provide a copy; it was a free download from Microsoft.

 

Otherwise, you might look at Robocopy; it is part of the Windows distribution.

What is SSD write cycle? - Definition from WhatIs.com.

I'm not sure SSDs, high capacity ones in particular, are a good choice for backups.

Thanks for the link.

 

The intent of my post was to share what I believe is a good deal for photographers who are looking out for desirable storage options. Since the price is so incredible (just about $30 for 16TB - that normally costs a lot lot more), I also expressed the caution to make multiple copies. So far, the drives are working well for me. Since they are SSD, they stay cool to the touch despite intense activities for hours and hours.

 

Nothing is perfect. SSD may fail over time. Hwvr, HDD and Sata also fail and they have additional disadvantages, the least of which is fragmentation, not to mention the major flaw of slow R/W speed even at 7200rpm. That said, in my years of experience with computers - other than the fire that destroyed my system containing both internal SSD and HDD drives, my data drives had not suffered failure in their natural course.

 

Nowadays I believe just about all better computers use SSD drives, at least for bootup. They are the preferred option at this time. They cost more than HDD. This is the reason I posted the information when I found these SSDs at such a counter-intuitive price.

If a deal looks too good to be true, it usually is. Or as Robert Heinlein wrote, TANSTAAFL - There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.

Don't we all know that? That's why I said I was gambling/testing with several copies. And I can tell you that they are good. Pls refer to my above remarks for your other points. I know you worked with computers, so did I, for 21 years.

Another point in your post that I think is a bad choice. Never leave your external backup drives connected to your computer unless you are accessing them for backup or restore. If your backup drive is connected, that data is vulnerable to destruction through user error, malware, or even electrical problems (think lightning strike or the like). I have yet to see malware that can beat air gap.

That's not what I meant. I meant leaving the cable with the drive, not the computer. The reason is I suspect the hardware is not that sturdy and constant pulling the cable in and out may soon wear out the port. I don't know, it's just a precaution - again, as you said, "when something looks too good to be true", etc. But so far I have no proof of it being as fragile as that.

 

I will report any problems - because I am using them intensively. I will soon find out if any. :);):eek:

Edited June 6, 2022 by Mary Doo

Cheap high capacity SSDs probably equals not so good SSDs.

Having and using multiples does not equal low reliability * number of drives, but just low reliability.

Bit off topic, but are any image formats, like TIFF or DNG etc that are inherantly more robust for successful reconstruction following minor corruption?

SSDs excel in speed. So good computers use SSDs as boot device, for installs of programs/apps, and scratch memory (though that in particular shortens their life span), and reliable and not even that slow HDDs for storage.

Well, hard drives are not all that reliable. I have five sets of four hard drives in my NAS units and every once in a while a drive goes bad and has to be replaced. In fact this spring a whole NAS unit stopped working (data was transferred successfully to a new NAS). I do use hard drives for long-term storage and SSDs to speed up interactive work (keeping OS, programs, scratch and project files on SSDs while being worked on). I don't think there is any panacea for long-term storage, stuff gets broken every once in a while and sometimes this results in data loss. Portable hard drives probably are more susceptible to impact damage than SSDs if traveled with. However, I've read that SSDs can lose data if left powered off for a long time. I haven't really experienced this myself.

 

The price per capacity in the OP's case sounds too good to be true and I would not be prepared to rely on those SSDs myself, just based on the information given. It's not that I want to pay extra, but I do tend to choose name-brand drives. It seems unlikely that a no-name provider could simply offer an order of magnitude or several orders of magnitude lower prices even if the speed is low.

Personally, I've had better luck than some of you. My first conventional HDs were around 1985. In that time to date (modernizing as I went), I have had only two large capacity drives actually fail, though there were some fixable problems (stiction during one historic era and such).

 

Still, the advice to "trust no drive" is good advice. Like voting in Chicago, backing up is something needed "early and often"/

The price per capacity in the OP's case sounds too good to be true and I would not be prepared to rely on those SSDs myself, just based on the information given. It's not that I want to pay extra, but I do tend to choose name-brand drives. It seems unlikely that a no-name provider could simply offer an order of magnitude or several orders of magnitude lower prices even if the speed is low.

Fair enough. You are not as curious and crazy(?) as I am . ;) I have many Seagates and WD's too, up to 8tb, but none as much as 16tb - hence I am testing. Hey, if they don't work, so be it. :cool:

When discarding SSD drives, and you can't run a delete all data program beforehand, can you just throw them away assuming no one can "steal" anything from them?

 

If it's a hard drive, would drilling a hole into it accomplish that as well?

I guess a nice bit of high voltage (but safe for you low current) ,across it's terminals would trash it.

Since the price is so incredible (just about $30 for 16TB...

Sorry Mary, but that sounds like a classic fake scam to me.

 

Normal (discount) price of an 8 TB SSD is several hundred £££s UK. Multiply that by whatever the $/£ exchange rate is.

 

I got my hands on a claimed 2TB USB flash drive recently. I got it for peanuts, and alarm bells rang as soon as I put it on test and saw a transfer rate of only about 10 MB/s. After a lengthy test cycle using H2testw, it proved to have a true capacity of only 60 GB. Which was fair enough at the giveaway price I paid for it, but the identical drives were being advertised on Amazon for about £30; and now marked "No longer available" - I wonder why? :rolleyes:

 

Anyhow, long story short: I wouldn't trust any important data to those drives without first testing them with H2testw or some similar fake-detecting software.

When discarding SSD drives, and you can't run a delete all data program beforehand, can you just throw them away assuming no one can "steal" anything from them?

 

If it's a hard drive, would drilling a hole into it accomplish that as well?

I'd hammer it to a pulp. My grandson would gladly do it for me with a rock. ;) Make sure the memory chips are broken.

 

In real life, unless that drive is destined for destruction for a specific reason, I would rather delete the volume under Windows Disk Management and save it for another day. Since the data is mostly recoverable unless overwritten; I won't bequeath it to a cop if there were incriminating information where the statute of limitation has not expired. :eek:

Do those drives look anything like this by any chance?

Normal (discount) price of an 8 TB SSD is several hundred £££s UK. Multiply that by whatever the $/£ exchange rate is.

They are normally very expensive and 16TB of SSD is hardly even available.

I got my hands on a claimed 2TB USB flash drive recently. I got it for peanuts, and alarm bells rang as soon as I put it on test and saw a transfer rate of only about 10 MB/s. After a lengthy test cycle using H2testw, it proved to have a true capacity of only 60 GB. Which was fair enough at the giveaway price I paid for it, but the identical drives were being advertised on Amazon for about £30; and now marked "No longer available" - I wonder why? :rolleyes:

 

Anyhow, long story short: I wouldn't trust any important data to those drives without first testing them with H2testw or some similar fake-detecting software.

Understand. We'll see. Thanks.

Do those drives look anything like this by any chance?

[ATTACH=full]1429748[/ATTACH]

No. There are a number of variations. Anyhow, I think I have written enough about this. Thanks.

When discarding SSD drives, and you can't run a delete all data program beforehand, can you just throw them away assuming no one can "steal" anything from them?

 

If it's a hard drive, would drilling a hole into it accomplish that as well?

 

If the SSD is still functional, use the manufacturer's utility software to perform a "Secure Erase" This instructs the drive to set every bit to 1's which, because it is NAND memory, read out as zeros. Then repurpose or sell/donate the drive. Certain government agencies or research labs might be able to recover data from the drive, but normal data recovery services cannot.

 

If the SSD is not functional, beat it with a heavy hammer breaking the chips in the drive. Then throw the broken chips in the garbage.

 

For HDD I take them apart. There are usually only five screws to open the case, one in each corner and one hidden under the label which acts as the anti-disturbance indicator that invalidates the warranty if it is removed. Open the case, remove the many screws holding the platters to the drive hub, and remove the platters. They make wonderful coasters for glasses and cups. My coffee mug is sitting on one now on my desk. Remove the head assembly and put it in recycle. There are no solder connections; everything is crimped, so no lead. Pry the magnets lose from the case. You now have two powerful magnets which have many uses from FIRMLY holding items to the side of the refrigerator to finding small magnetic parts dropped on shag carpet. Discard the small circuit board. Recycle the metal case.

They are normally very expensive and 16TB of SSD is hardly even available.

Think it's only fair to provide an update: Don't buy it. There's no way these are SSD drives.

 

So I was your guinea pig. The ones I received do "work" but so slow it's ridiculous. I didn't even bother to see how many files were copied - No patience for these things.

 

So the search for a good backup solution continues. I have received Synology DiskStation DS920 + Seagate drives from B&H. Will see...

Edited July 20, 2022 by Mary Doo

It might be worth investigating whether NAS boxes are available that take M2 (NVme) 'drives'. Per Terabyte they appear to be cheaper than a 2.5" SSD.

 

I just put together a PC that takes an M2 stick directly on the motherboard. Oowee, a 1.5 GB/s transfer rate, while a good make of 1 TB SSD drive 'only' reached 450 MB/s connected via a SATA port on the same board.

 

BTW, nearly all drives, HDD, M2 or SSD, store comprehensive self-diagnostic meta data that's accessible via some types of hardware-monitoring software. Things like hours of use, number of soft errors, projected failure liklihood, etc., are all reported.. and a whole list of other stats. So there's a much reduced chance of sudden and unexpected drive failure if you periodically keep your eye on everything the drive can tell you about itself.

Call me crazy, I have a tendency to over-do, over-buy, over-... and I also try to do as little as possible by myself unless it's something that I enjoy doing. Many of you folks enjoy tinkering with hardware, monitoring stats, etc. These stuff were somewhat interesting to me many years ago. I put together a PC system from parts and that was the only time I did it and I was satisfied that I did do it. Now I got my new system with enormous storage, 30" monitors, plus sound systems, appendages, ugly cables .. and I feel tired looking at them. So they are untouched for months though I keep telling myself I will get to them, and I am actually thinking of hiring tech support to connect them all.

I just put together a PC that takes an M2 stick directly on the motherboard. Oowee, a 1.5 GB/s transfer rate, while a good make of 1 TB SSD drive 'only' reached 450 MB/s connected via a SATA port on the same board.

 

Joe, you are comparing apples to oranges when you try to draw conclusions about NAS (Network Address Storage which is connected to the computer by ethernet, and for the home usually 1 Gb (giga-bit not gigabyte) ethernet or perhaps via USB 3.1 (5 gigabit) or 3.1 Gen 2 (10 gigabit) based upon comparison to storage media connected to the motherboard using SATA (6 Gb) and NVMe PCIe3 (3940 GB for 4 channels).

 

The limiting factor for an ethernet connected NAS will be the speed of the ethernet connection, unless Mary has 2.5 Gb or faster ethernet installed. A USB 3 Gen 1 connected NAS might just saturate a SATA SSD, depending upon the RAID configuration selected and again depending upon RAID configuration a USB3 Gen 2 link probably would saturate the SSD. But remember USB 2.1 Gen 2 is has some connection length limitations, unless you have active (read expensive) cables.

Joe, you are comparing apples to oranges when you try to draw conclusions about NAS (Network Address Storage which is connected to the computer by ethernet,

Obviously I realise that the interface is the speed-limiting factor. The real point was the cost differential between a 1TB M2 stick and a 1TB 2.5" SSD, which, if you multiply it by whatever number of drives in your Raid array, could mount up to a substantial saving. I also see Nvme/M2 as possibly being more 'future proof' than SSDs in an oversized retro-style container.

 

At present the cost of an M2-capable NAS box appears to defeat the SSD/M2 cost differential, but I'm pretty sure that will soon change as people realise that a 2 square cm Nand chip rattling around in a 40 square cm tin can and connected via a bottleneck interface doesn't make a lot of sense.

Obviously I realise that the interface is the speed-limiting factor. The real point was the cost differential between a 1TB M2 stick and a 1TB 2.5" SSD, which, if you multiply it by whatever number of drives in your Raid array, could mount up to a substantial saving. I also see Nvme/M2 as possibly being more 'future proof' than SSDs in an oversized retro-style container.

 

At present the cost of an M2-capable NAS box appears to defeat the SSD/M2 cost differential, but I'm pretty sure that will soon change as people realise that a 2 square cm Nand chip rattling around in a 40 square cm tin can and connected via a bottleneck interface doesn't make a lot of sense.

SSDs are good as cache storage, to speed things up (the NAS Mary bought offers the possibility to do just that).

But their durability is bad, can't take many write cycles. And therefor are not a good choice as storage medium in a NAS.

They will not survive being used as cache storage medium either. But that only hurts your bank account, not your data.

SSDs are good as cache storage, to speed things up (the NAS Mary bought offers the possibility to do just that).

But their durability is bad, can't take many write cycles. And therefor are not a good choice as storage medium in a NAS.

They will not survive being used as cache storage medium either. But that only hurts your bank account, not your data.

My new Dell desktop has 1TB M.2 PCIe SSD + 1TB SATA 7200 RPM HDD

 

What do I have to fear going forward?