|
Is anyone doing 3rd party audits of the encryption features of SSDs?
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 21:31 |
|
|
Alereon posted:While not exactly what you're looking for, Intel did an internal audit of their drives that found that only 128bits of the 256bit AES key were used, which resulted in a drive recall since they promised AES256 and only delivered AES128. Huh. That actually makes me worried about the smaller manufacturers like ADATA or whatever. I don't have a lot of confidence that they're doing good audits and then actually taking action on the results. I suppose it's possible that the encryption is entirely on whomever is providing their controllers, but I doubt it's just plug and play. The manufacturer probably has to do some not-insignificant amount of implementation. And when I say "worried", I mean in some nebulous, theoretical sense. I don't even use it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
I've seen the exact same thing. Funnily enough, it was also with some old virtual machines like in that linked thread. At the time, I figured it was a bad cable, or system misconfig , or something and moved on with my life. Like Aleron, I'd like to see AnandTech look into it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2014 08:12
|
|
|
Dick Fagballzson posted:I defied his advice, went with my instincts, and turned out to be right. And I'll be smug about it all day long thank you very much. But you defied it for what will probably turn out to be the wrong reason, so I'm not sure what you're smug about.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2014 01:23
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:Yeah, got burned by this. Yep, and then you always get a bunch of dummies who, even years later, will never try that manufacturer again. I mean, people are already up in arms about this, and Samsung might release a firmware that fixes it in a week. It's a little early to freak out about how poo poo Samsung is.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2014 12:19
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:Indeed, better to have nothing at all and just go by anecdote. I don't know if what he's saying is true, but if it is true, then what he's describing is an anecdote.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2014 01:08
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:I find the reports that backblaze and google have put out to contain very useful information. Some people look at those reports and bring up concerns over the data and mention aspects like bulk purchasing, different vendors, and drive farming as reasons it is not reliable. I disagree and feel that the data they do present is better than not having it. I don't think he was talking about backblaze and google. He said "unless you're constantly picking up new drives on different days from different delivery services". I'm sure google and backblaze get lots of drives from different lots, delivery services, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2014 01:22
|
|
|
BitterAvatar posted:Well that does sound very useful compared to Windows. You have to have both old and new drives installed simultaneously.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
Before Performance Restore After Performance Restore  After running the test like 10 times, there's always that little dip between 50 and 70GB. Not that it really matters, but I'm curious...anyone have any theories what could cause something like that?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
Maybe once a month I'll get a BSOD from something like SamsungRapidFilter.sys. Anyone else get that? (840 evo 256GB and Win7)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
wooger posted:Over what? RAM caching isn't just RAM caching. There's a lot of heuristic assumptions in caching algorithms and you can't just say that they're all equal. It's like saying "your car can't be faster than mine, they both have gas engines!" Now, I'm not saying RAPID is actually better or not, I'm just saying you haven't made your case.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2015 16:33
|
|
|
Yeah, I hardly care about reliability past a certain point*. When the drive dies, it doesn't take long to get back to where I was since I have real-time backups with CrashPlan. * A "certain point" being maybe reasonable confidence I won't have it die within a year.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
Here's a bit of info that someone might find useful. Samsung Magician can't enable RAPID if you're running the Windows 10 preview. In the minimum requirements table at the bottom of the Rapid mode screen, for OS, it shows "Error in Obtaining I...". Of course, because the UI is stupid you can't actually expand the table column to read the rest of the error message...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
r0ck0 posted:Or you know you could just plug the C: drive into the first SATA port like you're supposed to. Figuring out which port is the "first" SATA port seems way harder than just unplugging a couple of other drives. Particularly if you have a small case.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
r0ck0 posted:If only there was a book with a picture that showed which is the first port. Oh well better just unplug everything. Yes, finding a manual, finding the correct page, interpreting the not-so-great documentation, is definitely easier than unplugging a SATA cable or two.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Yeah it won't work on Windows 10. To be honest I can't tell any performance difference from when I was running it on Win7 with Rapid.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
B-Nasty posted:Apparently, the factory amount isn't enough to stop performance issues, and if you just try to keep the drive with space free, you may run into problems like Avulsion's one a few posts up. Since I have a 500GB drive, I set a specific OP amount of 10%, which added to the factory amount, should be plenty. Do you have some source for this? I've read multiple times in this very thread that you do not have to do this on Samsung SSDs.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
frozenpeas posted:The funny thing about this reinstall/clone debate is that it takes longer to read the thread than it does to install windows to an ssd and run ninite. The effort part of a fresh install is like 10% the install and 90% getting the OS and all your apps configured like you want. beefnoodle posted:Homeopathic technicians in this thread. Hahah! Darkpriest667 posted:Really, It was a better at handling system resources and a hell of a lot more secure than 7 was. 7 wasn't a bad OS but it would top load the threads and it was not nearly as secure as 8 is/was. I'm sorry the start screen hurt your feelings. You'll love the new start menu in Windows 10 You also have to be careful when cloning because all that HDD activity can cause the pin on the hard drive head to dig in to the drive and start a fire.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:Also, when I first heard about the 840 EVO performance degradation problem I remembered how hard this thread was jerking off over paying a big premium for the 840 EVO and busted a side laughing. Nicholas Nassim Taleb posted:I will repeat this point again until I get hoarse: a mistake is not something to be determined after the fact, but in the light of the information until that point.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
fatman1683 posted:I'd love to see if I can build a server with absolutely no moving parts whatsoever: SSDs, completely passive cooling, etc. Good news: you can!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
gently caress waiting 30 seconds for my computer to boot, 30 seconds for my tabs to load, 30 seconds for my VM to load, possibly 30 seconds for my IDE to load in my VM. I'm no heathen.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
ClassH posted:Does nobody use S3 sleep? I mean it takes literally 3 seconds to wake up (its up before the monitor wakes up) and uses like 1-2 watts while sleeping.(basically nothing) I've literally never had sleep work reliably on a desktop computer. But maybe it works now, I just gave up on trying it out on every computer to only be disappointed. edit: Hey you want to hear something funny? I guess I never bothered to disable sleep when I moved over to Win10 full time, so I've been using sleep for a few months! I guess it works! Thermopyle fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Jul 6, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2015 17:56
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Your anecdotes are worthless. We've characterized countless SATA cables in our labs here and there are absolutely poo poo ones that aren't actually cable of holding the SATA 6Gbps spec properly. They're typically no name SATA cables from random vendors online, but in our experience some motherboard vendors also use better cables than others. Without being able to publish our data, I'll just say that the best bundled-with-motherboard cables we've found are the ones that Asus currently ships. Black cable with a black and white clipped connector. I bet thats an endless source of frustration as I would imagine a lot of people blame the drive and return it when they've actually got poo poo cables.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 21:31 |
|
|
Skandranon posted:I was never that happy with RAPID to be honest. Seemed to cause more trouble than it was worth. I had zero problems with it, but when I moved to Win10, which Samsung didn't support with RAPID at the time, I didn't miss it at all. It did basically zero for perceptible performance (confounded by comparing RAPID on Win7 to RAPID-less on Win10).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2015 19:24
|
|