"A new report has been released that does name drive manufacturers — and it singles out Intel as the only company whose products didn’t fail under heavy testing".
http://www.extremetech.co...ble-drive-manufacturer
Naturally most people are smart enough to buy Intel over other manufacturers when it comes to SSD's, this proves all other SSD manufacturers are not up to par.

Rigbuilder12
"A new report has been released that does name drive manufacturers — and it singles out Intel as the only company whose products didn’t fail under heavy testing".
http://www.extremetech.co...ble-drive-manufacturer
Naturally most people are smart enough to buy Intel over other manufacturers when it comes to SSD's, this proves all other SSD manufacturers are not up to par.

Bunch of crap. Is this an ad?

First of all, I have had two drives with Intel NAND fail. I have two other drives with Samsung NAND which haven't failed. Second of all, Intel drives are not "up to par" as far as performance goes, so it depends on what your measurement is and what is important to you when you are buying a SSD.

Your link doesn't work, but I visited the site. I didn't find the article you referenced, but I found other articles which made me not think highly of the site. For instance: "Memories emerge intact from cryogenic resurrection machine". Ok? And: "Popular Chrome VPN extension Hola at center of massive botnet attack". They call a DDoS attack through a proxy a botnet?

LJennings
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/173887-ssd-stress-testing-finds-intel-might-be-the-only-reliable-drive-manufacturer
An article from 2014?
 
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/201064-which-ssds-are-the-most-reliable-massive-study-sheds-some-light
Couldn't even use the article from 2015...

Nice...

All six drives made it several hundred terabytes past their manufacturer-set limits, but four of the six drives died before or just after the 1PB mark. Intel’s SSD died first, of a self-inflicted wound (the drive is designed to stop working once it begins having problems), but two drives — the Kingston and the Samsung 840 Pro — made it past the 2PB mark.

Lol, fanboy much RB12?
 
Unless your doing lots, as in large file size(s) for NLE, this sounds more like fanboygasm....
  

you go ahead and drink your koolaid, just do us a favor and drink it elsewhere

Sounds like someone bought a cheap ssd^
Intel has the fastest Enterprise and Consumer SSD as well as the most reliable SSDs on the market.
Lots of hellbent haters in this forum😆

Rigbuilder12
As SSDs become increasingly common in data centers and consumer PC setups, we’ve seen more questions regarding which SSDs are truly reliable (and under what test conditions). When we last visited this issue, we covered a report on SSD reliability when the drive suddenly loses power, but the report authors didn’t name names or give any information regarding which drives failed more than others. A new report has been released that does name drive manufacturers — and it singles out Intel as the only company whose products didn’t fail under heavy testing.
Before we dive into the results, we need to discuss the conditions of the test. The drives in question were being evaluated for long-term sensor data recording where speed and SSD size were of secondary importance compared to reliability and price. The author states that the drives he tested were chosen based on whether they advertised “Power Loss Protection,” were reliable and inexpensive. This last criteria is somewhat flexible, but provided pricing information indicates a target between £30-£90 ($50-$150 USD).
The drives tested were:

• Crucial M4 (128GB)
• Toshiba’s THNSNH060GCS (60GB)
• Intel S3500
• Innodisk 3MP Sata Slim (8GB and 16GB)
• Intel’s older 320 SSD (We tested the related SSD 330 in our cache comparison benchmark)
• OCZ’s 32GB Vertex SSD

 
This test proves Intel makes the best SSDs on the market, they listed all other SSD vendor names that matter(notice Samsung is nowhere to be found).
Everyone knows Intel is the best at everything they touch, and now its been proven!
Of course I own 3 Intel SSD's. I've always known lntel has had the lowest failure rate among SSD manufacturers(.003% failure rate is unmatched)over the last 9 years, most other vendors can't even post a 9 year statistic when it comes to their SSD's, because they haven't been making SSD's nearly as long as Intel. 

You're quoting from an article from 2014  >>  http://www.extremetech.com/computing/173887-ssd-stress-testing-finds-intel-might-be-the-only-reliable-drive-manufacturer
 
But if your read the latest article from the same company from 2015, Samsung is one of the brands compared and Intel is the 1st to fail.  >>  http://www.extremetech.com/computing/201064-which-ssds-are-the-most-reliable-massive-study-sheds-some-light
 
 
You stick with what you want/like just as the rest of us will.

RainStryke
I happen to know that data centers don't commonly use SSD's in their systems, the main reason it's not cost effective and the second is the reliability isn't there yet.
 
Also, just so you know... Intel partnered Micron for their latest drives.

So true, we uses SAS Drives and even SATA Drives but NO SSD Drives.
Even our Blades used SAS Drives.
 
My Dell R4 has a (No Name) Micron SSD Drive in it, almost forgot about that.

From my personal experience my Fujitsu SCSI and SAS drives outlast EVERYTHING, those old MAM3367 series drives sounded like a dremmel but they were stupid fast for the time and would outlive the chassis they were in.  For SSD's, my old Corsair ForceGT (SATA2) were pretty good, I lost one eventually, but that was the one I bought used so no idea how rough its life was before me.  I PERSONALLY had terrible luck with my Corsair Neutrons drive, lots of bad data, intermittent drive failures and so on, infact I thought it might have been my SATA ports or power, swapped to 850 Pros (was going for EVO's but Pros were on sale and the warranty is KILLER) and all the problems went away.  Got some 840 EVOs as well no issues there, I have not used the Intel SSD's I know EVGATech_JaysonC has for a while and had nothing but good things to say about his, and I have never heard EVGATech_MattM complain about his either but saying that Intel is the ONLY way to go is nonsense.

I only tested these funky small drives and left out Samsung. This also predates Toshiba taking over OCZ (toshibas reliable memory controller with OCZ speeds). I think this test is too old.

You know what? WIth SSD's for me its speed and size. If the SSD fails I would have already bought a second multi-terabyte to FULLY back it up. SSD's are fairly new and with more storage comes less reliability. You have to remember that new technology cant evolve fast enough with the advancements of the tech industry.

I have an Intel 530 Seires 180 GB drive, it`s a piece of junk compared to my Samsung 850 EVO.
4 Bad sectors and only at 96% health after less then a year`s usage.

OK,
 
If sudden power interruptions are proven to have a causal effect on SSD life / function --- this is just 1 more reason to protect your PC with a UPS. 
 
By the way, more files are corrupted in memory with power fluctuation than any where else, I've seen - why I always insist on UPS protection for my clients.
 
My Samsung SSDs 840 Pro, 850 EVo, & 850 Pro have not let me down neither has my Kingston Hyper SSD
 
I am also enjoying my Intel PCIe SSD

 
Reminder that Trolling to get a response, or to anger another member is not allowed. Also, off topic remarks are not allowed. A couple posts deleted already. Let's stay on topic. (No Trolling).

wow so the fact my Patriot 64gb SSD has been going strong now for 2 years is a fluke because it's not a good quality drive? lol