2

I see frequent mentions that placing page file on SSD is good for performance but bad for SSD's lifespan (e.g. here on SU). But nothing I saw had any citations, especially ones backed by actual data.

Is there any reasonable measurement backed non-anecdotal assessment of just what exactly the impact on SSD's lifespand is?

E.g. will it cause SSD to fail in 1 year 50% of time, or shorten it from average 5 years to average 4 years etc...

|improve this question
6

Sigh. I'm pretty tired of debunking this, and I'm copying exactly what I said previously

The idea that SSDs are fragile snowflakes that will melt under the white heat of data is a bit of a mistake.

Many tests have been done where drives have been torture tested - tech report did one with last generation drives, here's an ongoing one and basically its PRETTY hard to kill a modern SSD by excessive writes.

If it dies prematurely, its more likely to be due to other things.

You're going to want your pagefile on a SSD - If you have tons of ram, you're barely going to touch it except when needed.

If you don't, the fast SSD will be a better place to put a pagefile.

I tend to treat my systems as if my drives would die any day, and back up so... I'm probably a little less worried, but I'm doubtful it'll have a major effect on drive lifespans

From Jamie Hanrahan's link in the comments

I found this gem

Should the pagefile be placed on SSDs?

Yes. Most pagefile operations are small random reads or larger sequential writes, both of which are types of operations that SSDs handle well.

And quite a bit more - its worth a read on the source.

In essence the things SSDs are good at (fast reads) and the sort of files that use a SSD efficiently (large ones) are both what the pagefile is.

The even go on to say

In fact, given typical pagefile reference patterns and the favorable performance characteristics SSDs have on those patterns, there are few files better than the pagefile to place on an SSD.

So. Microsoft recommends using your SSD for your pagefile.

|improve this answer
  • I agree completely. Microsoft agrees too, and they have actual data to prove it. "Most pagefile operations are small random reads or larger sequential writes, both of which are types of operations that SSDs handle well. [...] In fact, given typical pagefile reference patterns and the favorable performance characteristics SSDs have on those patterns, there are few files better than the pagefile to place on an SSD." blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/e7/2009/05/05/… – Jamie Hanrahan Jun 6 '16 at 0:22
  • Replaced it with mistake. But hey, I learnt two things. – Journeyman Geek♦ Jun 6 '16 at 0:23
  • Oh, well, and since you did I deleted that comment, so now your reply comment is kinda hanging out there. :) On topic, I would also add this: If one is still concerned about pagefile writes wearing out an SSD, there is a simple answer - if you can install a second drive: Get a small (hence cheap) SSD, install that along with your primary, and put your pagefile on the little one. When/if it wears out (likely years from now), replace it. (But... if your pagefile IO is really a bottleneck on your machine you might be better off spending the money on more RAM. ) – Jamie Hanrahan Jun 6 '16 at 0:26
  • I typically replace the hdds on older laptops with the cheapest ssds I can find. As long as they do AHCI, the performance improvement is dramatic. I do have my home setup designed that I can afford to lose at least one hard drive at a time, so I'm personally less concerned about that. – Journeyman Geek♦ Jun 6 '16 at 0:31

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.