Which SSD Has Longer Life? A Real-World Breakdown

Understanding SSD Lifespan: More Than Just TBW

Let’s kick it off with the basics — SSD lifespan is typically measured in TBW (Terabytes Written) or DWPD (Drive Writes Per Day). But hang on, that’s not the whole picture. While TBW gives you a sense of how much data can be written before failure, real-world use throws some curveballs.

For example, a Samsung 970 EVO Plus might boast a TBW of 600TB for the 1TB version, while a Crucial MX500 sits closer to 360TB. Sounds like a win for Samsung, right? But wait — what if you're just doing light office work or gaming? In that case, you might never hit those limits before you replace the whole machine.

So yeah, TBW matters — but context is everything.

Types of NAND Flash: TLC vs MLC vs QLC

MLC (Multi-Level Cell): The Reliable Old Champ

MLC drives used to be the gold standard for durability. They store 2 bits per cell, which means less wear over time. Examples? The old-school Samsung 850 PRO series — those things are tanks. Some still chugging along after a decade.

But MLC is pricey. Like, "maybe-I'll-just-buy-an-HDD" pricey. That's why most consumer drives have shifted away from it.

TLC (Triple-Level Cell): The Sweet Spot

TLC stores 3 bits per cell — more storage, cheaper price, decent endurance. Most mainstream SSDs today are TLC-based, and for regular users, they’re more than enough. Even pros can use them without worries (unless you're hammering them with 4K video edits daily).

Drives like the Samsung 970 EVO Plus, WD Black SN850, or Crucial P5 Plus are TLC champs. And they’ve got surprisingly good endurance thanks to smart wear-leveling and over-provisioning tricks.

QLC (Quad-Level Cell): Yeah... Maybe Not

QLC crams 4 bits into each cell, which makes it cheaper — but also more fragile in terms of write cycles. These drives are perfect for cold storage or light use, not heavy workloads.

Personal take? I once bought a QLC drive for storing game installs, thinking “eh, how bad can it be?”... It slowed down bad after filling 70% of capacity. Lesson learned.

DRAM Cache or Not: It Makes a Difference

Here’s something that’s easy to overlook — DRAM cache. Drives with onboard DRAM generally manage wear better, especially under sustained write loads. Why? Because they don't have to rely solely on flash to track where stuff’s written.

So if you're comparing, say, a Kingston A400 (no DRAM) vs a Crucial MX500 (with DRAM), the MX500’s gonna live longer under stress. Simple as that.

Some newer SSDs use HMB (Host Memory Buffer) instead, borrowing RAM from your system — it works, but it’s not quite as solid as real DRAM.

Brand Reputation and Firmware: The Unseen Factor

Okay, maybe this part feels fuzzy, but it matters. SSD lifespan isn't just about hardware specs — firmware optimization and thermal control also play a huge role.

Brands like Samsung, Western Digital, and Crucial tend to be more conservative in how they manage wear. Firmware updates can even extend drive life or fix wear-leveling bugs. Yeah, seriously.

I’ve had an early-gen ADATA SSD go toast in under 2 years — no warning, no SMART alert, nada. Meanwhile, a Samsung 860 EVO I abused for years just keeps going. Coincidence? Don’t think so.

So… Which SSD Lasts the Longest?

If we’re talking real-world usage and longevity, Samsung’s PRO line (like the 970 PRO) is the clear winner — MLC NAND, top-tier controller, excellent firmware.

But most people don’t need that level of endurance. For 95% of users, a good TLC drive with DRAM cache like the Samsung 980 PRO, Crucial MX500, or WD Black SN850 will outlast your use case.

And QLC? Stick to archival stuff or budget gaming builds. Just don’t run your OS on it and expect miracles.

Final thought:
SSDs are fast, cool, and mostly reliable. But not all are created equal. Pay attention to the NAND type, presence of DRAM, and — yeah — maybe trust the brand with a better track record. Sometimes, it’s worth spending 20 bucks more just to avoid the “my SSD died and took my thesis with it” horror story.

Is 165 cm normal for a 15 year old?

The predicted height for a female, based on your parents heights, is 155 to 165cm. Most 15 year old girls are nearly done growing. I was too. It's a very normal height for a girl.

Is 160 cm too tall for a 12 year old?

How Tall Should a 12 Year Old Be? We can only speak to national average heights here in North America, whereby, a 12 year old girl would be between 137 cm to 162 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/3 feet). A 12 year old boy should be between 137 cm to 160 cm tall (4-1/2 to 5-1/4 feet).

How tall is a average 15 year old?

Average Height to Weight for Teenage Boys - 13 to 20 Years

How to get taller at 18?

Staying physically active is even more essential from childhood to grow and improve overall health. But taking it up even in adulthood can help you add a few inches to your height. Strength-building exercises, yoga, jumping rope, and biking all can help to increase your flexibility and grow a few inches taller.

Is 5.7 a good height for a 15 year old boy?

Generally speaking, the average height for 15 year olds girls is 62.9 inches (or 159.7 cm). On the other hand, teen boys at the age of 15 have a much higher average height, which is 67.0 inches (or 170.1 cm).

Can you grow between 16 and 18?

Most girls stop growing taller by age 14 or 15. However, after their early teenage growth spurt, boys continue gaining height at a gradual pace until around 18. Note that some kids will stop growing earlier and others may keep growing a year or two more.

Can you grow 1 cm after 17?

Even with a healthy diet, most people's height won't increase after age 18 to 20. The graph below shows the rate of growth from birth to age 20. As you can see, the growth lines fall to zero between ages 18 and 20 ( 7 , 8 ). The reason why your height stops increasing is your bones, specifically your growth plates.