Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Im building a new server for my company and would like to know which option is better? using SSD or traditional hard drives with RAID 10?

I prediect that the web server will perform a lot of read/write operations, do SSDs have shorter life span?

share|improve this question
up vote 5 down vote accepted

Typically SSDs do have a shorter lifespan, it depends on how much writing you do, in our tests we managed to totally kill some supposed enterprise-class disks in less a week (we were HAMMERING them however). Of course you really don't mention the nature of your application, very often it'll be faster and more reliable to just have more memory to be honest. I'd look at your storage-requirements in relationship to your memory to see if you can cache the most frequently accessed data after that I'd see how many IOPS your disks are doing and base my decision on that.

share|improve this answer

If your web server performs a lot of random access I/O and disk capacities are not an issue, then SSD is a good option. Keep in mind though, that you should use RAID for SSDs as well to increase fault tolerance. I can't comment on the SSD life span. We have few machines with Intel SSDs for about 1.5 years. So far so good.

share|improve this answer

Also using SSD as a busy webserver. Been up and running for a year with no problems yet, we're using Intel X25m drives.

I'm also very interested in the lifespan issues but to be honest I've had hard disks last less time.

Its certainly blazingly fast.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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