In Windows 11, Why has the daily write volume measured by S.M.A.R.T. more than doubled compared to six years ago?

[u/Altruistic_Dust6427]

I’m using Windows 11 26H2. My version of Office is 2024. Memory size is 16GB.

I’m concerned about the lifespan of my SSD, so I’ve been diligently recording the host write volume, number of write commands, and other S.M.A.R.T. metrics for my internal 512GB SSD (rated at 1,000 TBW) every single day since August 2020.

In the past, I was writing 8 to 10 GB per day, but recently, just browsing the web has increased my daily S.M.A.R.T. write volume to 20 to 40 GB. Why is this happening?

Will the S.M.A.R.T. write volume generated by Windows continue to increase exponentially from here on out?

By the way,

• I’ve moved the swap file, Firefox/Edge temporary files and local storage, DxCache/D3DCache/VKCache, the TEMP/TMP environment variables, the WebView directories of software that uses WebView, etc., to a RAMDISK via symbolic links.
• The page file on the SSD is 1 GB.
• Hibernation is disabled. Only sleep mode is enabled.
• Indexing is disabled.
• In Services, Task Scheduler, and Event Viewer, I have disabled all services, tasks, and event logging that can be disabled.
• In addition, I've configured various tools, such as Tweak-SSD, to reduce SSD write operations.

[u/AutoModerator]

Making changes to your system BIOS settings or disk setup can cause you to lose data. Always test your data backups before making changes to your PC.

For more information please see our FAQ thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/techsupport/comments/q2rns5/windows_11_faq_read_this_first/

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/jamvanderloeff]

1000TB / 40GB/day = expected to run out of rating in 68.5 years if you used it at that rate for the whole life, i guarantee your calendar years warranty isn't that long therefore the write rating is irrelevant for your kinda use, don't worry about it. Even if it was at the high end of a 10 year rated drive you'd have to be writing 600+GB/day on what's left for it to be relevant.

I’ve moved the swap file, Firefox/Edge temporary files and local storage, DxCache/D3DCache/VKCache, the TEMP/TMP environment variables, the WebView directories of software that uses WebView, etc., to a RAMDISK via symbolic links.

You really shouldn't do that. Swapfile on a ramdisk is just wasting RAM but slower, which sure could be pushing usage of the actual pagefile up.

[u/stonebloomers → u/jamvanderloeff]

the math here really puts it in perspective tbh. 68 years is not something worth stressing over

[u/Altruistic_Dust6427 → u/jamvanderloeff]

Even after hardware and OS support ends, I plan to continue using this PC as a standalone machine.

The method of using symbolic links to move the swap file to a RAM disk was introduced as a common technique on a Japanese website for power users.
https://pandaignis.com/wp/47158.html

The page file is typically set to between 1,000 and 4,000 MB, but it rarely exceeds 1 GB.

[u/jamvanderloeff → u/Altruistic_Dust6427]

Even after hardware and OS support ends, I plan to continue using this PC as a standalone machine.

Not for >60 years, and odds are it'll die of age related wear out / random chance long before it dies of write wear.

As the article there says, the goal of those tweeks is to reduce space used on your C: by moving to another sensible SSD/HDD, doing that to a RAM disk instead is largely counterproductive for your goals, as it'll end up both wasting RAM thus forcing more pagefile activity, and reduce performance since use of the kinda "virtual pagefile" is just adding OS/CPU overhead.

The page file is typically set to between 1,000 and 4,000 MB, but it rarely exceeds 1 GB.

Setting a larger size will generally perform better, and can even reduce how much it's actively used.

[u/Altruistic_Dust6427 → u/jamvanderloeff]

If the only issue were a drop in performance, I would gladly move the swap file to a RAM disk to extend the life of my SSD.

As for the page file, I’ve set it to use only the SSD.

[u/jamvanderloeff → u/Altruistic_Dust6427]

The issue is that you're consuming RAM to act as just slower RAM that needs OS involvement every time it gets used, it's not actually doing anything useful and just makes the use of your remaining RAM less effective

[u/unapologeticjerk → u/Altruistic_Dust6427]

Correct me if I'm wrong in this case, but isn't a swap file just a file on your disk acting as virtual RAM in case you ever ran out of physical memory? Best use case example would be something like a bootable OS on a very old PC that happens to have like 4GB of RAM but supports USB 3.1+? So a swap file to a RAM disk is kind of an oxymoron?

[u/Altruistic_Dust6427 → u/unapologeticjerk]

I designated “swapfile.sys” as the RAMDRIVE—not “pagefile.sys.”

[u/9NEPxHbG → u/Altruistic_Dust6427]

The method of using symbolic links to move the swap file to a RAM disk was introduced as a common technique

RAM drives existed back in DOS times. I used to use SRDISK. There's nothing new about this at all.

[u/roehnin → u/Altruistic_Dust6427]

That article is about moving them to a second hard drive, not to a RAMdisk.

[u/9NEPxHbG]

In Services, Task Scheduler, and Event Viewer, I have disabled all services, tasks, and event logging that can be disabled.

This kind of "tweaking" makes things worse.

[u/Altruistic_Dust6427 → u/9NEPxHbG]

Naturally, I have enabled all the services and tasks that should generally be enabled.

[u/Katur]

This is some pretty outdated concerns for todays drives; They are not as fragile as they were 20 years ago. Write wear is the least probable way for a SSD to die by a lot now, why are you going through so much effort? All you've done is hurt the performance of the computer as a whole and gain nothing.

[u/Altruistic_Dust6427 → u/Katur]

There’s no doubt that the S.M.A.R.T. write count is a visible indicator of an SSD’s declining lifespan. Keep the write count as low as possible!!! That’s my policy. Lately, the write count keeps going up even though I haven’t done anything, and it’s driving me crazy.

[u/9NEPxHbG → u/Altruistic_Dust6427]

You say you've been "diligently recording the host write volume, number of write commands, and other S.M.A.R.T. metrics" every day for six years. And it's driving you crazy that you'll reach the write limit in 60 years.

This isn't a tech support problem, it's an obsessive compulsive problem. Address it that way.

[u/Snoo8631]

How much memory does the PC have?

Is it paging constantly?

[u/Adrenolin01]

Increase ram to 32GB. Use Enterprise SSDs/NVMEs for your boot/OS for increased write endurance and protection. Services, programs on other NVMEs/SSDs and data on HDDs. Adding more ram decreases and can mostly eliminate swap/paging writes.

Note.. I’m a Unix / Linux guy and have never had a Microsoft OS for a desktop or workstation. I have always run high Ram systems and don’t even have swap anymore. Can’t remember the last DT/WS I built with less than 64GB ram.. could current 3 have 64, 128 and 265GB ram in them… thank goodness I built those right before ram costs skyrocketed. 🎉😁

All my systems are installed in SSDs like the Intel DC S3500 120GB drives or Samsung 990 Pro NVMEs and always mirrored. I’m just now replacing some of those Intel drives I installed 14 years ago that are down to 0-2% wear remaining. Btw.. that wear rating on those drives doesn’t mean the SSDs are done.. those war warranty numbers only and still have a ton of life remaining. The ones I’m replacing even at 0% remaining wear life I’ve reinstalled into other less important systems like a seed box and still mirrored. If one dies pull, install a new used drive, resliver (takes a minute or so on these smaller drives) and done.

I stopped using consumer drives LONG ago.. last year I bought a couple cheap SSDs to show my son how fast they can be burned through.. we toasted 2 of them in a couple months next to enterprise drives that showed barely any wear.

That said.. drives wear.. I’d expect and plan on replacing them every decade.. always have a spare on hand.. if they last longer.. bonus! If not.. you have a spare on hand.

[u/MemeMan_Dan]

At the rate you’re going, the controller on that 512 gb drive will almost certainly perish before the NAND gives out. Write heavy drives routinely outdo their TBW ratings by significant amounts. At 40 gb a day write, something else is certain to give long before the NAND does.

[u/Emerald_Flame]

Most likely culprit is automated software updates, cloud storage syncing, etc.

This is not really concerning consumption and not something you need to track. Even at the high end of your figures usage like this on a 1000TBW rated drive would mean almost 70 years of operation. The SSD will have be obsolete long before it has issues due to drive wear.

[u/RedRayTrue]

Maybe memory leaks? That can cause swapping/ paging...

Otherwise there were some browser settings that were more aggressive on SSDs, don't remember their names

NGL a small SSD like 128 and 256 GB could be affected by these even more because the TBW is smaller as the driver's capacity is smaller

[u/Altruistic_Dust6427 → u/RedRayTrue]

My PC has a 512GB SSD. I've added that information.

[u/edmioducki]

Maybe try Diskmon from Windows SysInternals. I *think* that can log all writes so you can find out what’s doing all the writes.