Why not use the in-built W10 "Optimise"? It uses Trim for SSDs and defrag for rotating disks.

 

5 hours ago, vortex681 said:

Even if it only lasted as long as the worst SSD in the torture test, that's potentially over 30 years of writes. You'd have to be writing over 19Tb every month to reach 700Tb in the 3 years it took your drive to die, so it's quite likely that defragging your drive is what caused it to fail so early. SSDs can obviously fail for other reasons but defragging them significantly hastens their demise.

Defrag is just reading and writing, nothing more, just into specific locations. It won't make a drive fail any earlier than an equivalent amount of "regular" writes.

Plenty of early SSDs failed prematurely for reasons utterly unrelated to flash wearing out.

Cheers!

 

1 hour ago, Luke said:

Defrag is just reading and writing, nothing more, just into specific locations. It won't make a drive fail any earlier than an equivalent amount of "regular" writes.

You're absolutely correct - defragging does just consist of reads and writes. But in order to make all of the files contiguous, defragging needs to do many times more writes than everyday use of the drive does. Because there's effectively a maximum number of writes an SSD can accept before it fails, all of these extra "regular" writes caused by defragging will mean that it fails that much earlier. Defragging is completely unnecessary for SSDs because of the almost instantaneous assembly of any fragmented files when they're demanded. SSD manufacturers provide management software which takes care of all the optimising and TRIM functions for their drives so why use anything else?

47 minutes ago, vortex681 said:

You're absolutely correct - defragging does just consist of reads and writes. But in order to make all of the files contiguous, defragging needs to do many times more writes than everyday use of the drive does. Because there's effectively a maximum number of writes an SSD can accept before it fails, all of these extra "regular" writes caused by defragging will mean that it fails that much earlier. Defragging is completely unnecessary for SSDs because of the almost instantaneous assembly of any fragmented files when they're demanded. SSD manufacturers provide management software which takes care of all the optimising and TRIM functions for their drives so why use anything else?

I'm not disagreeing with you - I don't see any need or purpose to defragmenting an SSD.

My point is merely that even if the SSD was 100% fragmented, a defrag would add an extra 200GB or so to lifetime writes (trivial compared to total lifespan) and would not likely be needed again (the vast majority of files on a drive are never overwritten). The SSD failed for some other reason, which happened often for early SSDs.

Cheers!