I've got an application which requires data recording in a outdoor environment, and I am interested in the reliability of SSDs vs HDD when placed in a cold (down to -20) and hot (+50) ambient environments. Intuition leads me to believe SSDs will be more reliable, with the possible exception of high temperatures. Air conditioning enclosures is not an option.
Does anyone have any information on disk reliability in these situations?
Look for an industrial or ruggedized SSD for this application.
A good example of a proper product spec.
http://www.pretec.com/products/ssd-series/item/sata-ssd-series/a5000-industrial-grade
．Standard 2.5" SATA III SSD, compatible with SATA III/II/I interface
．Capacity: 32GB ~ 256GB
．Data transfer rate: Up to 490 MB/s
．Built-in ECC (Error Correction Code) function
．Support ATA-8 command and SMART function
．Temperature
I. Operating Temperature: 0℃ ~ +70℃
II. Extended Temperature: -40℃ ~ +85℃
III. Storage Temperature: -55℃ ~ +95℃
The main difference of HDD and SSD is the Storage Capacity and its Related Costs. You can buy SSD supported devices with storage of up to 4 terrabytes, but they come at a cost.An HDD, meanwhile, will give you storage capacity of up to 2 terrabytes on a laptop and 10 terabytes on a desktop.
Yes, there are chips which can work on extreme temperatures (both in cold or warm), but they are much costly. In practice, in most situations it is better (a LOT cheaper) to solve the problem of the temperature stabilisation as to use such electronics.
The temperature between -20 - +50 C isn't really extreme, especially in case of always working hardware, because its normal ohmical heat will him enough for the normal work. For the higher temp I suggest to use simply air conditioning.
And yes, SSDs are more reliable because they don't contain moving parts.
Another solution (I don't know it were applicable in your situation): you could use a simple, minimal embedded hardware which stores its data in a better, protected area, and reaches it with cable network or with wifi.
