SSD Write Endurance 25nm Vs 34nm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canthearu

To be fair, I think people get a bit too upset about compressible vs incompressible performance. All 60gig drives are designed fairly cheap, to use as few chips as possible without utterly crippling the controller, so you shouldn't be expecting 256gig drive performance out of a 64gig drive. It doesn't help that virtually drive makers post extremely over the top sequential write values in their specs ... For example, my torqx 64gig manual says 230meg per second sequential writes ... fat chance, it does 18meg or so a second sustained and that is it.

It isn't really fair to criticise a sandforce drive for slow incompressible writes when it is paired with 64gig of Async NAND, As the Chronos Deluxe show, pair it up with some nice Toggle Mode NAND, and the sandforce controller can do incompressible about as well as any other drive.

That isn't to say the sandforce drives can't go faster when doing incompressible data .... would be nice to see a bit of a boost in this area when the sandforce 3 comes out :)

---

I just mean for the purposes of this testing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Christopher

I just mean for the purposes of this testing.

---

Haha, I was just ranting in general!

MTRON 7000 PRO 16GB SLC, Day 18

GiB : 80 002.81
TiB : 78.1277
MBs : 56.90

187 92/92/130169283

Attachment 124243

Snooze!

It keeps getting a little faster, but that's about it. In two more days MWI should hit 90, making 20 days to MWI 90, or right around 200 days to MWI 0.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Christopher

It keeps getting a little faster, but that's about it. In two more days MWI should hit 90, making 20 days to MWI 90, or right around 200 days to MWI 0.

---

And that is only what the MWI counts ... Who knows how long this SSD will last beyond it's specified rating.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canthearu

And that is only what the MWI counts ... Who knows how long this SSD will last beyond it's specified rating.

---

I would guess maybe 3 years --BUT-- I'm not sure it's even possible, given the conditions and speed of the writes. I don't think anyone knows for sure.

I'm seriously thinking that absent firmware c0ckup, the drive lasts indefinitely from an endurance perspective.

first of all, thanks for this thread. it's very interesting and informative!

...but just out of curiosity: do you guys really buy all these drives just to send them straight to hell? :D or do you get these for cheap from supporters/sponsors?

keep it up! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaZz!

first of all, thanks for this thread. it's very interesting and informative!

...but just out of curiosity: do you guys really buy all these drives just to send them straight to hell? :D or do you get these for cheap from supporters/sponsors?

keep it up! ;)

---

Unfortunately I have no-one to sponsor me, so I have to buy the drives myself.

There certainly is an opening if you are interested.

Edit: I don't view it as sending the drives to hell, although the troqx belongs there. I view it as a sacrifice in the process of learning how SSDs live and die. How can I preach the longevity of SSDs if it is never tested.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaZz!

first of all, thanks for this thread. it's very interesting and informative!

...but just out of curiosity: do you guys really buy all these drives just to send them straight to hell? :D or do you get these for cheap from supporters/sponsors?

keep it up! ;)

---

Yeah, I'd be happy to test anything a manufacturer wants to send me (but no one has taken me up on my offer), but like canthearu, I don't think of it as just sending a drive to Hell. You get to see all sorts of behavior you'd not otherwise ever get to see. And since it's usually easier to "get a result" on a less expensive, lower capacity drive, it lowers the barrier of entry. If you could only use 512GB drives there wouldn't be many SSDs in the test since A)they are expensive and B) it would take a long damn time. I was able to get some BNIB MTRONs pretty cheap for example, and if you shop around there are some really good deals.

It's not just an endurance test in the strictest sense, it's a variety of things all rolled into one.

EDIT
But yeah, canthearu, that Torqx suqx something fierce.


My Patriot with the 3016 suqx worse though:
https://www.box.com/shared/static/p2...oq3lqxgz1a.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaZz!

first of all, thanks for this thread. it's very interesting and informative!

...but just out of curiosity: do you guys really buy all these drives just to send them straight to hell? :D or do you get these for cheap from supporters/sponsors?

keep it up! ;)

---

No sponsors. But the smallest capacities is'n too expencive and some of them are used SSD.

unfortunately i'm not in the position to offer any sponsorship, i'm sorry ;)

i really had to argue with myself whether to buy a SSD or not. now i'm a proud owner of a crucial m4 128gb and to think about putting it under such an endurance test raises my hackles :D

so it's even more creditable that you guys do this kind of research and share your results!

now that i'm already here in this thread: is there a way to monitor the amount of data written to a SSD? the tool SSD Life seems to offer exactly that, unfortunately it says my M4 doesn't provide any statistical data about data writes. so there's no chance?

Download SSDLife or Crystal Disk Info. Look at line 173/AD just like my last result post at page 147.
Take the P/E number and multiply with the total capacity of your ssd and you got how much it's been written to.

My m4 got 8400 P/E used.
8400*64020803584 byte = 489,1032859683037 TiB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RaZz!

now that i'm already here in this thread: is there a way to monitor the amount of data written to a SSD? the tool SSD Life seems to offer exactly that, unfortunately it says my M4 doesn't provide any statistical data about data writes. so there's no chance?

---

The smart values have a media wear count, that raw value documents the average wear cycles for your drive. Multiply that value by the drives size for rough estimate for the amount written.

Torqx day 11

Drive hours: 262
GiB written: 13,796.90 (13.4739 TiB)
Avg MB/s: 17.22

Bad blocks: 83
Wear cycle counter: 0/913/1379

Intel 520 - day 2

Drive hours: 70
Avg MG/s: 74.92 MB/s

Host GB written (F1): 14,653.4 GiB (14.31 TiB , 468909 raw)
NAND writes (F9): 10,374 GiB (10.13 TiB)

Reallocated sectors (05): 0
Failure count (AB, AC): 0 program, 0 erase
Media Wearout Indicator (E9): 100 (0 raw)

As B.A.T. said, the only way to measure the total writes to the M4 is through the wear leveling attribute. Multiplying it by 128 would give you a really rough idea of the total writes. In this testing you'll get a more accurate count that way as the writes are mostly sequential which creates less write amplification. In daily use you would see a little more. But a rough estimate is the best you can do (with the M4).

Welcome canthearu, I will follow the 520 closely :)

What happened to the XS forum, was there an update ? I didn't receive my weekly update showing me the link to the new posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by canthearu

Intel 520 - day 2

Drive hours: 70
Avg MG/s: 74.92 MB/s

Host GB written (F1): 14,653.4 GiB (14.31 TiB , 468909 raw)
NAND writes (F9): 10,374 GiB (10.13 TiB)

Reallocated sectors (05): 0
Failure count (AB, AC): 0 program, 0 erase
Media Wearout Indicator (E9): 100 (0 raw)

---

So it looks like the 520 also has an initial "credit" period.

thanks for the tip.

however, the raw value just shows 0's:

Attachment 124255

hum... :p:

RaZz!

you just haven't written that much yet... Less than 128GB host writes I'd guess.

aight. i already thought it'd be smth like that.

i just wanted to make sure as i left the windows temp folder as well as the browser cache on my ssd. so i'll check these values from time to time. most SSD guides recommend moving all this stuff off the SSD, but if the writes aren't excessively high, it doesn't make any sense to do that. why buy a fast SSD when you move everything to a slower HDD? :)

I agree. I just move large stuff off SSD's to save space. Games/Docs/Videos ect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nn_step

anyone else notice this: http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/users/swanson...BleakFlash.pdf

---

I read that.

I'm not worried at all, a lot of companies are looking for alternatives to flash. I think the memristor is a good one, there is even a website for it: http://www.memristor.org/

Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)

746.43TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 25 up 2 from last update (4 days ago)
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
POH 6710
MD5 OK

33.31MiB/s on avg (~262 hours)

--

Will update the chart and listings tomorrow. (had a few days off :))

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ao1

So it looks like the 520 also has an initial "credit" period.

---

Heh, E9 has gone down to 99 over the night. Obviously I've finished burning this "credit" period already :)

Of course, by the time most 60gig SSDs reach 10TB NAND writes, people have seen that shiny new 256gig SSD on the shelf, and exiled the old 60giger to the secondary machine they hardly use :)

Okay, the new Turbo arrived today.

It's SMART data is much more promising than the last one. Here it is straight out of the box.
https://www.box.com/shared/static/g1...75m2ipyfrz.png

MTRON 7000 PRO 16GB SLC, Day 19

GiB : 80 002.81
TiB : 78.1277
MBs : 56.90

187 92/91/138218085
Attachment 124262

It gets faster yet. Interesting.