Ha Ha!Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
Excellent :clap:
Printable View
Ha Ha!Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
Excellent :clap:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
Break out the champagne it is party time!!!!! :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
Really? What else would kill it? An electrical surge? A blown capacitor? The drive controller chip wearing out?Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
As far as PE cycles go, would you say that your drive is indicative of what one should expect with Samsung 830s? With your 830 at ~7600 WLC, doesn't that mean that most cells have more or less lasted to about double the manufacturer expected lifetime so far? I assume a core assumption in all this endurance testing is that there's not much variation between drives of the same type at least as far as PE cycles go, which is why you feel comfortable making basic conclusions using only a single drive of each type. If there was a lot of PE cycle lifetime variation between two drives of the same model (say your 830 is a real outlier, and mine is much closer to manufacturer speced PE counts), I would think this whole exercise would not be particularly useful as far as forming generalized conclusions about what a particular drive should be expected to do.
Also, for a given write load, doesn't increasing the size of the drive quickly make up for say the difference between 3k and 5k PE cycle NAND? In other words, if you have a massive write load application, just pick a bigger drive. Alternately, can't manufacturers just move to larger and larger SSDs to account for lower PE Counts associated with smaller and smaller smaller process NAND chips (all else being equal)?
Right, but once the NAND is beginning to reach its actual physical limits, assuming you have an excellent wear leveling algorithm, wouldn't one expect that the reallocations actually do start to happen almost all around the same time as each NAND cell reaches its limit?Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
The number one problem is firmware rendering the drive unusable, but you can short them out if you do something stupid (I did that to an MTRON I was testing). The 830 is probably pretty indicative of most -- most of the flash is pretty much identical, at least in so far as it will far exceed what it's rated for. However, maybe through the luck of the draw you get one drive that has one part of one NAND die go bad, or die early. The whole drive would be unable to function unless it has some kind of redundancy, like SF or the Intel 320 series.Quote:
Originally Posted by gordo
Because it would take so long to get to 7700 PE cycles in a modern Win7/w TRIM environment under normal useage scenarios it would be more likely that something else happens along the way (20 years at 1PE cycle a day, 10 years at 2/day).
Absolutely -- there is more flash to write to, and unlike endurance testing, the workload isn't infinite. So if your workload doesn't change, but you upgrade the current drive to a unit 2x the size, it will last much, much longer. It might take you 12 days to go through one PE cycle instead of 7.Quote:
Originally Posted by gordo
You would think there is a brick wall, beyond which the NAND is just pushed too far. That's not the case though for the most part... all of the flash is different. Even if it does wear at the same rate, it will still not all die at the same time. If you were just putting the flash chips in a machine that did nothing but write and erase the flash, you might see most flash chips wear out at or around the same time.Quote:
Originally Posted by gordo
Congratz :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
That took only a year :rofl:
Thanks for the info. I'll try some during the weekend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
btw here are the benchmark before I have done anything to the Mtron.
Attachment 127273
I'm going to SE it before I'll put it to the test.
--------------------------------------------
Plextor M3P 128GB Day 5
118,444.08 GiB
115.67 TiB
273.64 MB/s Average
119 Hours
Rellocated Event Count 0
--------------------------------------------
Samsung 830 256GB Day 75
1,782,813.16 GiB
1,741.03 TiB
305.46 MB/s Average
1765 Hours
7742 Wear Leveling Count
MWI 1
6/0 Erase/Program Fail
Used Reserved Block Count: 12/24572 sectors
--------------------------------------------
Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
Hi B.A.T, please find the file attached. it is the special tool for Mtron SSD. (Smartview)
http://www.mediafire.com/?34h0m6qk0nty25n
Thank you! I'll try it later today. :)
Ohh... what does it do? I wonder if it works with the Imation branded MTRONS.Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
Sadly it doesn't recognize the Mtron. I don't know why.Quote:
Originally Posted by neeyuese
It makes it possible to get more accurate info from the Mtron.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
Attachment 127285
Todays update:
m4
981.1945 TiB
4131 hours
Avg speed 74.27 MiB/s.
AD gone from 52 to 48
P/E 16922.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=492726
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
673.67 TiB
23441 hours
Reallocated sectors : 104 to 106
Available Reserved space: 78
MWI= 114 to 103
MD5 =OK
40.61 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=492725
Intel X25-E 64GB
174.04 TiB
529-30=499 hours
Reallocated sectors : 0
Available Reserved space: 100
MWI= 98
MD5 =OK
100.62 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=492724
B.A.T.
Maybe it needs to be in IDE mode and not AHCI?
That is a good idea. I'll try that tomorrow. :up:
Hi B.A.T , maybe the firmware version on your Mtron drive is too old, both of my Mtron 3025 have the version 0.20r1 and working fine. Sadly the Mtron website down and very hard to find the correct version firmware now.Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
Some of mine have 17r and some have 18r, but the latest available for mine (they're Imation branded) is 18r.
Please find the 0.20r1 firmware links.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
This firmware package support all Mtron SSD.
http://www.mediafire.com/?xw3ibgbp3bvbwuc
--------------------------------------------
Plextor M3P 128GB Day 6
140,407.73 GiB
137.11 TiB
273.07 MB/s Average
142 Hours
Rellocated Event Count 0
Attachment 127290
--------------------------------------------
Samsung 830 256GB Day 76
1,731,806,725.13 GiB
1,764.38 TiB
300.67 MB/s Average
1788 Hours
7846 Wear Leveling Count
MWI 1
6/0 Erase/Program Fail
Used Reserved Block Count: 12/24572 sectors
I think you are right about how it shows write.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
1GB file increases the raw with 1200~1024 MiB
Filling the entire drive with 29.3 GiB increased the raw with 50000~48.8 GiB. That is a lot of writes in WA. It'll be exciting to see how long it will last.
I hope your MTRON lasts longer than the two I tried -- remember -- don't short it out! All I have to show for it is two dead MTRONs and a trail of tears.
How did you manage to do that? It's secure in the endurance rig so there should be no problems.
Ha... I didn't say I was proud of the fact. And if I've proven anything, it's that no SSD is safe and secure when I'm around.,Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
Needless to say, the poor MTRON got shorted out because of something dumb I did. I had run it for a day or so in my other system before I put it in the endurance rig, and I managed to short it while moving it. It was a combination of rotten luck and bad decisions on my part.
The other MTRON died after some time, I rebooted the system and the MTRON had locked up. I tried flashing new firmware on it, but to no avail.
If I can track down 20r FW for the 16GB 7025, I'll give it another shot.
Do you know the difference between 17R and 20R?
Just a quick update. (busy with the new releases from MS for a few more days)
Attachment 127295
You may have noticed that the Samsung is Off the chart, it's currently at 1764TiB but as the other drives are way behind I've set a maximum of 1500TiB.
The chart in post#1 will be correct though.
Some thoughts for new charts which I would consider useful if possible: split the big chart on sections based on SSD capacity like <100GB SSDs, 100-200GB SSDs, etc. Also, maybe a more useful chart would be one in which total writes potential would be presented, normalized relative to a theoretical bigger SSD. In such a chart, a 40GB SSD with 1PB writes would be presented to have a theoretical write potential of 7.5PB relative to a 300GB model ( TotalSSDWrites * (300GB/SSDSize) ) . And for the dead ones, one extra information would be useful where it is possible to get it: average number of P/E cycles per day next to total writes. This should tell us if a slower write speed makes a difference or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil