Yeah, well at 3:00 AM you get me, and not necessarily a sober me at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnw
Printable View
Yeah, well at 3:00 AM you get me, and not necessarily a sober me at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnw
johnw,
Can you please explain why? :) Not here to start a heated discussion but would be great to hear your side :)
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
407.94TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 12
MD5 OK
34.33MiB/s on avg (~34 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 92/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 69 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 47 (SSD Life left)
E9 205009 (Raw writes)
F1 273020 (Host writes)
106.19MiB/s on avg (~22 hours)
power on hours : 805
Wear Range delta is still increasing!
I'll consider giving it a break for some hours, last time that did no good though.
(won't happen until it's 2 days or more or when the new firmware is released)
Yeah, in essence that's what the Intel drives do. (increase random write endurance and speed)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ao1
Over-provisioning can still make a difference as it's hard to tell if (some) of the writes are converted to random writes even if they are sequential by nature.
What impact over-provisioning makes on other controllers is more of a mystery.
Funny you guys are talking about SSDs in a server. I need to build a new server in a few-to-6 months (waiting on new LGA-2011 XEONs) and also want to use SSDs. It will be a SQL 2008 R2 DB server with the minimum requirements of 6 total SSDs in 3 separate RAID0 plus a couple of enterprise SAS HDDs for backups. DB size could be anywhere around 500MB to 2GB with up to 10 concurent users. I was thinking the M4's or the Intel 520 (depending on the controller used).
It is off topic for this thread. Why not start a thread with your question? Also, it would be a good idea to put in the first post of the thread as much information as possible about your expected usage of the server (budget, capacity, peak and average load, access patterns, needed reliability and uptime, server hardware, network connection, OS, software, etc.)Quote:
Originally Posted by A||uSiOn
M225->Vertex Turbo 64GB Update:
541.24 TiB (595.10 TB) total
1475.04 hours
10966 Raw Wear
118.74 MB/s avg for the last 15.98 hours (on W7 x64)
MD5 OK
C4-Erase Failure Block Count (Realloc Sectors) at 10.
(1=Bank 6/Block 2406; 2=Bank 3/Block 3925; 3=Bank 0/Block 1766; 4=Bank 0/Block 829; 5=Bank 4/Block 3191; 6=Bank 7/Block 937; 7=Bank 7/Block 1980; 8=Bank 7/Block 442; 9=Bank 7/Block 700; 10=Bank 2/Block 1066)
Attachment 121466
I will stick to the C300 as the most endurant for now. Maybe something will beat it but for now ( seeing as the SF drives can't even write a bit before dying out ) I bet it will be the most endurant.
Sober me says, "I think it's too early to make much of the SF test performance to date."Quote:
Originally Posted by bulanula
The OCZ Everest product slides and press release (posted on AnandTech and a few other places) today has a dig at SandForce compression technology in it, which is hilarious, but I'm actually stoked about the Octane drives.
SF drives are still pretty good though, and if some new FW can magically fix most of the problems with them -- then great. We need more drives and controllers on the market, and if OCZ can come out of the gate swinging with their own controller, then that's even better. Furthermore, if OCZ can get them out at a competitive price it should have a positive effect on the market.
And if Intel's Cherryville and the new OCZ drives come out in early November as they are said to, I'm going shopping... unless they both get marked up way over MSRP, or end up being a relatively poor value in light of current incumbent SATA III drives.
Todays update:
m4
716.7737 TiB
2572 hours
Avg speed 89.30 MiB/s.
AD gone from 203 to 198.
P/E 12427.
Value 01 (raw read error rate) has changed from 5 to 7.
MD5 OK.
Still no reallocated sectors
Attachment 121474Attachment 121475
Kingston V+100:
Will be online again from monday.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
409.37TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 12
MD5 OK
33.79MiB/s on avg (~47 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 92/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 71 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 46 (SSD Life left)
E9 208592 (Raw writes)
F1 277791 (Host writes)
106.17MiB/s on avg (~46 hours)
power on hours : 819
Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 60 Update, Day 29
05 2
Retired Block Count
B1 23
Wear Range Delta
F1 274383
Host Writes
E9 211645
NAND Writes
E6 100
Life Curve
E7 10
Life Left
Average 127.45MB/s Avg
MSAHCI drivers, Asus M4g-z
663 Hours Work
Time 27 days 15hours
6 GiB Minimum Free Space
Attachment 121476
might be a reason for that :) there is a bit of posturing/jockeyiong going on here.Quote:
The OCZ Everest product slides and press release (posted on AnandTech and a few other places) today has a dig at SandForce compression technology in it,
another thing they are quick to point out is the device latency. whereas they have been completely ignoring that with the SF drives. SF latency tends to be very high, but nary a word from them on that, until now!
With respect to latency in access times, there is a pretty comprehensive 120 vs 240 drive comparison at TechReport. The SF drives did well in their tests. It an analysis of SandForce, Intel, and Crucial drives at 120 and 240 on their two trace based tests and Iometer. It includes access times expressed in various ways (they use service time). It's primarily concerned with how they perform in relationship to each drives' higher capacity version, but it's worth checking out.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/21843/7
well offhand i would comment on the parameters of the Trace used. Including compressibility of data, in which SF will look great. Also, intentional high loadings set up by the tester (by his own admission). so he did a two week trace, and intentionally loaded it up in the first place.
Then he runs it back fast, creating even higher loadings in my opinion. (well for sure, your running two weeks of stuff in a short time).
so unrealistic would be my initial impression. Same methodology as Anand.
I will read further shortly.
http://www.behardware.com/articles/8...l-510-320.html
select the correct test from the list above the chart, it will change the results so you can see them.
http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u...ssbledata2.png
here is another one
http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u...essbledata.png
here is another set of tests that i find telling;
http://www.techau.tv/blog/ssd-shaked...vs-crucial-m4/
look at the access time.
latency as follows:
SF- .284
M4- .076
so.....seriously off topic here, but at low QD the SF are not great with latency. and normal people will be at low QD almost constantly. just brain candy...latency is measured as a function of 4K@QD1, and the M4 is much much better. not only with incompressible, but with incompressible as well.
interesting that there are very few tests with low 4K QD on SF drives out there. i mean very very few. At least published of course. Even Anand will only test 4k @ QD3 which is ridiculous.
I still am getting crashes on deletes with Beta9. I'm not really sure why, but it did take about 27hrs to crash. I'm setting up the new endurance testing rig tomorrow afternoon, so the Mushkin will be offline for a short time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
CT,
That's a good point.
Tom's Hardware does Iometer at QD1 and their comprehensive M4 review at every capacity point shows how super low the average and max response times are. The C300 occasionally had very high max response times, but the 510 and M4 seem to have that sewn up. At least Anand has the light and heavy trace based tests, but the avg QD for the light is still 2+. I find my 510 120GB to be a lot faster in practice than you would assume from looking at it's results compared to 2281s, but the M4 is even better in some ways.
On a side note, it's absurd that the 120GB 510 is still $280 -- for that kind of money you could get a M4 120GB, 80 supreme tacos AND a large Mt. Dew.
Any new chart updates or C300 updates, Vapor ? Thanks.
@ Anvil. So idle time did not make a difference to B1? How about deleting and then reinstating the static data to see what happens then?
Attachment 121492
Ao1,
Yes, I'll do that when the new firmware is ready, I haven't decided on whether to do a Secure Erase though, possibly just a quick format.
That is AS-SSD access time, which is measured with 512B IOs, not 4KiB. The only SSDs that do really well with 512B IOs are Intel and Samsung. The Crucials do well with 512B read access time, but much worse for 512B writes than Intel and Samsung. It looks like Everest will join Intel and Samsung. But I'm not sure how important 512B access time is. If you look at IO traces (eg., Ao1 has posted some), 512B IOs are quite rare with Windows 7.Quote:
Originally Posted by Computurd
Much more important than 512B access time is 4KiB access time. The Crucials are a bit ahead of the V3s for 4KiB reads, but the V3s are a bit ahead of the Crucials for 4KiB writes (even incompressible data). It will be interesting to see where the Everest SSDs fit in for 4KiB access times. My guess is that they will be similar to Intel 320s.
You have to be careful with Tom's IOMeter data. Some of the data in their reviews is labeled as QD1, but it really is not (for example, they give 100+ MB/s 4KB QD1 reads, which is absurd). I think the problem is that they set IOMeter for QD1 but also start up 4 or 8 or more worker threads. Each worker thread may only let one IO queue up, but since the worker threads are submitting IOs in parallel, the queue fills up higher than 1 anyway. I think the only thing that should be labeled QD1 is when there is only one worker submitting IOs, and it limits its queue depth to 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
I don't think the have realized how bad/wrong those iometer test are.
Iirc it was the workstation, web and server test that were the worst.
They should update those test to show the actual number of outstanding IO's. (workers * outstanding IO's)
M225->Vertex Turbo 64GB Update: Milestone Reached...
549.07 TiB (603.71 TB) total
1492.56 hours
11109 Raw Wear
117.77 MB/s avg for the last 19.25 hours (on W7 x64)
MD5 OK
C4-Erase Failure Block Count (Realloc Sectors) at 10.
(1=Bank 6/Block 2406; 2=Bank 3/Block 3925; 3=Bank 0/Block 1766; 4=Bank 0/Block 829; 5=Bank 4/Block 3191; 6=Bank 7/Block 937; 7=Bank 7/Block 1980; 8=Bank 7/Block 442; 9=Bank 7/Block 700; 10=Bank 2/Block 1066)
Attachment 121500
Ao1,
I've changed the static data around 3 times on the Mushkin, and it didn't seem to matter. I didn't secure erase, but WRD didn't seem to be affected.
Todays update:
m4
723.8176 TiB
2595 hours
Avg speed 89.23 MiB/s.
AD gone from 198 to 194.
P/E 12545.
Value 01 (raw read error rate) has changed from 7 to 10.
MD5 OK.
Still no reallocated sectors
Attachment 121503Attachment 121504
Kingston V+100:
Will be online again from monday.
that M4 just wont die...
It's doing a very good job not dying :D
I have the new Endurance rig up and running. I'm very impressed with this super-cheap 1155 Celeron G530 as well. While endurance testing, it only pulls about 36w from the wall. I laughed when Intel released not just Pentiums, but more CPUs with the Celeron branding... Its worked pretty well so far. The 65w TDP is a real knee-slapper too.
Hmmm... that looks like a good idea. What motherboard and case do you use?
I'm using the Biostar TH67+ uATX motherboard and a Rosewill uATX case (Rosewill is a house brand for the US e-tailer Newegg). I'm using a Scythe Shruiken low profile CPU heatsink/fan, 4GB of Geil 1333 cas 7 and my OCZ ModXstream Pro 500w PSU. I'm using the Mushkin as the system drive (we'll see how well that works out). It's very quiet, and I've placed it next to my TV (I'm using it as the monitor when I need to check in and see what's going on.). I can tell what's going on just by the HDD activity LED anyway, so I'm trying it like this for a while. I'll post an update later and we'll see what happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
The case is just a plain SECC steel black box. I used it for my AMD backup system.
I'm not even using a case fan.
I just ordered a bulldozer rig but maybe a dedicated endurance rig with a low power cpu and a smal case is a much better idea. I've used the Scythe Shuriken heatsink in my last htpc and it works like a charm in smal cases.
I could have just bought a SATA 3 motherboard for My AMD system, or tried a SATA 3 add in card (like the Apricorn Velocity Solo PCIe 1x), but since I have 3 1155 motherboards but only one 1155 CPU, it seemed like a better idea. A tiny mini-ITX system with a power brick would be a good HTPC and/or endurance testing rig.
My case isn't really small, it's just a little smaller than the Lian Li PC-A05NB ATX case I'm using for my main system. I do wish the uATX case was a little smaller as I live in a tiny urban condo -- I just don't have much space. A HTPC audio-component style case would be ideal for me.
And SB cpu uses incredible little power and makes the a perfect silent testing rig. The FRACTAL DESIGN ARRAY R2 is perfect for this task.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
412.07TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 12
MD5 OK
33.30MiB/s on avg (~71 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 82/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 76 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 44 (SSD Life left)
E9 215415 (Raw writes)
F1 286886 (Host writes)
106.19MiB/s on avg (~71 hours)
power on hours : 845
It's been 3 days without issues, I'm almost convinced that the 1.3.2 fw is what made the drive stop failing.
If the firmware update from sandforce fixed the bsod/hang/disconnect problem, that is great news :clap:
Then you guys finally can get some writing done.
I'm not sure that it is the new fw on the Corsair and they won't tell, I guess we'll know in a few days.
Anyways, no disconnects since the 4th of October, that's 18 days and about 140TB of host writes ago.
You'll pass 1 PiB within 3 mnd then :up:
I can try the standard SF firmware equivalent of 1.3.2 which is 3.3.0. I've been reluctant to upgrade, but I'll give it a shot tonight.
I did get a freeze and blue screen with the Mushkin as the system drive, but I think it was me trying to use the system and install some drivers while endurance testing.
B.A.T.,
The great thing about SB processors is that they all idle around the same. A 2600K and the lowest-end dual core Celeron 2.4 G530 pretty much use the same power at idle. For a while, my 2500K was running at it's lowest idle frequency for about 15 hrs (on accident, through some Asus power saving software) and I didn't even notice. Both of my systems now are virtually silent (tiny apartment + loud system = sleepless nights), and so I'm thinking about future plans for another drive to test.
The Force 3 is set to idle for the night, will resume tomorrow morning.
Current status
05 2
B1 77
E6 100
E7 44
E9 216182
F1 287909
Power on hours 848
Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 60 Update, Day 30
05 2
Retired Block Count
B1 25
Wear Range Delta
F1 284182
Host Writes
E9 219916
NAND Writes
E6 100
Life Curve
E7 10
Life Left
Average 128.85MB/s Avg
Intel RST drivers, Biostar TH67+ Celeron G530
688 Hours Work (24hrs since the last update)
Time 28 days 16 hours
10 GiB Minimum Free Space
Attachment 121517
To date, the Mushkin has used the same 3.2.0 FW. I'm going to upgrade tomorrow I think.
Yup, but i feel that it is telling of latency regardless. Main reason I linked the 4K from the other site is that they were actually using true 4K results, which is rare with those drives unfortunately. The V3 writes are a bit better though, nice point.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnw
i noticed that with his link. Again, hard to find Low QD numbers for SF. weird.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnw
yes horrible. i was thoroughly confused when reading some of those results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
413.51TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 12
MD5 OK
33.16MiB/s on avg (~83 hours)
System up-time 83.5 hours
--
No movement on the Force 3 Wear Range Delta, still at 77.
About to restart the test.
523.26TB. 6977 reallocated sectors. Max speed down to 41mb/s.
It is interesting that once the reserve space got to 1, the OS stopped complaining about the imminent failure of the SSD...
Based on what happened with the Samsung, I wonder if it would be worth trying a power-off intermission at this point. Say, power the SSD off for a week and see if it still works and MD5 checks after that time, before continuing the writes.Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
One thing that would have been nice to know about the Samsung is how much I could have written to it before its unpowered data retention went down to some amount (say, a week or a month). I'm guessing I wrote so much to it that the unpowered data retention was less than a week, maybe even only a couple days. For practical purposes, I'd think the minimum data retention anyone would want to risk would be a week or so. In that case, the amount that can be written to the SSD is probably going to be less than the amount that we measure when we write until we start getting write errors....
I got some of the data from last posts and I made some simple statistics:Quote:
Originally Posted by One_Hertz
TB Reallocated sectors Average reallocated sectors/TB
491,4 4904
500,71 5478 61,65413534
502,35 5588 67,07317073
511 6207 71,56069364
516 6556 69,8
523,26 6977 57,98898072
Seems reallocations are slowing... It might be yet another stabilization around some certain value
Todays update:
m4
730.6351 TiB
2618 hours
Avg speed 89.23 MiB/s.
AD gone from 194 to 190.
P/E 12664.
Value 01 (raw read error rate) has changed from 10 to 11.
MD5 OK.
Still no reallocated sectors
Attachment 121533Attachment 121534
Kingston V+100:
Will be online again from monday.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
414.92B Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 12
MD5 OK
36.35MiB/s on avg (~11 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 92/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 79 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 43 (SSD Life left)
E9 219382 (Raw writes)
F1 292169 (Host writes)
106.89MiB/s on avg (~11 hours)
power on hours : 880
Idling for 10 hours made no difference at all, Wear Range Delta is still increasing.
I'll move all files to another drive and then back again just to see what happens. (no cleaning or formatting)
Anvil,
I think that deleting everything off the Force 3 and then putting it back won't make much of a difference in WRDelta.
Incidentally, the Mushkin peaked at 26 a couple days ago, and now is on it's way back down (it's currently at 21). If history is any indication, it should drop back down to 10 or 11, 12 eventually.
I haven't done moved the files back and forth, and I've not secure erased the drive. I have deleted the Mushkin and then performed fresh Windows installs on three separate occasions. That didn't seem to change anything either.
It remained at 79 throughout the move (from and to) but during the first loop it dropped to 78 :)
Just out of curiosity
There are 94460 files on the drive, it took ~40 minutes to move the data to an HDD, it took 18 minutes to move it back.
Also, the first loop was pretty slow, looks like avg speed is almost back to normal.
WRD will often go up or down frequently. I guessed that the Mushkin would peak, then drop again, and so far that looks to be the case, but nothing would really surprise me. Lots of the drive's behavior is inexplicable, but I will say that Win7 installs from a USB key are insanely fast on the Chronos D.
Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 60 Update, Day 31
05 2
Retired Block Count
B1 20 Down from 25
Wear Range Delta
F1 294589
Host Writes
E9 227218
NAND Writes
E6 100
Life Curve
E7 10
Life Left
Average 128.48MB/s Avg
MSAHCI drivers, Asus M4g-z
712 Hours Work
Time 29 days 16 hours
11 GiB Minimum Free Space
Attachment 121540
I could't be happier with the new Celeron/H67 setup. I have the case in my TV stand/component rack and connected to the TV via DVI->HDMI, so I can just switch inputs on the TV so see what's going on. But then I discovered this awesome remote desktop application for WebOS and my HP TouchPad (Splashtop Remote for WebOS/iOS/Android). It's works great, and I can do almost anything from it. I bought a TouchPad when they were $99 in the HP firesale and didn't have too much to do with it until now. I just keep the TP over by my main system so I can either see the system itself or have the TP to check in on the endurance rig. Of course, it's not as big of a deal if you're using a SSD that doesn't crash when you look at it wrong.
Interesting. So based on observations from your drive and SymbiosVyse’s drive it seems that SF drives do not rotate static data, rather they rely on the user to change the static data, at which point they then try to limit wear on the most worn blocks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
Christopher, your drive seems to be an exception. Have you at any stage removed the static data?
Todays update:
m4
737.2672 TiB
2637 hours
Avg speed 89.22 MiB/s.
AD gone from 190 to 187.
P/E 12773.
Value 01 (raw read error rate) has changed from 11 to 15.
MD5 OK.
Still no reallocated sectors
Attachment 121562Attachment 121563
Kingston V+100:
Will be online again from monday.
Another thing I've been aware of during the last couple of updates are the strange increase of value 195. According to Micron that value is not described. Wikipedia tells me this:
LinkQuote:
195 0xC3 Hardware ECC Recovered N/A (Vendor specific raw value.) The raw value has different structure for different vendors and is often not meaningful as a decimal number.
I'm not able to find anymore useful data on this so any help from you would be great :)
Ao1,
Yes, I've removed the static data 3 times by way of deleting the volume, then reinstalling windows.
I had another TRIM/File delete related crash just a few minutes ago. I should have left it the way it was when I had the problem eliminated.
Using the Chronos as the boot drive leaves it vulnerable to more problems in my estimation.
Luckily I watched it happen so I got the system restarted immediately and back up and running.
Two days ago WRD was at 26, now it's down to 17 again. If you were graphing Wear Range Delta (and Ao1 is) you'd see two peaks, then valleys down at 10,11,12 or so.
The Mushkin just hit 303TiBHW a short time ago.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
417.61B Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 12
MD5 OK
33.91MiB/s on avg (~35 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 90/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 82 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 41 (SSD Life left)
E9 225669 (Raw writes)
F1 300510 (Host writes)
MD5 OK (MD5 checking was enabled for this session)
102.68MiB/s on avg (~22 hours)
power on hours : 905
Yesterday B1 started increasing within a few loops so the decrease was only temporary.
--
Drive is back up running on fw 1.3.3, avg speed looks to be a bit up, will know more next update.
Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 60 Update, Day 32
05 2
Retired Block Count
B1 16
Wear Range Delta
F1 304933
Host Writes
E9 235194
NAND Writes
E6 100
Life Curve
E7 10
Life Left
Average 127.92MB/s Avg
Intel RST drivers, Celeron G530 Biostar TH67+
736 Hours Work (24hrs since the last update)
Time 1 month 16 hours
11 GiB Minimum Free Space
Attachment 121570
Wear Range Delta continues to drop, but I'm a little surprised that the increase and decrease has happened so quickly.
It was 25 when I posted the update on the 29th day, but perhaps the difference between B1 = 11 and B1 = 21 is not so much when the Force 3 and F40-A are both given to high WRDs.
Besides the capacity difference, NAND/PE differences, there is also the matter of speed. Shouldn't faster drives be able to rotate static data more quickly than slower drives? The Chronos D is roughly 25% faster than the Force 3, and maybe over 2x the speed of the F40-A (I believe it was about 55MBs @ 46% [Application]).
hmm. is this with the new FW?Quote:
I had another TRIM/File delete related crash just a few minutes ago. I should have left it the way it was when I had the problem eliminated.
hmm. is this with the new FW?Quote:
I had another TRIM/File delete related crash just a few minutes ago. I should have left it the way it was when I had the problem eliminated.
CT,
No, its the 3.2.0 same as always. I'm now using another drive as the OS drive, so that combined with using less free space should eliminate this.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
418.97GB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 12
MD5 OK
37.56MiB/s on avg (~10 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 90/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 84 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 40 (SSD Life left)
E9 228535 (Raw writes)
F1 304318 (Host writes)
MD5 OK
102.80MiB/s on avg (~10 hours)
power on hours : 916
The new firmware looks to perform the same as the previous one wrt speed.
@christopher
Is there no new firmware for the Mushkin?
Anvil,
There is a 3.3.0, but the one I'm waiting for is the supposed "fix", 3.3.2.
I guess I spoke too soon about fixing the file delete crashes...
Attachment 121577
I could try the newer fw, but I had fixed the random crashes, and found a setting with beta8 that had eliminated the delete crashes. It wasnt unexpected as with the new endurance only rig the Mushkin was the os drive. Now that its a secondary I thought it would stop.
3.3.0 would have fixed your issue (if it's equivalent to Corsairs 1.3.2), there should be no need to tweak the loop wrt the number of files.
I expect Mushkin will release "3.3.2" shortly, the timestamp of the new fw from Corsair was 13th of October.
(does of course not mean that Corsair was given the fw on that date, just that it was time-stamped by someone on that date)
Does anyone know the p/e cycle max count of the Toshiba 32nm toggle nand ?
M225->Vertex Turbo 64GB Update:
575.08 TiB (632.31 TB) total
1550.67 hours
11584 Raw Wear
118.04 MB/s avg for the last 63.85 hours (on W7 x64)
MD5 OK
C4-Erase Failure Block Count (Realloc Sectors) at 10.
(1=Bank 6/Block 2406; 2=Bank 3/Block 3925; 3=Bank 0/Block 1766; 4=Bank 0/Block 829; 5=Bank 4/Block 3191; 6=Bank 7/Block 937; 7=Bank 7/Block 1980; 8=Bank 7/Block 442; 9=Bank 7/Block 700; 10=Bank 2/Block 1066)
Attachment 121581
Kensiko,
The 32nm Toshiba toggle nand is rated at 5000PE cycles.
I'm just upraded to 3.3.0, and B1 WRD is down to 14.
No word from Mushkin on 3.3.2, nor do I believe that Patriot and OWC have it either.
Patriot released it 4 days ago, it's accessible through the forum, the download page is not updated yet.
(I updated my drive the 20th)
I checked the download pages for those two companies a few days ago and didn't see it.
Mushkin must just be way behind the curve. I've updated the Chronos to 3.3.0, so maybe it'll help in the mean time. I'm a little tired of playing around to get the drive to work correctly, and now I just want to get in some writes.
After updating to 3.3.0, I've noticed that the file delete section is much more "smooth". It had always been a little jerky, and now it isn't. Not sure why this is, but I've spent a fair amount of time monitoring the end of the loop and the delete section, and its always been a little uneven.
I also ran across a Crucial forums post about a user with a 256GB drive that had become read-only, but he only had 191 hours on it, along with 515401711649 program failures -- indicating that something else is going on. It's an interesting failure though.
Todays update:
m4
745.4980 TiB
2665hours
Avg speed 89.21 MiB/s.
AD gone from 187 to 182.
P/E 12911.
Value 01 (raw read error rate) has changed from 15 to 16.
MD5 OK.
Still noreallocated sectors
Attachment 121590Attachment 121591
Kingston V+100:
167.4125 TiB
661 hours
Avg speed 75.10 MiB/s
AD gone from 33 to 26.
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Still no reallocated sectors
Attachment 121592Attachment 121593
Edit:
I also started to make the Intel Z25-M G1 80GB ready. I've finished an SE and tested with ASU but something is wrong. RR doesn't scale with increased QD which is strange since the other drives are using the same controller. Here is a screenshot:
Attachment 121594
M4's average speed is starting to decrease a little. Wonder if that is a sign of things to come?
B.A.T
The G1's 4K write response times are exactly 4K response time, multiplied by the QD (4 or 16).
Here is a X25-M G2 80GB for comparison:
Attachment 121598
Maybe, but it still kicks ass. I did this test 5 min ago . That's why the G1 results looks so strange because the m4 is ok on the same controller.
Attachment 121599
After a tip from Anvil I've been trying on another port and with dedicated 3 Gb/s port with the same result. Looks like my motherboard are unable to perform ncq with 3 Gb/s ssd.
That M4 is a beast though. I kinda wish I had bought a 120 M4 rather than the 510. The M4 just looks better and better over time (your M4 should go in the SSD hall of fame when it dies). I'm taking my 64gb M4 back this weekend when I go home for a few days.
I bought a couple of G2s cheap, but you can get the G1s here on Ebay new for the same price. The G1 looks better at any rate.
Does MSHACI restore NCQ on your AMD motherboard?.
It's a really good buy and v0009 makes it just as good as the sandforce models.
NCQ works fine with the m4 so I think is is a Sata 3 Gb/s problem.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
420.38GB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 12
MD5 OK
35.13MiB/s on avg (~23 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 94/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 86 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 39 (SSD Life left)
E9 231895 (Raw writes)
F1 308791 (Host writes)
MD5 OK
102.69MiB/s on avg (~23 hours)
power on hours : 928
And now the intel joins the test.
You have seen the performance, here is the rest.
Like the others I've got 20GB of free space and it's filled with the same static data (os, music, movies, pics)
Since it's used here are the smartinfo before I started the test. It has 3270 GB written and has been on for 18632 hours.
Attachment 121603Attachment 121604Attachment 121605
This is how it looks after an hour of testing
Attachment 121602
That's pretty good :)
An avg at about 60MiB/s is more than I had expected, well, 1 hour is not much.
How are the other drives performing, does the new drive make an impact?
It looks good so far :):
m4=88.85 MiB/s
Kingston V+100=74.73 MiB/s
Intel=60.28 MiB/s
B.A.T.
What about the MTRON?
I'd love to see some benchmarks on that too. Trying to kill that drive might take the next 7 years...
I have trouble making it work on my main rig. It's a sata 1,5 Gb/s ssd and I can't get it to SE or the os see it. I'm going to try esata tomorrow on both the main rig and my work laptop.
Interesting. The Mushkin wouldn't work on the Sata II ports on my AMD 785 motherboard. It wouldn't even boot to an OS with the drive connected, on any of the ports.Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
The ich8m on my Dell Latitude D630 is slow for Sata II in some respects, but seems to work with anything.
It isn't supposed to be easy, but that is half the fun :)
If that is true, then a SandForce 2281 is a full 25 percent more fun than non-SF2281's!Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
Man, SandForce should hire me for their marketing... now with 25 percent more "Fun" in every box!
That is so true :rofl:
"It's so easy that even a five year old can do it." Note-1 :up:Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
They didn't ship one in the box????? :shrug:
Note-1: 5 year old not inclucded.:rofl:
*Taiwanese firmware engineer sold separately.
If you had one of those it would be fixed! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
When SSD Write Endurance testing is part of your job,
This is for one 25nm test:
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-A...-30-26_431.jpg
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-9...52520graph.jpg
(chamber temperature is 0-75C)
Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 60 Update, Day 33
Updated to 3.3.0 FW
05 2
Retired Block Count
B1 13
Wear Range Delta
F1 312945
Host Writes
E9 241375
NAND Writes
E6 100
Life Curve
E7 10
Life Left
Average 127.47MB/s Avg
Intel RST drivers, Celeron G530 Biostar TH67+
755 Hours Work (24hrs since the last update)
Time 1 month 1 day 11 hours
9 GiB Minimum Free Space
Attachment 121616
I'm still waiting on 3.3.2 FW, but no sign yet. I'd imagine it should be around in a week or two.
??
If I can tame the file delete problems, I can add or remove static data at will. Right now I have 12.7GB of static data. There has never been more than 17 and never less than 12GB.
12.7GB/55.7 is 22.8 percent static data.
Looks expensive :)Quote:
Originally Posted by zads
What's the workload?
--
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
421.75GB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 12
MD5 OK
34.31MiB/s on avg (~35 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 95/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 87 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 38 (SSD Life left)
E9 235195 (Raw writes)
F1 313175 (Host writes)
MD5 OK
102.61MiB/s on avg (~35 hours)
power on hours : 940
Ice-T and Ice Cube iTunes.Attachment 121646Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
7257 reallocations. 531.4TB. Max speed down to 37.5MB/s (!).
I am shutting off my rig for a few days to see if it can hold the data in tact.
M225->Vertex Turbo 64GB Update:
581.73 TiB (639.62 TB) total
1565.52 hours
11705 Raw Wear
117.98 MB/s avg for the last 16.32 hours (on W7 x64)
MD5 OK
C4-Erase Failure Block Count (Realloc Sectors) at 10.
(1=Bank 6/Block 2406; 2=Bank 3/Block 3925; 3=Bank 0/Block 1766; 4=Bank 0/Block 829; 5=Bank 4/Block 3191; 6=Bank 7/Block 937; 7=Bank 7/Block 1980; 8=Bank 7/Block 442; 9=Bank 7/Block 700; 10=Bank 2/Block 1066)
Attachment 121647
3.3.2 just released for the MCDx.
I just upgraded so I can see what happens...
I'm going to leave it as is until Thursday, then I'm going to put it back in my main system over the weekend and see what happens. If its still working when I get back on Sunday, then I think it will be looking good.
Todays update:
m4
751.8592 TiB
2687 hours
Avg speed 88.72 MiB/s.
AD gone from 182 to 179.
P/E 13019.
Value 01 (raw read error rate) has changed from 16 to 23.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
Attachment 121653Attachment 121658
Kingston V+100:
172.8184 TiB
683 hours
Avg speed 76.11 MiB/s
AD gone from 26 to 20.
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
Attachment 121654Attachment 121655
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
7566.5GB Host writes
18652 hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=92
MD5 OK
59.56MiB/s on avg
Attachment 121656Attachment 121657
I'm still working on the MTRON
I'm seeing a small but noticeable decrease in speed in terms of average MB/s with the new 3.3.2 FW.
The Samsung 830 launched in the States today and is generally available. Supposedly, it comes with Norton Ghost AND a voucher for Batman: Arkham Asylum, according to thessdreview.com, but I don't see it listed as being included with the retail kit at Newegg.com.
The 64GB version might be a good test candidate...
I agree. The Samsung 830 is a good candidate :up:
I've heard that Samsung says that all of the capacities of 830 perform the same... while I'm not sure I believe that (the 64 can't be as fast as the 256). If it's just a much faster 470, you could kill the 470 in about 10 days...
I'm sure that no review site will get a 120GB 830, but its probably almost as fast as the 256/512s. The 830 has some pretty good measured latency and astounding sequential writes.
According to Anandtech it's only the read speed that is the same on all capacities. Write decreases with the smaller sizes.
That makes a lot more sense. 520MBs reads and 160MBs on writes for the 64GB model according to Anand's chart. That is actually pretty good. If you test the Mushkin with incompressible data you get about those figures. With the Mushkin though, if you ever get the urge to write a couple TB of zeros, you can do so at 300MBs sustained. Why you would ever want to, I don't know, but it's nice to know you could. The 64GB 830 would seem to be a good deal faster than the M4 64GB, but I suspect those two might be pretty close in actual performance.