:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by RyderOCZ
Printable View
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by RyderOCZ
The saga of the M225 Turbo starts in the Turbo thread in the Indilinx forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by RyderOCZ
We're all so very proud of Bluestang's initiative.
I bought a new Vertex Turbo 128 (there were a couple floating around for a short time a couple months ago). It's great, but I think the WA with smaller writes is pretty high.
Samsung 830 64GB Update Day 1
GiB written :
9116.33
Avg MB/s :
108.25
Time Elapsed:
24hrs
https://www.box.com/shared/static/yz...qgts1uofvb.jpg
I'm not really sure what else to put in the updates at the moment.
Todays update:
Kingston V+100
280.9583 TiB
1259 hours
Avg speed 28.83 MiB/s
AD still 1.
168= 1 (SATA PHY Error Count)
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=470803http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=470800
The Kingston has disconnected 3 times during the 3 last nights... Something is not right with this one. Same ting with the low write speed.
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
100,7683 TiB
19410 hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=71 to 70
MD5 =OK
51.88 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=470805http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=470799
m4
6.6668 TiB
24 hours
Avg speed 80.19 MiB/s.
AD gone from 100 to 97.
P/E 110.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=470801http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=470802
M225->Vertex Turbo 64GB Update:
876.17 TiB (963.36 TB) total.
~2239 hrs (Torture), 3280 hrs (Power-On).
17036 Raw Wear.
111.00 MB/s avg for the last 6.05 hours (on W7 x64).
MD5 every 20 loops on 1.59GB file = OK.
C4-Erase Failure Block Count (Realloc Sectors) at 24.
C5-Read Failure Block Count (uncorrectable bit errors) from 21 to 24.
1=Bnk 6/Blk 2406 - Erase Failure C4
2=Bnk 3/Blk 3925 - Erase Failure C4
3=Bnk 0/Blk 1766 - Erase Failure C4
4=Bnk 0/Blk 829 - Erase Failure C4
5=Bnk 4/Blk 3191 - Erase Failure C4
6=Bnk 7/Blk 937 - Erase Failure C4
7=Bnk 7/Blk 1980 - Erase Failure C4
8=Bnk 7/Blk 442 - Erase Failure C4
9=Bnk 7/Blk 700 - Erase Failure C4
10=Bnk 2/Blk 1066 - Erase Failure C4
11=Bnk 7/Blck 85 - Erase Failure C4
12=Bnk 4/Blk 3192 - Erase Failure C4
13=Bnk 7/Blk 280 - Erase Failure C4
14=Bnk 3/Blk 2375 - Erase Failure C4
15=Bnk 7/Blk 768 - Erase Failure C4
16=Bnk 7/Blk 765 - Erase Failure C4
17=Bnk 7/Blk 182 - Erase Failure C4
18=Bnk 5/Blk 939 - Read Failure C5
19=Bnk 5/Blk 1115 - Read Failure C5
20=Bnk 5/Blk 1011 - Read Failure C5
21=Bnk 7/Blk 3549 - Read Failure C5
22=Bnk 7/Blk 3556 - Read Failure C5
23=Bnk 4/Blk 1961 - Erase Failure C4
24=Bnk 7/Blk 1862 - Erase Failure C4
25=Bnk 7/Blk 111 - Erase Failure C4
26=Bnk 5/Blk 902 - Read Failure C5
27=Bnk 7/Blk 560 - Erase Failure C4
28=Bnk 7/Blk 827 - Erase Failure C4
29=Bnk 6/Blk 482 - Erase Failure C4
30=Bnk 5/Blk 167 - Read Failure C5
31=Bnk 7/Blk 1771 - Erase Failure C4
32=Bnk 5/Blk 956 - Read Failure C5
33=Bnk 5/Blk 1242 - Read Failure C5
34=Bnk 5/Blk 1461 - Read Failure C5
35=Bnk 5/Blk 1800 - Read Failure C5
36=Bnk 5/Blk 1030 - Read Failure C5
37=Bnk 5/Blk 1074 - Read Failure C5
38=Bnk 5/Blk 1128 - Read Failure C5
39=Bnk 5/Blk 1427 - Read Failure C5
40=Bnk 0/Blk 1674 - Read Failure C5
41=Bnk 5/Blk 756 - Read Failure C5
42=Bnk 5/Blk 788 - Read Failure C5
43=Bnk 5/Blk 909 - Read Failure C5
44=Bnk 5/Blk 407 - Read Failure C5
45=Bnk 5/Blk 1294 - Read Failure C5
46=Bnk 5/Blk 562 - Read Failure C5
47=Bnk 5/Blk 256 - Read Failure C5
48=Bnk 5/Blk 943 - Read Failure C5
So a total (B8+C3+C4+C5) of 58 Bad Blocks.
Stopping test for the night, will pick up tomorrow morning when I can babysit my little M225.
I'm catching up on the summary and I just noticed that the attachments stopped working October the 27th, it's been over 1 month, we deserve an explanation!
Shouldn't we put in TRIM and fw ver?
We could but there are just 2 drives that have been running w/o TRIM and one of them lacked TRIM due to running off XP so it's really just the X25-M G1 that lacks TRIM.
FW would be OK, although I (and Christopher) have changed fw several times during the test :) so we'd have to list all fw's used.
I listed the FW version for the Mushkin in the updates after I switched from 3.2.0
The first month of Chronos testing was done with 320fw. Then I went to 3.3.0 for one day, then 3.3.2 was released, so I used it for the remainder.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
532.07TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 14
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
MD5 OK
33.16MiB/s on avg (~85 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 94/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 47 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 10 (SSD Life left)
E9 489474 (Raw writes) ->478TiB
F1 651488 (Host writes) ->636TiB
MD5 OK
106.38MiB/s on avg (~85 hours)
power on hours : 1866
--
@B.A.T and Christopher
Make sure to make/save screenshots of SMART on the new drives, if you haven't done so already :)
I have pre testing SMART pics and made one corresponding to the first update. I can include them if you want when I post the updates, I just don't know how much bandwidth I have from my box.com account which I use for posting pictures since the forum is broken still.
I save screenshots every time for all my ssd in the test. That folder is starting to get very large :shocked:Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
When your really fancy Toggle NAND drive only lasts for 50 days, it helps to keep the number of screenshots down.
I hope the Samsung doesn't last forever.... I only have 50GB of space on my file sharing serivce.........
I bought one of those HP TouchPads when they were being sold for for $99 instead of $500 and you got a free box.net account upgraded to 50GB of storage with it. You get statistical stuff and the ability to direct link downloads and larger files/speeds/etc. You can get the 50GB free now with an Apple device but the extra stuff is, well, extra. I really wish they'd fix the attachments for this thread alone though. It made everything a lot easier.
You dont have to post/upload the SMART screenshots, just keep a private/local copy until the spredsheet is ready.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
533.36TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 14
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
MD5 OK
36.48MiB/s on avg (~10 hours) ssdtoolbox cleaning + restarted last night as avg was getting low
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 88/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 47 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 10 (SSD Life left)
E9 492378 (Raw writes) ->481TiB
F1 655353 (Host writes) ->640TiB
MD5 OK
106.40MiB/s on avg (~95 hours)
power on hours : 1876
I'm pretty sure the Samsung 830 uses 27nm Toggle NAND, 32Gbit dies. So the 64GB has eight packages, dual 32Gbit dies.
Toshiba has 24nm Toggle NAND already shipping in production drives, but they're probably not really the same stuff.
I'm not quite following up with this thread. Is there any impact by using non-compressible data to fill the SSD? (i.e. would certain controllers "cheat" with 0-fill and increase endurance?) What standard (settings) is used to join this thread?
The compressibility of data only matters for SandForce drives. They're the only controllers that can compress data/deduplicate data (there may be an enterprise controller made by some other company that does so as well, but I'm not sure. I'm mostly concerned with consumer drives.)Quote:
Originally Posted by minpayne
For the SandForce drives we've been using the 46 percent compressibility, but it's pretty much irrelevant for other drives/controllers. In terms of endurance gained by 0-fill for SandForce drives, I think it's six-of-one, half-dozen-the-other. Since the work never ends, you just end up with faster writes of more compressed stuff...
For example, the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 60GB I had tested would write 90MBs - 100MBs with random data, and around 290MBs with 0-fill (with the endurance testing in ASU). If it's writing 290MBs with 0 fill, the actual writes to NAND are 100MBs. SandForce drives have a SMART value for host writes and a value for raw writes. If you divide the raw writes by host writes you can see the average compression ratio for all the data written to the drive. So a SandForce drive can't cheat in that sense -- you always know how much data is actually written to the NAND after the data has been compressed. At the 46 percent compression ratio in ASU I ended up with about 77 percent of host writes actually being written to NAND. It wouldn't be realistic to only use incompressible data as much of the data being written to the drive is compressible to one extent or another (but nowhere near 0 fill compressible). As a result, you end up with much lower than 1 write amplification, but modern drives are pretty good when it comes to WA.
I tested the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe SF2281 and it died pretty quick. I'm now testing a Samsung 830 64GB, but I just started it about 37 hours ago. If you're serious about testing a drive, I recommend testing a smaller-capacity drive. The two Intel 40GB drives started 7 months ago, and they're still going and going and going. My SF2281 made it 50 days, but that was kinda anomalous. There's no way to say how long a drive will last in advance, but I'd plan on the test lasting several months. I built a low power Sandy Bridge system that I can tuck out of the way in my apartment. I use a remote desktop application for my tablet to use as a monitor. The testing system will need to run 24/7, so having a quiet system is mandatory for me. But ASU doesn't require a lot of resources to endurance test, so if you're a folder you could probably use a folding rig. You could also use a laptop and just close the lid (disable close lid = sleep, never sleep) and stick it under your couch. I tried that for a while. Windows 7 isn't required, but TRIM helps a lot with average speed.
Samsung 830 64GB Update, Day 2
FW:CXM01B1Q
GiB written:
18185.44
Avg MB/s
107.92
Per-day average:
9092.92
https://www.box.com/shared/static/5u...fhclp2j3sd.jpg
The Samsung starts the loop quite fast, but seems continually drop after the first several seconds, so that at the end of the loop it's only managing 120MBs, and if I let it, it would plunge down into the 100MBs range. It can hit max sequential speeds of 520 read and 160 write which makes it as fast as a 128GB OCZ Octane. I'm not certain that there is a compelling reason to get the 470 instead of the 830. It's just an impressive drive.
Toggle NAND must be made of pixie dust and unicorn glitter.
@Christopher...your running 46% compression...I didn't think the Samsung's had compression technology in them?
Staying at 46% does not make a difference for the non compressing drives but it won't hurt either, it should not make a difference for speed and so he might just keep it at some none 0-Fill option.
I might go for a different option with the next drive, even if it doesn't do compression.
Interesting that the Samsung settles at about the same speed as I get on the 120GB Force 3, it has double the capacity and still the Samsung is faster.
The Synchronous version of the Force 3 (the GT or Vertex 3, equivalent) would most likely place itself closer to the Mushkin.
Are you sure that you have disabled anti-virus real-time scanning on the folder where the data is put?
(I forgot a few times myself when moving the F3 around during the bug period)
Johnw's Samsung 470 averaged ~113MiB/s so the 830 is doing fine but looks to be a little bit slower for this work-load.
M225->Vertex Turbo 64GB Update:
879.17 TiB (966.66 TB) total.
~2245 hrs (Torture), 3304 hrs (Power-On).
17092 Raw Wear.
109.89 MB/s avg for the last 7.90 hours (on W7 x64).
MD5 every 20 loops on 1.59GB file = OK.
C4-Erase Failure Block Count (Reallocations) 24 to 25.
C5-Read Failure Block Count (uncorrectable bit errors) from 24 to 27.
C4 and C5 list getting to long to show.
So a total (B8+C3+C4+C5) of 62 Bad Blocks.
May let it run overnight.
Edit: I'm over 65000 loops according to the ASU log.
Anvil,
The endurance testing system is as clean as a system can be, no AV scanning, indexing, or any of that stuff. I did some experimentation the first 24hrs as some combination of setup was causing the speed to drop into the 78MBs range. It's now averaging 108MBs and instantaneous estimated MiB start at 154, then slowly drops to 125. With 6 second pauses and 6 second randoms, it averages 108MBs. The less free space there is, the less the speed. It's pretty linear.
At first, it was super fast for the first few loops. Then, speed rapidly decreased. Somewhere along the line the drive stopped writing randoms and that greatly increased speed. Once I tweaked the loop parameters by increasing random write duration and the pause, I found a happy medium that preserves randoms and a respectable average speed.
I use the 46 percent compression level because I just don't like the idea of writing 0 fill to the drive. It shouldn't really matter with the 830, but most data that gets written in every day useage is somewhat compressible. Also, I have the same set-up that was run on the Mushkin, though I'm considering adding 39.3GB of static data like B.A.T.'s drives.
This might be a dumb question, but is the amount of voltage needed to write and hold 00s in a cell less than some other combination of bits in MLC?
Todays update:
Kingston V+100
283.1335 TiB
1284 hours
Avg speed 25.29 MiB/s
AD still 1.
168= 1 (SATA PHY Error Count)
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471011http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471008
No disconnect the last 24 hours, but it's still crawling away at very low speed.
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
105,0538 TiB
19435 hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=70 to 64
MD5 =OK
49.27 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471010http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471009
m4
13.7037 TiB
50 hours
Avg speed 81.46 MiB/s.
AD gone from 97 to 93.
P/E 234.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471012http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471007
So a few weeks ago, when the Mushkin died, I also had another SSD failure -- the Agility 60. After a lot of work, I was able to get the drive d-flashed. It just died again, and I can't seem to get it to detect with the jumper (though I had problems last time with this, and after a few hours I could detect it -- but it took about 8 flashes to work). I was running 1.7fw, d-flashed it with 1.7 a few weeks ago, and I think that could (possibly)be the problem.
So Bluestang, if you decided to Turbotize your other M225... maybe stick with 1.6FW. I've never had a problem with 1.5 or 1.6 on any of the Indys.
That has been Turbotized already. I did them at the same time since I was running them in RAID 0. I'll have to take a closer look at 1.7 then. Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
Thank you for the detailed reply :) That did explain lots of things! (I cannot add "Thank You" onto your post yet)Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
Though I know it'd be luxury to destroy a large SSD, I'm interested in the endurance (and related algorithms) of the 8k-page-sized models, such like the M4 256G and 512G. It is suspected that the M4 controller is not taking good care of WL and WA and may lead to early death of certain blocks of the 8k-page-sized nand flash. I'd be interested to see how an M4 256G/512G goes compared against the M4 64G in the normalized chart.
Turbotize is the greatest word I've ever made up.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluestang
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
536.11TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 14
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
POH 4863 hours
MD5 OK
33.83MiB/s on avg (~35 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 92/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 47 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 10 (SSD Life left)
E9 499272 (Raw writes) ->488TiB
F1 664530 (Host writes) ->649TiB
MD5 OK
106.44MiB/s on avg (~120 hours)
power on hours : 1900
WRD has been locked at 47 for the last few days, unusual!
edit:
@bluestang
I just checked my (X25-V) and it has done 37565 loops but that does not include any loops before May 31st (that's when the loops started to get recorded) and so there is missing 14-15 days of loops + a few unexpected reboots during the SF issues.
166,624,167 files has been created and deleted :)
Yeah, I'm sure we are all missing some log info for various reasons...most of it out of our control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
287,950,582 files created/deleted for me :)
Edit:
System was totally locked up when I got in. The culprit...most likely the M225.
C5-Read Failure Block Count jumped from 27 to 37.
Most of the RF's are on Bank 5.
If the M225 makes it to 1 PB, it will do it kicking and screaming the whole rest of the way :)
Edit2:
@RyderOCZ...care to give me an idea on how many bad blocks the 1.6 Turbo FW has budgeted?
Had to wipe disk partion, sanitary erase, full format and run CHKDSK /R to get M225 accessible to endurance test again.Quote:
Originally Posted by bluestang
Copied static data back over and ASU ran for just under an hour (.82 to be exact) doing 25 loops @ 118.84 MB/s before ASU stopped with "Write Error 0" and drive subsequently dropped out from system again.
C5-Read Failure Block Count went to 43 during this time.
There is very little lost as each loop is stored (and the totals can be recalculated), still it could mean thousands of files and a few GiB per loop, I expect I could have lost up to 50GiB of writes, all in all that is nothing vs the amount of writes that has been performed.
It looks like the M225 will need a lot of care and attention to get past 1PB, let's keep our fingers crossed.
https://www.box.com/shared/static/p2...oq3lqxgz1a.jpg
https://www.box.com/shared/static/gl...8jd9ka09n6.png
Ummm, not sure this is a suitable test candidate. I'm not sure this drive is suitable for anything.
It's some random Patriot 32GB. The chassis is quite nice, but what's inside seems to be awful.
What controller and NAND?
Phison controller with some kind of Toshiba NAND.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
I'm almost 10 minutes in to the first loop and its only written 4GiB. Definitely not a suitable testing drive. I don't know what it would be suitable for... Its basically a Compact Flash card in a 2.5 inch form factor.
The drive's chassis is maybe the most attractive I've seen, but this is the first SSD I've ever wished ill upon. J.Microns are better than this by a long way I think, and they're not very good.
https://www.box.com/shared/static/ty...u0cfbehatk.jpg
This... is sad. I wasn't expecting much, but this is unimaginably terrible.
Shame on Patriot for ever thinking these drives were a good idea. And this is with the "good" Version 3FW.
This is a Hall of Shame drive. It's going in the closet, never to be spoken of again.
Samsung 830 64GB Update, Day 3
FW:CXM01B1Q
GiB written:
[B]27270.80/B]
Avg MB/s
107.83
Per-day average:
9090.27
https://www.box.com/shared/static/2b...53p8pydndc.jpg
@Christopher
Looks like the patriot don't support ncq. There is no scaling from 4K to 4K16QD on both read and write.
Todays update:
Kingston V+100
283.3777 TiB
1288 hours
Avg speed 25.29 MiB/s
AD still 1.
168= 1 (SATA PHY Error Count)
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471132
It has dropped out again. This is the 4th time the last week. There is someting wrong with this one. I'm home again tomorrow and I think I'll try an SE and see what happens.
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
108,5066 TiB
19458hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=64 to 56
MD5 =OK
46.66 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471130http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471129
m4
20.1124 TiB
73 hours
Avg speed 81.55 MiB/s.
AD gone from 93 to 89.
P/E 346.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471131http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471128
It's the worst. drive. ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
Not supporting NCQ is the least of it's problems. I've used it a little more, and it's actually worse than the numbers suggest.
My mind is blown.
Still trying to access the M225 since the "Write Error 0" crash and drop out a couple hours ago.
Nothing I have tried in the to get it back has worked this time.
I'll keep trying!
Try the D-flash!Quote:
Originally Posted by bluestang
(of course, you might want to take a screen shot of CrystalDiskInfo before you do.... you won't see that near-PB of writes on in SMART, so documentation is key).
Last CrystalDiskInfo screenshot is from yesterday afternoon. I'd really hate to lose the SMART data by D-flashing. System does recognize it as YADAPONG whatever with the jumper on though. As a last resort I'll try D-flashing tomorrow maybe...MF'er!
You tell that drive who's boss!Quote:
Originally Posted by bluestang
I have read about and have seen a U.S. national TV news story on similar drives coming out of PRC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
No links I don't remember where I saw the news stories.
They ran the gammet from cheap clones of name brands all the way to a USB thumb drive wired up inside an SSD case.
Get home and find you have a 4GB SSD- well a thumb drive NAND inside anyway. :shocked:
Seems like more work than it would be worth to the scammers.
I should point out that the product description didn't include the model... it had been de-labeled, and no mention of the controller was given in the product description. It was refurbished by Patriot, and all of their refurbished SSDs for sale have refurbished part numbers, like RF32SSD, where the RF stands for refurbished. It's a legit product, just not very fast. I was amazed that in 2009/2010 someone at Patriot thought that the Phison controller was going to be a good product.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopalong X
No, the Phison controller just sucks. It's really just a Compact Flash/SD-style controller adapted for use in SSDs. The PS-100 is actually assembled in America like other Patriot products. It has Toshiba NAND (maybe the 40nm stuff) and the chassis is fantastically beautiful. There's just not much going on in the controller area. But the controller and NAND are made in Japan and the drive still has some kind of warranty.
Actually, I dated a girl for six months who had a really nice chassis too. She didn't did have much going on upstairs, either. She wasn't nearly as cheap as the refurbished Patriot though.
No comment on the last sentence. :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
Banishment would be xtreme.
That suxs the SSD is legit but almost useless.
So close to 1PB and you have to drag that M225 over the finishing line by its ears.....Quote:
Originally Posted by bluestang
It's som typical....:shakes:
Have you open it and taken a look under the hood?Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
I will. I'll post some pictures.Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
I've seen the inside of one from a review (which also pointed out that it wasn't very good).
https://www.box.com/shared/static/dy...e4occ96648.jpg
I've voided the 30 day warranty.
https://www.box.com/shared/static/6l...ee1ioxxznl.jpg
The details are hard to capture, but it's a nice looking chassis.
https://www.box.com/shared/static/9t...x3li4ibfue.jpg
Those are TH58NVG5D2ETA20 Toshiba chips, Phison PS3016-S3 controller, Hynix cache
https://www.box.com/shared/static/tz...8eshhv8qyp.jpg
I assume it was originally built in Taiwan, then refurbished in Texas.
EDIT.
So I'm still confused and bewildered by the Phison controlled Patriot. I was wondering what performance would be like with SLC NAND. I imagine it would not be much better.
So I've bought a brand-new 3M Imation S-Class 32GB Phison controlled SLC drive super cheap. I expect to be disappointed by that drive too, but at least it was cheap and has SLC. Maybe it will be a good contender for a new endurance drive (but I'm not getting my hopes up).
Has anyone ever used an Imation S-Class 32GB? It's sure as hell no X25-E, but maybe it's better than the Phailzon 100 Patriot.
I wanted something quirky and off the beaten path to test, and the Patriot let me down. How does any SSD have worse random performance than a Quantum Fireball HDD from 15 years ago? I couldn't complete a run of AS SSD on the Patriot, it would just hang on the random write section. Sequential speeds are decent, but if you encounter any kind of random access, watch out. I don't know if its just starved for cache or if the controller and firmware are just that bad.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
539.08TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 14
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
POH 4890
MD5 OK
34.40MiB/s on avg (~25 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 79/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 46 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 10 (SSD Life left)
E9 506372 (Raw writes) ->495TiB
F1 673981 (Host writes) ->658TiB
MD5 OK
106.47MiB/s on avg (~145 hours)
power on hours : 1925
WRD decreased by 1 from 47 to 46.
^ Well, hopefully the Force 3 can break 1PB :up:
The Force 3 needs to go 2PB vs the other (60-64GB) drives, it's got RAISE and so it will be interesting when things start to develop.
Well, I tried D-flashing the M225 w/o success :(....
Drive is accessible in "factory mode" so I thought I would give it a shot. First, I ran the NAND cleaner by OCZ for my chips and it definitely saw all those bad blocks. Then I attempt to D-flash and it didn't like that at all -- "High Erase Failure" came up a few times along with "corrupt" and "scan list not found" (don't quote me on that one). Finally ended with see good.bin and bad.bin :shrug:
I think SSD makers need to have/use separate flash to store they're FW and other such pertinent drive info on. This way when someone writes 968TB to a drive they can still flash since it won't be stored on the regular drive NAND and then be able access it. :)
I'm out of ideas :shakes:
Edit: I'm taking the next half of the day off of work...I'm too depressed!
Boss: what happened? why aren't you at work?Quote:
Originally Posted by bluestang
bluestang: I am mourning the death of my beloved M225...:(
Boss: Get back here!
bluestang: I thought you cared...<tears>
I am working from home today to celebrate 968TB of writes by the M225...:D
Sad to see the M225 die like this. Maybe there is another way ? Any news on the 470 that someone here tried to read the NAND directly, One_Hertz ?
I just assumed that the M225 would kinda last forever. And now it's gone.
Sadness.
Samsung 830 64GB Update, Day 4
FW:CXM01B1Q
GiB written:
36318.15
Avg MB/s
107.64
Per-day average:
9106.05
96 hours
https://www.box.com/shared/static/x5...gldlyqpvge.jpg
The average per day is a little higher. I have an alarm that goes off at 14:27 every day so I can take screenshots. Figuring an exact daily average is going to get much more difficult.
Having good SMART data is essential, and it's the worst aspect of the 830. Why would they not provide decent SMART data? Why?
What a shame, it did put up a good fight though!Quote:
Originally Posted by bluestang
Let's see on Monday before we close the case.
The 830 is a lot better than the 470, there were movements to other attributes on my drives, not just F1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
(I don't think I found what they represented)
Umm... the Samsung's had some major movement... maybe?
Reallocated sectors went from 0 to 4096
https://www.box.com/shared/static/ov...a8hens93zu.jpg
Unless CDI is wrong about those being reallocated sectors, or it only increments in values of 4096.
I tend to think of that as a big deal for a 4 day old drive, but it's possible that it's normal. Maybe that's the equivalent of 1 reallocation with the Mushkin or something.
Maybe it's nothing to worry about.
EDIT
https://www.box.com/shared/static/57...pf2la0qtzg.jpg
Okay, its not a big deal (probably). I had been taking smart data pics with CDI because all ofthe attributes were unnamed with SSDlife. I installed the installer version instead of the portable and attributes are all there. peep it.
Todays update:
Kingston V+100
Still disconnected. I was home today way to late to start with SE and taking a look at it. I'll do this tomorrow.
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
112,7744 TiB
19487 hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=56 to 45
MD5 =OK
44.70 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471302http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471300
m4
28.4050 TiB
102 hours
Avg speed 81.38 MiB/s.
AD gone from 89 to 85.
P/E 490.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471303http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471301
@Bluestang
Sorry about the M225.... It put up a hell of a fight..
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
541.67TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 14
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
POH 4913
MD5 OK
33.55MiB/s on avg (~48 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 94/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 45 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 10 (SSD Life left)
E9 512854 (Raw writes) ->501TiB
F1 682612 (Host writes) ->667TiB
MD5 OK
106.49MiB/s on avg (~168 hours)
power on hours : 1948
WRD decreased by 1 from 46 to 45.
--
@Christopher
I expect 4096 could be the smallest unit for reporting.
Nothing to worry about.
Anvil,
I figured that out. I'm most pleased that SSDlife now shows proper attribute names. I now have context, and will include smart values in updates (since I know what they are now).
Reallocations have increased to 8196 within the past 30 mins.
Having PE count is handy too.
Samsung 830 64GB Update, Day 4
FW:CXM01B1Q
GiB written:
45390.03
Avg MB/s
107.57
Per-day average:
9078
PE Cycles
72
Reallocated Sector Count
8196 (2 blocks)
120 hours
https://www.box.com/shared/static/ze...ijadob8ko3.jpg
https://www.box.com/shared/static/1x...j4j73p9x49.jpg
Note that the normalized value decreased from 100 to 99 (threshold 10) when the raw value increased from 0 to 8192. With only one decrement of the normalized value, any extrapolation will be very rough, but current estimate is that the SSD can have 89 more of those RAW increases by 6144 (average of 4096 and 8192) before it has any trouble.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
Todays update.
Kingston V+100
283.3777 TiB
1288 hours
Avg speed 28.60 MiB/s
AD still 1.
168= 1 (SATA PHY Error Count)
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471380http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471377
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
115,5559 TiB
19507 hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=45 to 38
MD5 =OK
42.72 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471379http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471376
m4
33.2744 TiB
122 hours
Avg speed 82.57 MiB/s.
AD gone from 85 to 81.
P/E 584.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471381http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471378
Yeah, I figured that out.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnw
Look at the SMART data in the update I posted today. It incremented by 4096 twice (I believe these are actual sectors). Retired blocks equals 2 now. But SSDlife and CDI didn't show attribute names. Now SSDlife does since switching to the installer version, so that helps. I assumed that 4096 equals 2MiB, but that doesn't really fit since 100 x 2MiB is only 200MiB, of which it can lose ~180MiB? I'll have to do more research, but I know that 1) reallocated sectors increase in increments of 4096 and 2) retired blocks increase correspondingly in increments of 1. I basically watched it increase from 4096 to 8192 and from 1 to 2. So that's why I put 8196 = 2 blocks in the update.
I don't think the 32Gbit 27nm Toggle NAND on the Samsung is all that awful. It's probably better than Toshiba's Toggle NAND. Yes, the controller is a black box -- but so is every other controller. Samsung drives do have the distinction of being one of the main OEM drive manufacturers. It's not like Apple is putting Intel drives in Macs (though they are putting some fairly awful performing Toshibas in there). The 830 is OEM equipment for several high end laptops such as Dell Precisions and the like. That's always a good thing as that usually means everyone gets in some validation.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulanula
The case of the Samsung 830 is also very interesting. We will see how it compares to the 470 but I bet it will last much less considering the worse NAND it has. The controller is not much improved either, I bet. Samsung controllers always have been very proprietary and pretty simple but they do not easily fail like the SF ones.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
542.97TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 14
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
POH 4925
MD5 OK
43.32MiB/s on avg (~10 minutes)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 90/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 47 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 10 (SSD Life left)
E9 516166 (Raw writes) ->504TiB
F1 687021 (Host writes) ->671TiB
MD5 OK
113.91MiB/s on avg (~10 minutes)
power on hours : 1961
I had to install some updates and so the computer was restarted.
Samsung 830 64GB Update, Day 6
FW:CXM01B1Q
GiB written:
54505.70
Avg MB/s
107.91
Per-day average:
9084GB
PE Cycles
87
Reallocated Sector Count
8196 (2 blocks)
146 hours
https://www.box.com/shared/static/4p...cco4k06t2b.jpg
https://www.box.com/shared/static/1m...n1p5jg62f2.jpg
Todays update.
Kingston V+100
285.4463 TiB
1311 hours
Avg speed 25.61 MiB/s
AD still 1.
168= 1 (SATA PHY Error Count)
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471508http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471505
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
119,6193 TiB
19529 hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=38 to 33
MD5 =OK
51.45 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471507http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471504
m4
39.7725 TiB
145 hours
Avg speed 80.41 MiB/s.
AD gone from 81 to 78.
P/E 693.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471509http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471506
So after I d-flashed my Agility 60 for the second time, it's started exhibiting some very strange behavior... It's acting exactly like the Chronos Deluxe did as a system drive before the 3.3.2FW "fix". The same pause, then BSOD, then it needs a full manual power cycle. It's most curious... I mean exactly like a SF2281 hang/BSoD/reboot then manual power cycle. On the positive side, at least I don't have to d-flash it again (maybe?). I had always thought of my Indys as pretty bullet proof, but this one's getting kinda flakey.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
547.68TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 14
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
POH 4966
MD5 OK
33.45MiB/s on avg (~41 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 85/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 52 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 10 (SSD Life left)
E9 527666 (Raw writes) ->515TiB
F1 702329 (Host writes) ->686TiB
MD5 OK
106.46MiB/s on avg (~41 hours)
power on hours : 2002
WRD is increasing rapidly, I expect it will start decreasing again within a few more days.
--
@bluestang
What is the status on the M225?
EDIT: nvm.. answered my questions lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
bluestang: do you load the M225 again to see if it loads? May be there is a miracle waiting to happen...:D
Samsung 830 64GB Update, Day 7
FW:CXM01B1Q
GiB written:
63610.84
Avg MB/s
107.91
Per-day average:
9087GB
PE Cycles
87
Reallocated Sector Count
8196 (2 blocks)
PE Count:
101
170 hours
https://www.box.com/shared/static/18...ez2e3zag9e.jpg
https://www.box.com/shared/static/cr...5oj5d26ih3.jpg
If you look at the SMART data, notice that the Reallocated Sector count is at 8196. It went from 0 to 4096, then from 4096 to 8192. So look at the used reserved block count... 4. Does that make each block equal 2048? If a page is 4K, 128 pages equals 512K. Not sure how the math works out, but 8196 x 512 bytes = 4MiB.
It sounds really basic, but I really have no clue how this part works out. I know Indilinxes use (or used?) 4K pages, 128 pages equals one block, so each block would equal 512K or 100,000 512 byte sectors.
I keep trying various Google searches for specific Samsung 830 reallocated sector info, and to my dismay the most relevant article is... page 119 of this thread.
Todays update.
Kingston V+100
287.8517 TiB
1338 hours
Avg speed 25.45MiB/s
AD still 1.
168= 1 (SATA PHY Error Count)
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471678http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471675
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
124,5284 TiB
19557hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=33to 26
MD5 =OK
51.40 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471679http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471674
m4
47.4961 TiB
173 hours
Avg speed 80.85 MiB/s.
AD gone from 78 to 73.
P/E 828.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471677http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471676
Why is the M4's wear leveling count at 828 now? The Samsung is only at 101. Perhaps they calculate differently?
I was wondering about the same thing.
In my case it's easy to calculate. 64 020 803 584 byte*828 =48,21 TiB
With an WA of 1.01 it looks correct. Yours on the other side......
Is there no MWI for the Samsung 830? I've also read somewhere that the temperature of that SSD is a bit high, hence not recommended for small laptops where cooling might be a problem.
Yes. Perhaps it's a straight average? Maybe it's pe cycles / 10? Perhaps it's actually in Klingon.Quote:
Originally Posted by B.A.T
I don't see how it's possible to have over 1000 times the drive's capacity with slightly over 100 PE cycles. Maybe it's magic.
For real.Quote:
Originally Posted by minpayne
It gets pretty warm, but so did the Mushkin Chronos Deluxe I was testing before the Samsung. The toggle mode NAND models use a good bit of power, both from the NAND and controllers. The both should have thermal pads to conduct heat into the chassis. My Samsung 830 is actually hanging out of the back of my test system, so it's temp readings are from it's own heat and not the system. I should think it would be fine in a smaller laptop chassis as it only gets hot when you are writing to it as fast as you can for days on end. Laptops tend to get hot anyway, so it's more likely that a laptop heats up the Samsung. Indilinx drives and Intel drive don't get appreciably hot, but then, they use very little power. All of the 6gbps controllers will use more juice anyway, but the toggle mode NAND (Toshiba and Samsung) seem to use the most power on a per-device basis. But boy, are they fast.
Concerning SSD power use, newer drives like the Samsung are using as much power as 2.5" HDDs. But like a SB processor, they don't use much power at idle, then use larger amounts of power while completing work, then return to idle. Because they are so much faster than mechanical drives, they spend one twentieth the time doing the same amount of work at max power which means they can get back to idle as fast as possible. So the drive might heat up for a minute or two at a time, but shouldn't ever get problematically hot unless you're doing what I'm doing.
EDIT
If you look at the whole wear leveling values for the 830 you get 97/97/101. It's 73/73/838 for the M4. Maybe I should add some more static data to see what happens.
Hey guys, just got in back to work today...was out sick yesterday.
I'll try and see if I can get the M225 back today.
EDIT: No go. Can't seem to be able to D-flash FW to any version. Keeps saying "ERROR: Erase Failure\High" then "data corrupt" "see good.bin and bad.bin". Don't think the NAND will let itself get flashed. Or should I say the FW won't let the NAND get flashed with the high erase counts (PE).
I need RyderOCZ to supply me a special FW to overlook the high writes and just flash! LOL :)
It's not impossible, if the drive is packed with NAND it will produce heat (my Intel 600GB can get hot) and the Samsung is on the small side, really small.Quote:
Originally Posted by minpayne
I haven't checked my Samsungs yet but will do.
You should keep some 15-20GB of writes per loop (or thereabouts) on the 64GB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
I'm using 12GB free space as a minimum on both drives.
The PE counter (177) looks OK, it's just on a different scale, if you get the chance you could try catching/creating a screenshot when the attribute changes and compare to F1.
My Intel 600GB is a lot cooler than my M4 512GB, when both running the Endurance testing in AST at around 80-100MB/s fill. The coolest one is the Intel X25-E 64GB - my hand cannot even sense that it is powered on under stress test.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
I'm now thinking about getting a Samsung 830 for my laptop but I'm concerned with the heat I've read so far.
Anvil,
I was using 12GB min free, but from 16 down to 12 average writes dip into the 77MB/s range after a few loops. That's one of the reasons why I was thinking of adding some more static data.
Samsung 830 64GB Update, Day 8
FW:CXM01B1Q
GiB written:
70706.50
Avg MB/s
107.86
Per-day average:
9088
PE Cycles
116
Reallocated Sector Count
16384 (8 blocks)
194 hours
https://www.box.com/shared/static/dy...br5phz845b.jpg
https://www.box.com/shared/static/hi...q1flr1s6xk.png
I was watching last night when the PE cycles hit 110. The CV/worst value hit 96/96 as well. That would mean it should hit 0 at 2750 Wear Leveling Count.
1 in the raw value roughly equals 609GiB, so 2750 * 609GB would equal 1,676,219.83GB
Yup -- 1.68PB to PEexhaustion? I don't think so. I'll keep trying to figure out what it means.
Todays update.
Kingston V+100
289.7360 TiB
1360 hours
Avg speed 25.40 MiB/s
AD still 1.
168= 1 (SATA PHY Error Count)
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471773http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471770
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
128,3653 TiB
19579 hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=26 to 21
MD5 =OK
51.35 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471772http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471771
m4
53.5538 TiB
195 hours
Avg speed 81.00 MiB/s.
AD gone from 73 to 69.
P/E 933.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471774http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471769
@BAT
So, December the 25th for the Intel X25-M G1 and New Years day for the M4 :)
(according to SSDLife)
I need to install SSDLife onto the current test-rig, it's currently sitting on the AMD rig I used until late this summer.
--
The Intel just got past 550TB :) and the F3 will be past 700TiB by tomorrow morning.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
550.87TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 14
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
POH 4996
MD5 OK
32.05MiB/s on avg (~72 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 89/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 50 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 10 (SSD Life left)
E9 535621 (Raw writes) ->523TiB
F1 712916 (Host writes) ->696TiB
MD5 OK
102.75MiB/s on avg (~72 hours)
power on hours : 2032
(for some reason both drives have had a slowdown but they are steadily increasing on avg throughput)
--
@bluestang
Looks like I'll have to update the summary!
Looks like an exciting holiday this year :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Anvil
I bet that you can disregard those dates :), still it can be exciting, anything can happen of course.
I planned on starting my retention test from mwi=1%. Stop every 100GB and try like you did with the X25-V.
Those Intel's 40GBs are a model of good behavior. Maybe if you're writing slow and steady, you can do so almost indefinitely.
The 40GB Intels are writing as much/fast as they can, they are slow though :)
I have considered making an option for "slowing down"/controlling writes.
There are lot'a of possible options to consider though, like setting a fixed number of MB/s or a fixed number of GiB per hour or TiB per day and so the options will make it possible to have a few pauses.
These could be useful options but you can of course run the test just like before, w/o pauses.
One mystery solved --
The Samsung Toggle NAND uses 8K Pages, 1MiB blocks. the reallocated sector count really are sectors. Right now, the Samsung has 10 replaced blocks and reports 20480 reallocated sectors.
512 bytes * 20480 = 10485760 bytes, or 10MiB. Each block is 1MiB, so 10MiB of blocks have been flagged as bad and replaced.
Kingston SSDNow 40GB (X25-V)
552.24TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors : 05 14
Available Reserved Space : E8 99
POH 5008
MD5 OK
32.16MiB/s on avg (~84 hours)
--
Corsair Force 3 120GB
01 90/50 (Raw read error rate)
05 2 (Retired Block count)
B1 49 (Wear range delta)
E6 100 (Life curve status)
E7 10 (SSD Life left)
E9 539011 (Raw writes) ->526TiB
F1 717426 (Host writes) ->701TiB
MD5 OK
103.30MiB/s on avg (~83 hours)
power on hours : 2044
The Force 3 is now idling and will do so for a few more hours in wait for a data retention test.
--
Samsung 830 64GB Update, Day 9
FW:CXM01B1Q
GiB written:
80990.91
Avg MB/s
105.43
Per-day average:
8990GB
PE Cycles
129
Reallocated Sector Count
20480 (10 blocks)
8K pages, 1MiB blocks
219 hours
https://www.box.com/shared/static/ii...yjbm4y5lvd.jpg
https://www.box.com/shared/static/e9...6ahx11t8l9.png
The min free space is set to 12GB. If you look at the ASU shot above you'll see the instant MBs in the 60MBs range, but the average hasn't gone down too much (yet)
Measured WA -- 1.05
Since moving to 12GB min free from 16GB, the drive was only able to write 8284GB, about 700GB less than the previous daily average.
My Last Official M225->Vertex Turbo 64GB Screenshot and Stats:
http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/4...texturbo12.png
879.17 TiB (966.66 TB) total.
~2245 hrs (Torture), 3304 hrs (Power-On).
17092 Avg. Raw Wear.
B8-Initial Bad Block Count at 8
C3-Program Failure Block Count at 2
C4-Erase Failure Block Count (Reallocations) at 25.
C5-Read Failure Block Count (uncorrectable bit errors) at 27.
On 12/08/11 Drive threw 16 more C5 for a total of 43.
So a total (B8+C3+C4+C5) of 78 Bad Blocks.
I was able to write down SSD Life total of 901479.9 GiB (880.35 TiB / 967.96 TB) before it died on 12/08/11.
This drive managed 116.48 MB/s over the entire endurance test. :clap:
*** M225 -- R.I.P. December 8, 2011 at 968 TB of Writes ***
Thanks for all your work on this bluestang!
(first post updated)
--
The Corsair Force 3 has been disconnected for about 6 hours, another 48 hours and it will be back online.
Bluestang,
Are you going to put the other M225 into service? Or put it next to the expired one in the SSD Hall of Fame?
Did you ever see the RAW value increment by less than 4096? In the data you posted, I thought it went by at least 4096 increments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher
4096 * 512 = 2 MiB
Todays update.
Kingston V+100
291.9157 TiB
1385 hours
Avg speed 25.39 MiB/s
AD still 1.
168= 1 (SATA PHY Error Count)
P/E?
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471914http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471911
Intel X25-M G1 80GB
132,7932 TiB
19604 hours
Reallocated sectors : 00
MWI=21 to 15
MD5 =OK
51.32 MiB/s on avg
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471913http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471912
m4
60.5541 TiB
220 hours
Avg speed 81.11 MiB/s.
AD gone from 69 to 65.
P/E 1055.
MD5 OK.
Reallocated sectors : 00
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471915http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?ap...tach_id=471910
@Bluestang
R.I.P M225
You did a good job babysitting it. To bad it didn't last all the way to 1 PiB.
Yes. It increments in 2048. That's what I thought as well initially, but it was just because two blocks went out at once. Samsung's web page lists the 8K pages 1MiB block size. If you look at the smart data from today, the number of replaced blocks is listed as 10. Still, I'm a little confused by the erase fail and total runtime bad block counts. It does seem like one doesn't increment without the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnw