WOW really interesting C300 behaviour right there !
That "Getting smarter ?" reply was epic johnw ! LOLed so hard.
Printable View
WOW really interesting C300 behaviour right there !
That "Getting smarter ?" reply was epic johnw ! LOLed so hard.
4.83hrs, 1.0822TiB, 100MWI, 17 raw wear
Attachment 117263
And those last four values are changing and changing often. :confused:
Those attributes are not found on the C300's I've looked at.
Did you try using smartmontools?
The MD5 version will be available tomorrow, performing tests until then.
smartmontools/GSmartControl can only recognize F2/242 (the one with 95 as the value) as "Total_LBAs_Read", the rest are shown but unknowns.
I was afraid I messed something up during the flash to 0007...I'll explain what I did.
Booted the system with the C300 plugged in and see it's 0006. Burn the 0007 firmware CD and boot off of it and flash it, all goes well.
Boot back into Windows, take the initial Crystal Disk Info screenshot and go to run AS-SSD...4k writes are ~1MB/s so I figure something is wrong. Double check alignment [ok], double check TRIM [ok], double check write cache [ok], shut down to check AHCI/IDE. I figure the system must be in IDE mode because the flash was successful and because performance is wretched.
In BIOS, it says it's AHCI, so I flip it to IDE and put the 0007 CD back in to reflash. Boot off the disk and it says 0007 is already flashed, can't do anything else. Go back into BIOS, switch it back to AHCI, boot into Windows and performance is fine and suddenly I have 7 more SMART values showing up :lol:
114 hours, 32,8314 TiB, Wear Leveling Count and Percentage of the rated lifetime used has gone from 83 to 82.
Avg speed for all 114 hours is roughly 83,8 MiB
Attachment 117281
I don't think you did, the flash upgrade wouldn't have worked at all if there was something off with your setup.
The result however was really something :), more questions to be answered.
Could this be a new revision of the hardware. (controller)
Will double check on my other drives as well, the ones I checked last night were all 64GB.
--
The MD5 test looks to be working just fine, I've let it run through the night and it's been running every 10 loops, no errors.
135.82TB Host writes
MWI 25 (it just turned 25)
Reallocated sectors still at 6.
Yeah...that's where I'm particularly confused though since A) apparently I flashed in AHCI, which Crucial's guide says isn't possible, B) the mysterious ~1MB/s 4k writes are still unexplained, and C) I didn't actually do anything (just toggled between AHCI/IDE/AHCI and booted from the 0007 CD, which immediately said nothing could be done) between the initial flash to 0007 and getting the 7 extra SMART values. Definitely more questions now, even aside from "how did those SMART attributes show up?"
Anyway, C300 update this post, new charts next post.
3.918TiB, 17.58hrs, 99 MWI, 63 raw wear (looks like steps of 50).
Attachment 117293
TiB went from 1.0822 -> 3.918 (3.62x)
Hours went from 4.83 -> 17.58 (3.64x)
Power-on hours went from 6 -> 18 (3x...with low resolution measurement, it was a high 18, it's already 19 a few minutes later)
F5 went from 311891737 -> 1080080908 (3.46x)
F6 went from 2457063059 -> 8454389999 (3.44x)
F7 went from 307445319 -> 1057855304 (3.44x)
F8 went from 4446418 -> 22225604 (5x)
Seems F5-F7 could be timers of some sort? They do continue to move even with turning Anvil's app off. I think I would have to leave Anvil's app turned off for an extended period of time to know more, since I wasn't tracking how much it was moving.
Anyway, further look at it: F6 is 8x F7, which makes me think bits vs. bytes. F5 is 1.021x F7, which I can't find any significance to. And the 5x increase (between screenshots) in F8 is kind of making me think it's NAND writes. :shrug:
Updated charts :)
C300 isn't in the MWI Exhaustion graphs and axes haven't been adjusted in the Writes vs. Wear graphs because it's just too soon...MWI is down to just 99, very hard to extrapolate with accuracy off of that.
Host Writes So Far
Attachment 117295
(bars with a border = testing stopped/completed)
Raw data graphs
Writes vs. Wear:
Attachment 117294
MWI Exhaustion:
Attachment 117296
Normalized data graphs
The SSDs are not all the same size, these charts normalize for 25GiB of onboard NAND.
Writes vs. Wear:
Attachment 117297
MWI Exhaustion:
Attachment 117299
Write-days data graphs
Not all SSDs write at the same speed, these charts factor out write speeds and look at endurance as a function of time.
Writes vs. Wear:
Attachment 117300
MWI Exhaustion:
Attachment 117301
179TB. 7%. 17 Reallocated sectors.
Vapor, even the factory bad block count seems to have changed?
John's Samsung test is over now?
Hertz getting close to 0 mwi now
Factory bad block has always been 98. First screenshot was in hex and 62h = 98.
johnw is at MWI = 0, but he can keep testing until it dies or until read errors occur (via Anvil's MD5 update). And yeah, One Hertz is the next to get to MWI = 0.
MWI 1 (0 does not exist on Intel drives) :)
Playing around with F8, trying to figure out if it is NAND writes....can't figure out units if it is though :confused:
Take these two data points:
4.3924TiB, 26072470
1.0822TiB, 4446418
________________-_
3.3102TiB, 21,626,052....F8 increased by a factor of 5.86x; writes increased by a factor of 4.06x.
The 5.864:4.06 ratio (1.44x) seems too much like a good candidate for write amplification for it to not be investigated, IMO.
3.3102TiB = 3,389.6GiB = 3,470,996 MiB = 6,942,000 blocks (512KiB) = 888,575,000 pages (4KiB) = 3,554,300,000 KiB
So each unit of F8 could be equal to: ~164KiB, ~41.1 pages, or ~.321 blocks.
Each unit of F8 divided by 1.44 could be equal to: ~236 KiB, ~59.2 pages, ~.443 blocks.
None of it works out though :(
I suppose I'll also need to pause Anvil's app for awhile and see how things move.
EDIT: what is the block size of 34nm NAND? I've been assuming 512KiB, but that may not be the case it seems...
I always thought the block size of 34nm NAND was 128 x 4KiB = 512KiB.
Great thread, very nice work :)
Biggest findings so far (for me at least) :
1. All SSDs (even the Samsung 470) endure pretty heavy writes - I doubt I will ever write that much on my SSD...
2. 25nm doesn't harm the Intel drives (regarding lifetime)
3. SandForce is a huge disappointment. I expected a drop in performance...but seriously, the SDcard in my smartphone writes faster than this...that is unacceptable IMHO - but I don't want to kick off another discussion about this, as there is already another thread. I just didn't expect this at all.
I'm looking forward to more results :)
129 hours, 37,3114 TiB, Wear Leveling Count and Percentage of the rated lifetime used has gone from 82 to 79.
Avg speed for all 129 hours is roughly 84,2 MiB
Attachment 117325
Nice findings ao1
6.38TiB, 98MWI, 106 raw wear, 29hrs
Attachment 117328
65.521 TiB, 189 hours, sa177: 1/1/5483
Note that there were a few power-on hours when Anvil's app was not running between last update and this one. Therefore the difference between these last two updates should NOT be used when calculating average write speed.
Anvil's app is now reporting average write speed. At the moment it is saying 106.84 MB/s. I was getting about 110 MB/s, but now the app is doing a 2.1GB file copy and MD5 sum check every 10 iterations, so I think that is slowing things down slightly. I hope to set it to every 100 iterations once the app allows it (in the next app update).
139,5 hours, 40,4361 TiB, Wear Leveling Count and Percentage of the rated lifetime used has gone from 79 to 77.
Avg speed for all 129 hours is roughly 84,4 MiB
Attachment 117336
138.60TB Host writes
MWI 24
MD5 OK
No other changes.
now all we need is a V3. would be interesting, very very interesting, to see what form throttling takes on the new gen of SF drives.