Come on guys this thread is BEGGING for a C300. Crucial might wanna rise up to the challenge and give someone here one to test with etc. !!!
I've kind of resorted to skimming this thread now because of the clutter..
I will say that the lifetime throttling period can be set at manufacturer firmware download time, for either unthrottled, or throttling to last for 1,2,3,4,5 years.
The setting on the drive likely matches what the manufacturer offers as their warranty period, but you never know with some dumb engineers who might set drive manufacturing files wrong.. (I've met quite a few)
Only drive idle time will restore write speed in a lifetime-throttling mode, any Secure Erase that restores performance means that the drive has some other hinderance to its performance (not enough free space, uncompressible random data, etc etc) OR the drive was set to 'unthrottled' option.
One easy way to tell if drive throttling might be kicking in (and what your warranty period is set to):
What's your current SMART power on hours for the drive, and what's your current Write Wear indicator say?
Also, an unthrottled SF-2582 (or 60 of them) is ridiculous to play with. 90k IOPS. enough said.
"Red Dwarf", SFF gaming PC
Winner of the ASUS Xtreme Design Competition
Sponsors...ASUS, Swiftech, Intel, Samsung, G.Skill, Antec, Razer
Hardware..[Maximus III GENE, Core i7-860 @ 4.1Ghz, 4GB DDR3-2200, HD5870, 256GB SSD]
Water.......[Apogee XT CPU, MCW60-R2 GPU, 2x 240mm radiators, MCP350 pump]
109.36TB Host writes
I think you are spot on on the throttling, will do some checks on my SF drives.
I'd rather test the m4, I expect it to complete the test in a shorter time as it's about 30% faster on writes vs C300.
146TB. 25%. Reallocated sectors up by 1 to 12.
It looks like we'll be getting a new contestant
If all goes well, a colleague from the Norwegian forum will be joining with the Crucial m4 64GB, probably by the end of this month. (sometime next weekend)
110,66TB Host writes
Reallocated sectors still at 6. (it's been a long time since this changed)
updated the chart...
Last edited by Anvil; 06-26-2011 at 01:58 PM.
Can somebody please now get a C300 so that I can prove that C300 > M4 in terms of endurance etc. ?
Is it just me or is the X25 catching up to the 320 slowly but steadily etc. ?
The MWI values don't mean ANYTHING for now. The real winner in the 25 vs 34 nm race will be revealed after MWI goes past zero!
Did you folks add the read/md5sum verification in the mix? It is possible that the drives are dead already as far as the usefulness of them is concerned. I mean in real world, you would likely RMA the drive on signs of corruptions, not continue to write.
And I am sick of this Sandforce crap! I hope they learn to not cheat and take the customers for fools like they do at this time. Talk of making a quick buck off of gullible customers! I mean 500MB/s writes? Yeah riiiiggggghhhht! More like 200MB/s. And then, of course throttle down to single digit MBs. Yeah awesomenessss!
112.98TB Host writes
@devsk.. Throttling hits when ALL the nand have been written at least once and the Durawrite's GC map has been fully formed once more. While Sandforce/OCZ will often force feed most to believe that it's a lifespan saving algorithm?.. it just more of a limitation as to what the controller will do once it must differentiate between all it's interanl algorithms being introduced.
Think of it(lifetime throttle) as kind of like an "overhead loss".. rather than jsut a lifespan saving algorithm since the controller must TRIM, recover on the fly(if no fresh blocks remain), wear level and rotate data all at the same time. The "hammered state throttle" would definately be considered a lifesaving algorithm.
Far too much dramatization going on here. If you don't like it?.. don't use it. Simple as that and no one needs another consumer advocate posting claims of false advertising around here. Plenty of threads about that crap over at Anandtech if you're into that sort of thing. It just is.. what it is.
Guys, write throttling, as I have experienced is highly unlikely to occur to anyone using their SSD normally.
The only thing that is infuriating is the lack of official info, hence why I have explored this.
If people want to work within parameters that enables the excellent performance of a SF drive to be fully utilised, without the fear of inducing throttling they should be entitled to the info.
IF published specs are based on short burst speeds before they are throttled, it should be stated clearly.
your theory makes no sense here. the drive is "lifetime throttled"?.. yet only with sustained data loads? IOW, this heavily assumed "lifetime throttle" is only imposed after a short burst of data? LOL
You have other issues with that drive and you're just chasing your tail here. I would RMA the drive(obvoiusly don't want to make mention of this testing) and get another to test. Lifetime throttling is not used at ANY stage of the lifespan of these controllers in any real literal sense of the word. If an SE isn't clearing the maps to allow full factory fresh speed?.. you have other issues. Go ask Tony again and be more clear about your specific question for the actual long term effect of "lifetime throttle".
I've implemented the MD5 stuff, I just need to make some options for it.
Well, it seems there is no point on doing endurance tests on the consumer SF drives, we'd have to get to a drive without the warranty option set. (throttling disabled)
Link to "Configuring SSD Warranty period" not sure about the authenticity of this document.
One of GR's V2's with about 8000 hours would be ideal.
8000 hours with just a few TB's worh of writes would be just perfect
Seriously though, I don't think any of my drives are candidates, I've got a bunch of 60GB drives but I don't think they have nearly that many hours, just the TB's
I'll do a check on the most likely candidates.
I have two 50GB V2s with over 7000 hours and roughly 1.7TB of host writes each (roughly 1.6TB of NAND writes each). Unfortunately, they're in R0 as my boot drives in my primary system, so basically untouchable
114.88TB Host writes
I'm sure we'll find someone with a suitable V2, that 8000hour drive would have been perfect though.
Seeing how the SF controller has evolved I'm pretty sure that the SF2 would be the preferred one to get for this test. (although the Warranty period is the crucial factor for this test)
The downside is that there won't be any SF2 drives with 1000s of hours on them, yet.
Last edited by Anvil; 06-28-2011 at 02:35 AM. Reason: wrong host writes, .88 not .98
152TB. 21%. Reallocated sectors up to 13.
Seems like groberts got banned.
Anyway, anyone want to volunteer a C300 so I can prove that 34nm NAND >>> 25nm NAND ??? Eg there is no major controller difference between the M4 and the C300 so this would be perfect seeing that Anvil already has a M4 drive etc. !
Or perhaps some of the better known people might want to take this up with Crucial ???
Don't know but I think we really need a 25nm vs 34nm debate between the M4 and the C300.
The only reason the Intel 320 seems to be better than the X25-V drive here is because of its improved controller etc.
We have a new contestant in the endurance test: 64GB Samsung 470. It uses 32nm Samsung toggle DDR NAND flash, which tech-report has this to say about:
It seems that Samsung only cares about sequential write speed. The 64GB Samsung 470 has the fastest incompressible-data sequential write speed, by far, of any MLC SSD below 100GB. I can see the engineers sitting around developing this SSD: "Let's get the highest sequential write we possibly can" "Yeah!" "Okay" "But what about 4KB performance? And what about SMART attributes for monitoring health?" "Shut up, you! Get with the program!"According to Samsung, the 470 Series' flash chips have a write-erase endurance of only 3,000 cycles
Anyway, the SMART attributes on this SSD are anemic. Only 6 of them, and none of them appear to be host-writes or media-wear-out-indicator. They are also poorly documented. smartmontools labels one of them as supercapacitor health, but I don't think this SSD even has a supercapacitor. Anyway, I will be monitoring the SMART attributes as the test proceeds, so maybe we can deduce what they all are.
In the meantime, I will be sure to write down the TB-written from Anvil's program every day, since I cannot currently read it from the SMART attributes, and if Anvil's program gets restarted the TB-written will be cleared.
I also put a 40GB static data file on the SSD, with a known MD5 checksum. So that should help test the wear-leveling for static data, and also see if any data corruption develops.
smartmontools (I don't think this SSD has a supercapacitor, so I guess smartmon got that attribute name wrong):
endurance test started:
SAMSUNG 470 Series SSD_1GB-20110628-1058.jpg
Last edited by johnw; 06-28-2011 at 12:15 PM.