SSD Write Endurance 25nm Vs 34nm

[dr_sharp]

I don't think the OCZ data should be extrapolated the way it is presented in the graphs. The testing stopped because it was completely throttled. In the eyes of the users on this forum, that would be considered a failure.

I think you should remove the dotted trendline from OCZ data.

[Vapor]

I don't think the OCZ data should be extrapolated the way it is presented in the graphs. The testing stopped because it was completely throttled. In the eyes of the users on this forum, that would be considered a failure.

I think you should remove the dotted trendline from OCZ data.

Wear vs. TiB might still stick to that line, even with LTT (and my guess is that it would stick pretty closely to that line). The tester chose to stop testing but the drive was still functioning as intended, even if it were not functioning as desired.

Wear vs. Write-days extrapolation would change dramatically (for the 'better') as the drive would now be forced to last 1000+ days rather than the 55-60 it could wear itself down in without LTT. If anything, I feel I should add another line indicating actual life expectancy in days...but that would mess up the visibility of the charted data from every other drive

That said, I expect to remove the data from the Vertex 2 40GB when a SF-1200 drive without LTT enters testing (partially because testing on the V2-40GB is permanently incomplete and partially because of the initial 0-fill numbers complicating things), but until then it'll be on the chart because there is no alternative/better SF-1200 data.


C300 Update:

15.0234TiB, 95MWI, 251raw, 0 reallocated, 62.12MiB/s, 42/0 with MD5 checks (1.65GiB file)

[dr_sharp]

The tester chose to stop testing but the drive was still functioning as intended

I completely disagree with that statement. Nobody buys an SSD to run at those speeds. For all intensive purposes, it experienced failure.