It seems like the M4 and the 320 are close to cracking the 200TB barrier. Wonder how the C300 will perform.
It seems like the M4 and the 320 are close to cracking the 200TB barrier. Wonder how the C300 will perform.
The 320 should be > 200TB, not sure of how you could have misread the TB for the m4? (it's currently at ~84TiB)
--
154.72TB Host writes
MWI 15
Reallocated sectors still at 6
MD5, no errors.
It looks like speed is a bit up for this session, 33.8MB/s on avg. (~35 hours)
-
Hardware:
@B.A.T. : it seems like your avg write speed is going up! That's a good feature to have: more you write on me, faster I become...
It's only going up because the test was haltet for a couple of hours. From my next update I'll be using the latest v of anvils app and there the avg speed is calculated for me. At the moment the avg speed is 88.38 MiB/s
1: AMD FX-8150-Sabertooth 990FX-8GB Corsair XMS3-C300 256GB-Gainward GTX 570-HX-750
2: Phenom II X6 1100T-Asus M4A89TD Pro/usb3-8GB Corsair Dominator-Gainward GTX 460SE/-X25-V 40GB-(Crucial m4 64GB /Intel X25-M G1 80GB/X25-E 64GB/Mtron 7025/Vertex 1 donated to endurance testing)
3: Asus U31JG - X25-M G2 160GB
Updated charts
Host Writes So Far
(bars with a border = testing stopped/completed)
Raw data graphs
Writes vs. Wear:
MWI Exhaustion:
Writes vs. NAND Cycles:
Normalized data graphs
The SSDs are not all the same size, these charts normalize for total NAND capacity.
Writes vs. Wear:
MWI Exhaustion:
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:
MWI Exhaustion:
1: AMD FX-8150-Sabertooth 990FX-8GB Corsair XMS3-C300 256GB-Gainward GTX 570-HX-750
2: Phenom II X6 1100T-Asus M4A89TD Pro/usb3-8GB Corsair Dominator-Gainward GTX 460SE/-X25-V 40GB-(Crucial m4 64GB /Intel X25-M G1 80GB/X25-E 64GB/Mtron 7025/Vertex 1 donated to endurance testing)
3: Asus U31JG - X25-M G2 160GB
I'll be impressed if the Samsung 470 makes it past 200TiB. I'm far from certain, but my best guess is that the write amplification of the Samsung is around 5 -- much higher than the other SSDs in the test. If the Samsung makes it to 200TiB, I guess that would be about 16,000 erase cycles on the flash.
Last edited by johnw; 07-13-2011 at 12:48 PM.
We'll just have to wait, I'm already impressed by the Samsung.
The Samsung is a bit of a dark horse as we don't know much about the drive at all.
-
Hardware:
C300 evening update, plus a new chart to add to the mix.
41.787TiB, 86MWI, 702 P/E cycles (raw wear indicator), all MD5 okay, 81.7MiB/sec
New chart!
Approximate Write Amplification
Using the normalized writes (total GiB written / total NAND capacity), raw wear indicators (Samsung and Crucials), and raw wear inferences for Intel ( (100-MWI) x 50 / normalized writes ), I came up with a chart for approximate write amplification during testing. Not sure how useful it is, ultimately, but it seems interesting
Only value I'm unsure of is the X25-V, it may have 10k cycle NAND, in which case it's WA would be 2x what is shown as I calculated with the assumption of 5k cycle NAND.
Very interesting data, especially the Samsung as they are probably using different methods of production compared to onfi people like Intel micron but numbers like 16 000 seem pretty insane!
The V should have 5k cycle NAND (34nm).
1: AMD FX-8150-Sabertooth 990FX-8GB Corsair XMS3-C300 256GB-Gainward GTX 570-HX-750
2: Phenom II X6 1100T-Asus M4A89TD Pro/usb3-8GB Corsair Dominator-Gainward GTX 460SE/-X25-V 40GB-(Crucial m4 64GB /Intel X25-M G1 80GB/X25-E 64GB/Mtron 7025/Vertex 1 donated to endurance testing)
3: Asus U31JG - X25-M G2 160GB
Is anyone testing endurance of the intel 520 series? Or do we expect that to match one of th profiles we're currently testing due to same nand tech being used or similar? Trying to find relatively in-expensive drives for a write cache for the array which I would expect >200TiB of writes per drive in say 1 year. I know the pliant ones can do this but they're 10x+ the cost of everything else.
|.Server/Storage System.............|.Gaming/Work System..............................|.Sundry...... ............|
|.Supermico X8DTH-6f................|.Asus Z9PE-D8 WS.................................|.HP LP3065 30"LCD Monitor.|
|.(2) Xeon X5690....................|.2xE5-2643 v2....................................|.Mino lta magicolor 7450..|
|.(192GB) Samsung PC10600 ECC.......|.2xEVGA nVidia GTX670 4GB........................|.Nikon coolscan 9000......|
|.800W Redundant PSU................|.(8x8GB) Kingston DDR3-1600 ECC..................|.Quantum LTO-4HH..........|
|.NEC Slimline DVD RW DL............|.Corsair AX1200..................................|........ .................|
|.(..6) LSI 9200-8e HBAs............|.Lite-On iHBS112.................................|.Dell D820 Laptop.........|
|.(..8) ST9300653SS (300GB) (RAID0).|.PA120.3, Apogee, MCW N&S bridge.................|...2.33Ghz; 8GB Ram;......|
|.(112) ST2000DL003 (2TB) (RAIDZ2)..|.(1) Areca ARC1880ix-8 512MiB Cache..............|...DVDRW; 128GB SSD.......|
|.(..2) ST9146803SS (146GB) (RAID-1)|.(8) Intel SSD 520 240GB (RAID6).................|...Ubuntu 12.04 64bit.....|
|.Ubuntu 12.04 64bit Server.........|.Windows 7 x64 Pro...............................|............... ..........|
@stevcs
I expect you are thinking of the Intel 510 Series SSD (the 520 Series is due Q4?)
There are currently no-one testing the 510 series, being 34nm it should do well vs the m4, you should also consider the 320 Series 80-120GB as 25nm looks to be great!
-
Hardware:
The Marvell 9174 Controller is used by the Crucial M4, Intel 510 & Corsair P3, however both Intel & Micron produce their own unique firmware. There may also be other significant differences. NAND configuration, DRAM, Spare Area etc.
Intel do however specify workload parameters for Client and Enterprise applications, so those specs could be used to determine suitability for a particular workload. As can be seen in this thread those workload estimates appear to be quite conservative.
A small increase in reserve area would be enough to significantly increase work load capability, if the workload was a problem.
@anvil- you're correct, sorry (always thinking a generation ahead) but I meant the 510/elmcrest not the 520/cherryville. Problem with the 3xx is that they're all 3Gbps, not a problem in itself (as I don't except a single drive to do more than 100MB/s) but I'm looking to put them all into external chassis so want to make sure that all are running at 6gbps for the expander(s). (I've run into problems before mixing/matching, it's better to have everything the same signaling).
@Ao1, yes, that's what I thought as well. I was actually planning on 28% or so over-provisioning for whatever SSD. Just trying to pick the right ones for the workload. Since this is a 'write cache' drive (it's main purpose is to cache all random writes to the back-end datastore which is ~200TB) with about 100GB/day I don't want to have the replacement issues at work (don't know the actual brand, but EMC&Oracle use SSD's for their Tier 0 in the sans, for heavy database functions they don't last a year. Not a big deal as the client's are paying for the speed so the thousands $$/drive is not an issue. A 'little' different for a home system however.
|.Server/Storage System.............|.Gaming/Work System..............................|.Sundry...... ............|
|.Supermico X8DTH-6f................|.Asus Z9PE-D8 WS.................................|.HP LP3065 30"LCD Monitor.|
|.(2) Xeon X5690....................|.2xE5-2643 v2....................................|.Mino lta magicolor 7450..|
|.(192GB) Samsung PC10600 ECC.......|.2xEVGA nVidia GTX670 4GB........................|.Nikon coolscan 9000......|
|.800W Redundant PSU................|.(8x8GB) Kingston DDR3-1600 ECC..................|.Quantum LTO-4HH..........|
|.NEC Slimline DVD RW DL............|.Corsair AX1200..................................|........ .................|
|.(..6) LSI 9200-8e HBAs............|.Lite-On iHBS112.................................|.Dell D820 Laptop.........|
|.(..8) ST9300653SS (300GB) (RAID0).|.PA120.3, Apogee, MCW N&S bridge.................|...2.33Ghz; 8GB Ram;......|
|.(112) ST2000DL003 (2TB) (RAIDZ2)..|.(1) Areca ARC1880ix-8 512MiB Cache..............|...DVDRW; 128GB SSD.......|
|.(..2) ST9146803SS (146GB) (RAID-1)|.(8) Intel SSD 520 240GB (RAID6).................|...Ubuntu 12.04 64bit.....|
|.Ubuntu 12.04 64bit Server.........|.Windows 7 x64 Pro...............................|............... ..........|
While it can't be shown in this test here is a test someone ran on an Intel X25-V measured durability
http://translate.google.com/translat...ogle.com&twu=1
-=The Gamer=-
MSI Z68A-GD65 (G3) | i5 2500k @ 4.5Ghz | 1.3875V | 28C Idle / 65C Load (LinX)
8Gig G.Skill Ripjaw PC3-12800 9-9-9-24 @ 1600Mhz w/ 1.5V | TR Ultra eXtreme 120 w/ 2 Fans
Sapphire 7950 VaporX 1150/1500 w/ 1.2V/1.5V | 32C Idle / 64C Load | 2x 128Gig Crucial M4 SSD's
BitFenix Shinobi Window Case | SilverStone DA750 | Dell 2405FPW 24" Screen
-=The Server=-
Synology DS1511+ | Dual Core 1.8Ghz CPU | 30C Idle / 38C Load
3 Gig PC2-6400 | 3x Samsung F4 2TB Raid5 | 2x Samsung F4 2TB
Heat
Don't know if this will help but as a guide the Intel 320 is spec'd for around 15TB with a 4K 100% random workload over the full span. (TB varies depending on drive capacity). Reducing the span and adding over provisioning will increase write capacity significantly, but 200TB of random 4K writes is going to be a tall order for any non enterprise SSD any way you try to cut it.
Bookmarks