SSD Write Endurance 25nm Vs 34nm

[nn_step]

@nn_step, at what write size did your first Intel drive fail at (the one in the quote, above)?

What exactly do you mean by write size.

@nm...your data is very vague. a lack of data would be a better way to classify it.
can you give us some specifics? amount of data written, time elapsed, etc?
its hardly helping to come to some sort of understanding when all you say is : there was a failure.
where, when, how, under what conditions? after what duration?

Amount of data written is easy to calculate given the posted times and fixed data rates

My first post in regards to this test lists exactly the starting time of the test.

Where : 70 degree F basement (mine)
When : see above
How : Kernel module that I wrote
Conditions : All drives are written the exact same data at the exact same time, the data is random with high entropy.
Duration : see posted times above

So post the text from smartctl instead of a screenshot.

What program are you using to do the test on the SSDs? If it is not open source, what has been done to debug and validate the program?

One that I wrote myself, its only assumptions are the RAID cards being used and the timing chip that I am using

Assuming you wrote data continuously for 24th May 2011 at 50MiB/s on Intel 510 model, then this would be translated to 61*86400*50MiB = ~251.3TB . If WA is around 1.1 like on other models from endurance test, than this is means around 2150 cycles.
Also, according to endurance model posted by Ao1: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post4861258 , if theory with recovery time proves to be right, then we should see much more cycles (it would take around 2000-2500 seconds between each page write at 50MiB/s) .
Could there be other factors that are breaking the Intel model so early (like a faulty power supply or SATA issues)? it's hard for me to believe that both models are failing so fast and so near one of each other

Yes there certainly are other factors that could cause earlier failure:
1) Intel drives are closer to ventilation than other drives.
2) Intel drives received 3% less sunlight than the other drives
3) Intel drives are connected to the leftmost power connector of the power supplies
4) The failed Intel drives have sequential serial numbers and could have been part of a bad batch

But I am continuing to check for other additional reasons for the failures.

So presumably you are either using compressible data or your SF drives are not throttled......

the data is random with high entropy and the RAID cards have no problems sustaining the write/read rates



After 12 hours of off time, the Intel drive still has in excess of 90% of sectors failed.