SSD Write Endurance 25nm Vs 34nm

[bulanula]

Those specs from Intel are most likely based on 4K random, full span, which is an entirely different scenario to what is being tested here.

@ Anvil: how about a version of the endurance test that runs 4K random, full span, just to give a comparison to what is being tested here? I’d be up for testing another SSD in that scenario.

Regarding the 710; spending $6.50/per GB when the only notable benefit is endurance is going to be a tough call regardless of application. Something that lasts that long, at that price, when SSD technology is still evolving doesn’t seem to make any sense at all.

That is what I was thinking all along. Companies are not stupid. They would not want to underestimate their products so badly. What we are doing here is just dumping a load of sequential data onto the SSD in a precise pattern. 4K random is totally different and much more stressing. As is secure erasing, which nobody thought would be good to test etc.

Just put one of these MLC 25nm drives like the Intel 320 into an enterprise server environment and see how long it really lasts. I bet it would be pretty close to the 30TB Intel specify it to last etc. and NOT 300TB that our tests have shown otherwise why would anyone buy SLC drives. Or think about cache drives. Why would Intel use SLC 34nm in the Larsen Creek if MLC was so good as we have shown here in these tests ? Does not make sense to me. Maybe I just don't get it but I think Ao1 is thinking the same thing.

Sure, our test is good for the "average" user at home that stores static data and mostly transfers sequentially but this cannot compare to enterprise usage with no static data and where all the drive capacity is used 24/7 for caching or similar 4K random intensive tasks. Hence, Intel's rating difference to what we saw here.