SSD Write Endurance 25nm Vs 34nm

[Christopher]

My trip got cancelled, so here's an update:
MWI just hit 10

Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 60 Update, Day 23

05 2
Retired Block Count

B1 12
Wear Range Delta

F1 217697
Host Writes

E9 167875
NAND Writes

E6 100
Life Curve

E7 10
Life Left

Average 129.71MB/s ? Avg
RST drivers, Intel DP67BG P67

533 Hours Work (23 hrs since the last update)
Time 22 days 5 hours

10GiB Minimum Free Space


EDIT
It really seems to be getting faster over time.
Three weeks ago I was pulling down ~122MBs. Now it's averaging 129 - 130MBs

[Ao1]

My trip got cancelled, so here's an update:
MWI just hit 10

Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 60 Update, Day 23

05 2
Retired Block Count

B1 12
Wear Range Delta

F1 217697
Host Writes

E9 167875
NAND Writes

E6 100
Life Curve

E7 10
Life Left

Weird. So it looks like B1 does not tell the full story. SymbiosVyse’s drive has around the same WA factor. Considering your drive has 5K P/E cycles and is 60GB the host writes to get to MWI 10 does not compare that well against SymbioVyse’s drive. If your drive has 5K P/E cycles the wear levelling factor is 1.79, which compares to 0.81 for SymbioVyse with no static data.

B1 12 (103)
Wear Range Delta

F1 217,697 (195,264) – 89%
Host Writes

E9 167,875 (146,240) - 87%
NAND Writes

Assuming 5K P/E
5,000 = (217,697) * (0.77) * (1.79) / (60)

Assuming 3K P/E
3,000 = (217,697) * (0.77) * (1.07) / (60)

EDIT

Looking at the Intel’s drives they appear to have performed slightly better than spec’d. (Although the 320 uses 25nm I believe Intel NAND spec sheets quote 5K P/E).

X25-V

5,000 = (184,934) * (1.1) * (1.0) / (40)

320
5,000 = (194,560) * (1.1) * (0.95) / (40)

It looks like SF drives are not as efficient as Intel in static data rotation, although that is offset by WA due to compression.

EDIT 2:

SF drives use spare area for wear levelling, so if you calculate SymbiosVyse's drive as 48GB instead of 40GB the wear levelling index comes out as 1, (which makes more sense than 0.81).