Samsung 840 Day 14.5ish
Drive Hours: 344
ASU GiB Written: 123,784.38
Avg MB/s: 105.20 (37.63 hours)
MD5: OK
Wear Leveling Count (B1): 990 raw (1 normalized)
Reallocated blocks (B3,05): 0 (0 sectors)
Failure count (B5, B6): 0 program, 0 erase
Uncorrectable Error Count: 0
ECC Error Rate (C3): 0
Last edited by canthearu; 11-30-2012 at 03:27 PM.
Samsung 840 Day 19
Drive Hours: 454
ASU GiB Written: 164,332.41
Avg MB/s: 104.97 (147.59 hours)
MD5: OK
Wear Leveling Count (B1): 1315 raw (1 normalized)
Reallocated blocks (B3,05): 0 (0 sectors)
Failure count (B5, B6): 0 program, 0 erase
Uncorrectable Error Count: 0
ECC Error Rate (C3): 0
I may be here for a while with this drive .... damn samsung and their conservative engineering
At least the drive wasn't rated on the ragged edge of its true endurance.
If Samsung 840 survives past 5000 cycles, then it will be a true wonder.
Samsung 840 Day 25
Drive Hours: 599
ASU GiB Written: 217,131.14
Avg MB/s: 104.45 (292.10 hours)
MD5: OK
Wear Leveling Count (B1): 1737 raw (1 normalized)
Reallocated blocks (B3,05): 0 (0 sectors)
Failure count (B5, B6): 0 program, 0 erase
Uncorrectable Error Count: 0
ECC Error Rate (C3): 0
Speed Slowly Dropping it seems.
I'm going to assume you OP'ed the drive at least the amount suggested by Samsung Magician v3.2.Originally Posted by canthearu
Have you been running the Magician Performance Optimization occasionaly?
This does GC and manual TRIM and will/could improve read and write performance.
Just a suggestion.
Nope, no over-provisioning nor explicit performance optimisation ... but it isn't really required on a drive with working TRIM.
These things help most on drives that are have demanding 4kb I/O loads on near full drives, and virtually no difference on desktop loads (ASU included, as it runs a desktop type load pattern) with working TRIM.
Samsung 840 Day 38
Drive Hours: 904
ASU GiB Written: 327,768.56
Avg MB/s: 103.00 (237.01 hours)
MD5: OK
Wear Leveling Count (B1): 2626 raw (1 normalized)
Reallocated blocks (B3,05): 0 (0 sectors)
Failure count (B5, B6): 0 program, 0 erase
Uncorrectable Error Count: 0
ECC Error Rate (C3): 0
Samsung 840 Day 47
Drive Hours: 1116
ASU GiB Written: 403,139.61 (393.69 TiB)
Avg MB/s: 101.97 (449.63 hours)
MD5: OK
Wear Leveling Count (B1): 3232 raw (1 normalized)
Reallocated blocks (B3,05): 12 (99 normalized)
Failure count (B5, B6): 0 program, 0 erase
Uncorrectable Error Count: 0
ECC Error Rate (C3): 0
Looks like the wear is starting to show. Looks like the drive is retiring blocks without being an explicit erase or program failure (possibly excessive raw BER from worn cells). Will be interesting how much wear it can take.
However, it seems to have beat the Vertex 4 at endurance testing.
Hi guys,
Your tests are very interesting and quite useful for the community, so keep up the good work!
I've noticed that the average speed od the 830 is around 300 MB/s, and for the 840 around 100 MB/s. How is this average speed defined? Is it an average of the read and write? Why is it so much lower for the 840? Does this speed reflect the steady state performance in a proper way?
One more thing, how full are your SSDs during these tests? Do you fill them up entirely and then delete them entirely, or?
I'll be following closely to see what happens with the 840...
Thanks!
The 830 is a MLC drive with 256GiB of NAND onboard.
The 840 (not 840 pro) is a TLC drive with 128GiB of NAND onboard.
The 830 has twice as many NAND chips that can be working, as well as a less complex programming procedure ... so it can be programmed quicker, and can handle more wear before failing.
The speeds generally reflect the lower end of steady state performance while under desktop loads. Real world desktop loads should be better because it isn't constant.
Server loads are a completely different matter and server loads generally have a much higher write amplification then these endurance tests. Hence steady state will be slower and more quickly wear the drive out.
The settings for the test are in the initial post for the 840 test.
The 840 has done pretty well in regards to endurance. As far as I can tell, the 840 is a perfectly adequate desktop drive, but perhaps a bit expensive for what you get right now.
Other TLC based drives may not be as lucky, as Samsung is currently the best at this endurance business. Will have to evaluate other TLC based drives if they ever come out.
Samsung 840 Day 51
Drive Hours: 1216
ASU GiB Written: 437,361.39 (427.11 TiB)
Avg MB/s: 101.10 (549.80 hours)
MD5: OK
Wear Leveling Count (B1): 3508 raw (1 normalized)
Reallocated blocks (B3,05): 405 (86 normalized)
Failure count (B5, B6): 0 program, 0 erase
Uncorrectable Error Count: 0
ECC Error Rate (C3): 0
Wear is accelerating ... it won't be long now!
Samsung 840 - FINAL REPORT - DEAD - As of Day 52
Drive Hours: 1235
ASU GiB Written (APPROX): 443,309.73 (432.92 TiB)
Avg MB/s (APPROX): 101.10
MD5: OK
Wear Leveling Count (B1): 3556 raw (1 normalized)
Reallocated blocks (B3,05): 659 (79 normalized)
Failure count (B5, B6): 0 program, 0 erase
Uncorrectable Error Count: 0
ECC Error Rate (C3): 0
Drive is dead and does not respond to anything anymore.
The main concerning thing is that the drive said it did not trigger any smart warnings before dieing! I was not able to get any useful screenshots from ASU or crystaldiskinfo after the drive died (as neither would paint their windows trying to access the drive)
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks