Computers & Hardware > PC Hardware

The SSD Write Endurance test results are in: Updated for 850 EVO/PRO

(1/13) > >>

snadge:
this is from an experiment thats been ongoing a couple of years now

results: (all are MLC drives except the Samsung 840 EVO which is a TLC drive and thus has less endurance)

1) Samsung 840 Pro = 2400Tb
2) Kingston Hyper X 3K = 2100Tb *
3) Corsair Neutron GTX = 1200Tb
4) Kingston Hyper X 3K = 900Tb
5) Samsung 840 EVO = 800Tb

* see article for more info, they used two of these drives as they have special write compression to increase endurance (I dont know how this affects write performance though) so they used two, one normally and one in a manner that the made write compression was useless/inactive which would probably be the one that ended beneath the other

The article does say ..."The 840 Pro was among the most well-behaved drives in the experiment. It remained free of uncorrectable errors until the very end, and it accumulated reallocated sectors at a surprisingly consistent rate." ... which shows with it also being the top performing SATA SSD...is the one too buy if you want SATA - of course you can buy NVMe, M2 and PCIE SSD's now that allow for even faster speeds

http://techreport.com/review/27909/the-ssd-endurance-experiment-theyre-all-dead

UPDATE FOR SAMSUNG 850 SERIES:
Ive managed to find 3D-NAND 850 EVO and PRO results... in a nutshell 3D NAND doubles endurance compared to 2D PLANAR (a far cry from Samsungs ten times figure)

basically:
a TLC 3D NAND drive (EVO) is good for around 2,000 P/E cycles (a 250GB drive should last on average 23 years writing at 20GB per day)
an MLC 3D NAND drive (PRO) is good for around 6,000 P/E cycles (a 256GB drive should last on average 70 years at 20GB writes per day)
Lifespan with 20GiB of Host Writes per Day with 1.5x Write Amplification

to roughly work out the life span for an EVO drive, simply DOUBLE the total capacity and change it from GB to TB and thats its ballpark lifespan
to roughly work out the life span for a PRO drive, simply times the total capacity by 6 and change it from GB to TB and thats its ballpark lifespan

over the past 2 years my AVERAGE use has been 45.45GB a day... but ive been using HIBERNATE havent I & streaming through the C:\Drive...even when i was sleeping the PC it still writes to the HIBS file (8Gb) for Hybrid Sleep - so ive disabled it, got Opera Portable installed in and running from a 1GB Ram Drive and my usage is now circa 7-15GB a day, some virus scanners such as Kaspersky like to dump a ton of writes when scanning too.. I only observed this in Kaspersky where near the end of its scan it started to dump over 10GB of writes in less than a minute so I cancelled it!

Chrysalis:
the 850 pro which I have with its 3d MLC nand should get terrific results, shame these tests take so long as by the time they finish these are not the latest models on sale.

snadge:

--- Quote from: Chrysalis on January 14, 2017, 05:07:28 PM ---shame these tests take so long as by the time they finish these are not the latest models on sale.

--- End quote ---

that was my thought exactly - I have the 850 EVO, wished I had paid more for the 850 Pro cos after 3 years Im already at 30Tb due to streaming on KODI, so I've moved the install to my HDD in the hope it will stop the fast uprise in writes

these aren't exact but rough:

year 1 4Tb
year 2 17Tb
year 3 30Tb

Im now keeping a dated a record just to keep an eye on it, if streaming is affecting it then I'm going to have to go back to good old fashioned downloads to the HDD lol

j0hn:
My OS runs on a Samsung SM951 NVME 256gb. I wish I'd waited for the Samsung 950 Pro to come out but I'm still amazed at the speed of NVME drives. Would love to see a similar test for m2 ultra drives.

Chrysalis:
1089 powered on hours so circa 3 years, didnt realise I had the 850 pro this long.

writes is at 8.26tb.

Some of the things I have done.

Created a ram disk for browser temporary files, some people dont realise but browsers generate a ton of writes, e.g. if you watch a video its written to the storage as it plays.  Every image, every page is copied to the storage.
Steam, even if you download games to a hdd it first copies the files to the default cache path which is where steam gets installed which of course defaults to c:\program files, to move that I made a ntfs link using steam mover.

I dont worry about system restore and page file.  Whilst the page file generates writes, moving that to a hdd would slow things down and of course you buy an ssd for speed.  System restore is just too important to turn off.

I usually install new games to hdd but if I later find the loading times are lacking, or maybe get stutters from i/o and I am putting hours into the game then I move it to the ssd.

With all this said tho I do think modern ssd's even consumer one's are more reliable than hdd's.  Its just that psychology that has people wrapping them in cotton wool due to the failures of early generation drives.  One issue is that when ssd's fail its not a soft fail, but it can be completely bricked and thats whats scaring people.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page