Retention errors are caused by charge leakage over time from a flash cell. It varies and at this point I assume all SSD controllers implement strategies and algorithms to reduce this source of errors (cannot eliminate it, as a NAND cell will eventually leak current back to a 0 state, it just takes a very long time). Also all modern SSD controllers do flash correct and refresh (FCR reads out the page, corrects any errors and then refreshes the page).
BTW I pulled this out of a white paper on flash memory retention and error correction strategies.
Also as the number of writes to a cell accumulate over time, it's retention ability also drops off. Which is one thing you don't see tested in SSD endurance benchmarks/tests. A 1TB SSD might have 1000 P/E cycles on it and after the first program cycle it might retain the data for a year, with zero FCR or anything else done to preserve the data in the cells. By P/E cycle 980 it might be storing that data for a month. It might start accumulating some correctable page errors around 1080, but it might also be down to only a couple of weeks of retaining its memory.
Temperature also has an impact on retention age. At 20C the 1080 day error retention equivalent at 70C is 94 hours, basically 4 days. So if you left a NAND flash cell at 70C, it would "age" equivalent to almost 3 years at room temperature. DO NOT STORE NAND FLASH IN A HOT LOCATION. The table I found in the white paper lists the aging factor based on temperature which is derived from Arrhenius' Law.
So a hot car might "kill" the data on an SSD in a couple of months, compared to room temperature storage that might take a few years. At 50C the aging factor is 27.5. At 60C it is 90.2. Up at 90C it is 2143.6.
By a consequence, storing it at very low temperatures will give you a fractional aging factor.
Also to cut to the chase, from what I could find in the article, 2xnm NAND flash has roughly a 1 year retention age, impacted somewhat by the different ECC and error correction strategies implemented by the controller. The white paper gets in to deep details, but I can't suss out if that 1 year retention is at P/E cycles = 1, or at the maximum. With this 2xnm NAND flash the white paper looked at raw error rates related to retention age and found the difference between P/E = 1 and P/E = 5000 as about 20-40x (scale of graph is hard to see on the low end of P/E cycles) higher raw error rate of P/E = 5000. Down around P/E = 1000 it was more like only 3-5x higher than P/E = 0.
TLC is going to be worse than MLC which is going to be worse than SLC. Of course, the endurance rating is also different between them, which probably takes some of that in to account as well. There is also a difference between slow and fast leakage cells. It is possible "archival" SD cards and such are made with slow leakage cells which might have a much longer endurance.
Extremely long story executive summary at the end (cause I am a jerk), NAND flash sucks for long term cold archival, unless you are storing it COLD. Probably not too many people put some stuff on an SSD and then walk away and not come back till 10 years later, or even a year later. An archival SSD/flash memory card is also probably not going to sit on a shelf for a year plus without every being accessed, data added, whatever.
Modern SSD controllers (and possibly SD/uSD card controllers) also employ strategies to refresh the cells periodically so they don't "age out".
DO NOT STORE FLASH BASED DEVICES IN A HOT CAR. A black SSD, phone, flash card, etc. stored in a car, with the windows up with the sun beating down on the device can easily hit or exceed 70C. A couple of days of sitting in the sun like that could easily cause significant data corruption.
Also PS, that 1 year data retention thing, might not be universal across the board, that just seems to be the design goal and newer SSDs might be better or worse than that (smaller cells are going to lose charge faster, which might again be part of why the P/E endurance is lower), better controllers might be able to pull data with lower error rates with more decayed cells or have better ECC strategies. Also once that 1 year is exceed, it doesn't mean all of the data is gone, just that statistically you are likely to start encountering some uncorrectable errors. It might just be 1 error that is uncorrectable across the entire disk, but that is data lost and the uncorrectable errors are going to start skyrocketing.
Maybe not SSDs; but as they've gotten larger I've seen people using thumb drives for backup instead of USB HDDs. That's going to be a mostly stale set of data and in many cases will only be infrequently powered even if the controller in it is smart enough to refresh the data.
About the one year's data retention is that according to JEDEC specs it should be able to hold data for one year (under specific conditions and for client SSDs, not enterprise drives) after using all of its specified P/E cycles. So it's after it's used those 1000 P/E, not before you start to use it.
Like you said a lot of drives rewrites data that is in bad shape, Silicon Motion even has a specific name for its function - StaticDataRefresh.
While smaller lithographies lose charge faster than larger lithographies everything else being equal it kind of also depends on the construction of the NAND and the controller which can make a bit of a difference.
I've actually seen one 16nm MLC drive slow down before one 15nm TLC drive did. Which may not be exactly what you would expect given that the second was at a disadvantage in terms of both type of NAND and lithography. That was under specific conditions though, most of the time the MLC one would likely hold up better.
Samsung's T3 external SSD has both: USB 3.0 and USB Type C. The included M.2 SSD is not physically compatible with desktop M.2 slots, however (for those wanting that option).
I actually love that WD includes an adapter like that. It's a nice touch for compatibility when shuffling around data.
Also happy to see they support a full SMART array, no proprietary BS preventing display of some information. Sandisk is pretty good about this, so no surprise.
Alas, this is an expensive way to shuffle around data considering laptop HDD's can hit 200MB/sec sequentially for a fraction of the price.
"WD Security allows the setting of a password (up to 25 characters) that activates the hardware encryption features on the drive."
AFAIK, unless they changed something, this unit always has hardware encryption enabled. The software allows you to set a password, but, that does NOT change the hard-coded encryption key they installed at the factory. If you swap the unit with another unit, you can't read the drive, so, if the controller dies out, kiss your data goodbye.
In other words, say you wrote a 2GB file to this unit. Take it out, and plug it into a SATA connection, you won't be able to decipher the data. If you use the security software to add a password, it does NOT re-encrypt the whole drive using your password.
I would pass on all these hard-coded encryption key units.
Yes, that likely explains why setting / removing the password has no effect on the performance.
The hardcoded encryption key is probably good enough for mainstream users. Btw, I believe the actual encryption key is a combination of the user password and the hardcoded one.
That wouldn't make sense as data already on the drive would need to be re-encrypted. Much more likely it's just a simple password that, if set, is required to enable the controller to use the hardcoded key.
It's not a 'hard coded' key, just a randomly generated one at initialization. One key is used to encrypt the partition that stores block allocations, and another that encrypts blocks on write. Because the blocks need to be manipulated and encoded before write anyway (to minimise sillyness like all bits in a block being '1') encrypting it at the same time is close to 'free'. Encrypting also gives a nicely high-entropy output so can substitute another stage intended to give high entropy data.
This is why a the "SSDs don't really delete your data!!!1" stores are a bit of bunk: If you grab the raw NAND chips and read them back, you get a randomly arranged assembly of blocks of encrypted data. Deleted or not, you're not recovering anything without the key.
Whoops, didn't mean to hit submit yet. The passcode you enter in the drive is just to lock drive controller, and acts similarly to the ATA password of old in that without it the drive controller won't do what you tell it to (and the drive controller holds the actual keys).
Wish you had a Corsair GTX in there for comparison instead of the GS
I'd rather see only "Bootable" USB drives with Trim/GC compared
A direct comparison of Windows Boot Times and a 100GB copy/paste from and to the same SSD to test internal throughput would tell me everything I need to know
I'd love to see the Passport Wireless version of this. While I'm not certain if it would improve the battery life, I think it could withstand physically abuse better than the mechanical drive. Portable devices should move to Flash storage instead of keep using mechnical drive.
Hmmm... the WD is easily on the bottom end for performance. The thermal throttling should be a concern as that seems to be a major cause for its performance loss.
Either the M2 they built is not well done or the VERY nice external case (which is the same style as their external HDD-drives) doesn't remove heat from the M2 SSD. Looking at the other units, even the G-drive run a lot cooler, with Samsung among the coolest.
What is there to recommend on this product, other than its looks? It will sell well of course.
It's a nice drive. The black plastic feels and looks cheap but one screw is all it takes to crack it open. Uses a m.2 drive that's just 2 sided taped down. Easy to pop out and put it in a Mobo's m.2 slot and 550/540 so not to bad. The issue is with the controller on the m.2 to USB interface. But on sale this is a nice source or a cheap 1tb m.2 drive. I'll check the USB to m.2 board with a NVME drive to see how much it slows that down. But it's a nice drive and is much better then the Samsung that uses a junk msata drive and the SanDisk that uses. Normal sata drive in a small enclosure. And I will confirm the drive in the WD is a SanDisk and works in a Mobo m.2 slot without doing anything extra. And for those why want to do the swap. There are 2 small 2 sided tape squares
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
22 Comments
Back to Article
StevoLincolnite - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
Really not interested in SSD's for mass storage. Not until they are affordable at 4~ Terabytes or larger.Anyone know what they are like for archival purposes verses a mechanical disk?
azazel1024 - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
Retention errors are caused by charge leakage over time from a flash cell. It varies and at this point I assume all SSD controllers implement strategies and algorithms to reduce this source of errors (cannot eliminate it, as a NAND cell will eventually leak current back to a 0 state, it just takes a very long time). Also all modern SSD controllers do flash correct and refresh (FCR reads out the page, corrects any errors and then refreshes the page).BTW I pulled this out of a white paper on flash memory retention and error correction strategies.
Also as the number of writes to a cell accumulate over time, it's retention ability also drops off. Which is one thing you don't see tested in SSD endurance benchmarks/tests. A 1TB SSD might have 1000 P/E cycles on it and after the first program cycle it might retain the data for a year, with zero FCR or anything else done to preserve the data in the cells. By P/E cycle 980 it might be storing that data for a month. It might start accumulating some correctable page errors around 1080, but it might also be down to only a couple of weeks of retaining its memory.
Temperature also has an impact on retention age. At 20C the 1080 day error retention equivalent at 70C is 94 hours, basically 4 days. So if you left a NAND flash cell at 70C, it would "age" equivalent to almost 3 years at room temperature. DO NOT STORE NAND FLASH IN A HOT LOCATION. The table I found in the white paper lists the aging factor based on temperature which is derived from Arrhenius' Law.
So a hot car might "kill" the data on an SSD in a couple of months, compared to room temperature storage that might take a few years. At 50C the aging factor is 27.5. At 60C it is 90.2. Up at 90C it is 2143.6.
By a consequence, storing it at very low temperatures will give you a fractional aging factor.
Also to cut to the chase, from what I could find in the article, 2xnm NAND flash has roughly a 1 year retention age, impacted somewhat by the different ECC and error correction strategies implemented by the controller. The white paper gets in to deep details, but I can't suss out if that 1 year retention is at P/E cycles = 1, or at the maximum. With this 2xnm NAND flash the white paper looked at raw error rates related to retention age and found the difference between P/E = 1 and P/E = 5000 as about 20-40x (scale of graph is hard to see on the low end of P/E cycles) higher raw error rate of P/E = 5000. Down around P/E = 1000 it was more like only 3-5x higher than P/E = 0.
TLC is going to be worse than MLC which is going to be worse than SLC. Of course, the endurance rating is also different between them, which probably takes some of that in to account as well. There is also a difference between slow and fast leakage cells. It is possible "archival" SD cards and such are made with slow leakage cells which might have a much longer endurance.
Extremely long story executive summary at the end (cause I am a jerk), NAND flash sucks for long term cold archival, unless you are storing it COLD. Probably not too many people put some stuff on an SSD and then walk away and not come back till 10 years later, or even a year later. An archival SSD/flash memory card is also probably not going to sit on a shelf for a year plus without every being accessed, data added, whatever.
Modern SSD controllers (and possibly SD/uSD card controllers) also employ strategies to refresh the cells periodically so they don't "age out".
DO NOT STORE FLASH BASED DEVICES IN A HOT CAR. A black SSD, phone, flash card, etc. stored in a car, with the windows up with the sun beating down on the device can easily hit or exceed 70C. A couple of days of sitting in the sun like that could easily cause significant data corruption.
Also PS, that 1 year data retention thing, might not be universal across the board, that just seems to be the design goal and newer SSDs might be better or worse than that (smaller cells are going to lose charge faster, which might again be part of why the P/E endurance is lower), better controllers might be able to pull data with lower error rates with more decayed cells or have better ECC strategies. Also once that 1 year is exceed, it doesn't mean all of the data is gone, just that statistically you are likely to start encountering some uncorrectable errors. It might just be 1 error that is uncorrectable across the entire disk, but that is data lost and the uncorrectable errors are going to start skyrocketing.
DanNeely - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
Maybe not SSDs; but as they've gotten larger I've seen people using thumb drives for backup instead of USB HDDs. That's going to be a mostly stale set of data and in many cases will only be infrequently powered even if the controller in it is smart enough to refresh the data.Glaring_Mistake - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
About the one year's data retention is that according to JEDEC specs it should be able to hold data for one year (under specific conditions and for client SSDs, not enterprise drives) after using all of its specified P/E cycles.So it's after it's used those 1000 P/E, not before you start to use it.
Anandtech had a pretty good explanation of how it works here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/9248/the-truth-about...
Like you said a lot of drives rewrites data that is in bad shape, Silicon Motion even has a specific name for its function - StaticDataRefresh.
While smaller lithographies lose charge faster than larger lithographies everything else being equal it kind of also depends on the construction of the NAND and the controller which can make a bit of a difference.
I've actually seen one 16nm MLC drive slow down before one 15nm TLC drive did.
Which may not be exactly what you would expect given that the second was at a disadvantage in terms of both type of NAND and lithography.
That was under specific conditions though, most of the time the MLC one would likely hold up better.
Xajel - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
Damn it's looks very good, but doesn't perform very good.. I hope some company will release similar designed enclosure with Type-C connectivity.vailr - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
Samsung's T3 external SSD has both: USB 3.0 and USB Type C. The included M.2 SSD is not physically compatible with desktop M.2 slots, however (for those wanting that option).LordConrad - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
The Samsung T3 external SSD is not M.2, it is a mSATA drive inside the external case.Samus - Thursday, June 29, 2017 - link
I actually love that WD includes an adapter like that. It's a nice touch for compatibility when shuffling around data.Also happy to see they support a full SMART array, no proprietary BS preventing display of some information. Sandisk is pretty good about this, so no surprise.
Alas, this is an expensive way to shuffle around data considering laptop HDD's can hit 200MB/sec sequentially for a fraction of the price.
VulkanMan - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
"WD Security allows the setting of a password (up to 25 characters) that activates the hardware encryption features on the drive."AFAIK, unless they changed something, this unit always has hardware encryption enabled.
The software allows you to set a password, but, that does NOT change the hard-coded encryption key they installed at the factory.
If you swap the unit with another unit, you can't read the drive, so, if the controller dies out, kiss your data goodbye.
In other words, say you wrote a 2GB file to this unit. Take it out, and plug it into a SATA connection, you won't be able to decipher the data.
If you use the security software to add a password, it does NOT re-encrypt the whole drive using your password.
I would pass on all these hard-coded encryption key units.
ganeshts - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
Yes, that likely explains why setting / removing the password has no effect on the performance.The hardcoded encryption key is probably good enough for mainstream users. Btw, I believe the actual encryption key is a combination of the user password and the hardcoded one.
Huacanacha - Wednesday, June 28, 2017 - link
That wouldn't make sense as data already on the drive would need to be re-encrypted. Much more likely it's just a simple password that, if set, is required to enable the controller to use the hardcoded key.edzieba - Thursday, June 29, 2017 - link
It's not a 'hard coded' key, just a randomly generated one at initialization. One key is used to encrypt the partition that stores block allocations, and another that encrypts blocks on write. Because the blocks need to be manipulated and encoded before write anyway (to minimise sillyness like all bits in a block being '1') encrypting it at the same time is close to 'free'. Encrypting also gives a nicely high-entropy output so can substitute another stage intended to give high entropy data.This is why a the "SSDs don't really delete your data!!!1" stores are a bit of bunk: If you grab the raw NAND chips and read them back, you get a randomly arranged assembly of blocks of encrypted data. Deleted or not, you're not recovering anything without the key.
edzieba - Thursday, June 29, 2017 - link
Whoops, didn't mean to hit submit yet. The passcode you enter in the drive is just to lock drive controller, and acts similarly to the ATA password of old in that without it the drive controller won't do what you tell it to (and the drive controller holds the actual keys).VulkanMan - Thursday, June 29, 2017 - link
It IS hard coded, you can't change the encryption key on the device.It is set at the factory, and yes, it is randomly generated (well, so we think).
Bullwinkle J Moose - Thursday, June 29, 2017 - link
Wish you had a Corsair GTX in there for comparison instead of the GSI'd rather see only "Bootable" USB drives with Trim/GC compared
A direct comparison of Windows Boot Times and a 100GB copy/paste from and to the same SSD to test internal throughput would tell me everything I need to know
Synthetic tests have no place in the real world!
mr_tawan - Thursday, June 29, 2017 - link
I'd love to see the Passport Wireless version of this. While I'm not certain if it would improve the battery life, I think it could withstand physically abuse better than the mechanical drive. Portable devices should move to Flash storage instead of keep using mechnical drive.jaydee - Thursday, June 29, 2017 - link
"Catering to the mainstream market, it is currently a Best Buy exclusive."Catering to the mainstream market and NOT available on Amazon? Really?
jhoff80 - Thursday, June 29, 2017 - link
Maybe I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that a USB-A male to USB-C female adapter was very much forbidden by the USB-C spec.BMNify - Thursday, June 29, 2017 - link
Anyone can compare this and the ADATA SE730?Belard - Sunday, July 9, 2017 - link
Hmmm... the WD is easily on the bottom end for performance. The thermal throttling should be a concern as that seems to be a major cause for its performance loss.Either the M2 they built is not well done or the VERY nice external case (which is the same style as their external HDD-drives) doesn't remove heat from the M2 SSD. Looking at the other units, even the G-drive run a lot cooler, with Samsung among the coolest.
What is there to recommend on this product, other than its looks? It will sell well of course.
bignazpwns - Saturday, July 15, 2017 - link
It's a nice drive. The black plastic feels and looks cheap but one screw is all it takes to crack it open. Uses a m.2 drive that's just 2 sided taped down. Easy to pop out and put it in a Mobo's m.2 slot and 550/540 so not to bad. The issue is with the controller on the m.2 to USB interface. But on sale this is a nice source or a cheap 1tb m.2 drive. I'll check the USB to m.2 board with a NVME drive to see how much it slows that down. But it's a nice drive and is much better then the Samsung that uses a junk msata drive and the SanDisk that uses. Normal sata drive in a small enclosure. And I will confirm the drive in the WD is a SanDisk and works in a Mobo m.2 slot without doing anything extra. And for those why want to do the swap. There are 2 small 2 sided tape squaresNathanks - Tuesday, July 10, 2018 - link
Can you do the review again with current intel 8th gen board with usb 3.1 gen -2 i believe old board is limited to gen 1. which is 5gbps