I whish to have also the tests for non enterprise SSDs.
These drives are not meant for the mass consumer, but enthusiasts like to try, or at least know how enterprise hardware performs on common PCs.
And is not the same to have "an opinion", even if valid, that actually knowing the experimental data.
Somebody will answer that, obviously, enterprise SSDs have different performance and workload targets, but that is no reason to discard consumer tests.
There is a big difference between actually knowing how they work, and just making an educated guess.
Also, enterprise users need to know how common hardware performs on server environments, because sometimes is cost effective to use common hardware for enterprise. For example, Google used lots of common hardware on his servers, and that gave him a large advantage over older companies, with larger budgets.
Also, server hardware tends to have large validation and life cycles, and that means that it tends to have obsolete hardware. Sometimes is reasonable to use cheaper hardware, which can fail, but also has lower costs of replacement, or other benefits.
Agreed. Also, as prices drop SSDs will be making their way onto client OS VM servers; and those will mostly see amped up versions of client workloads on them.
You say that, but I recently picked up two 800GB Intel DC S3500 SSDs for use in my desktop, since they were near enough to the 960-1TB consumer drives, but brought me the nice benefit of full power-loss protection, higher performance than the Crucal M500/M550/M600/MX200 (though I doubt i'll ever notice it), and at $300 each, were really not that far from the $275 I've seen the 960GB M500 go down to.
Any idea what those ridicluously large caps on the PCB are for? I would hope for better unexpected power failure recovery -- but didn't see anything in the article touting that as a feature.
Your conclusion is based on the manufacturer's reported reliability rating, but you never tested it. Who's to say if this drive actually is more durable than it's competition? Or even a cheap consumer drive?
I know that testing this would be impractical, but it's difficult to judge hardware based solely on the manufacturer's claims.
The endurance rating is basically the warranty for the drive, so it's a quite practical measure. If the drive fails before exceeding the rating, then you are eligible for replacements.
It's a bit pointless to have a warranty on DC hardware if you have to send in your broken drive to get a replacement, since you're supposed to destroy it.
I'm not sure how exactly enterprise warranties work, but I would expect them to be more flexible given that the customers often do business worth of at least hundreds of thousands of dollars. Besides, with encryption the data is safe even when sent to the manufacturer.
The problem with evaluating endurance, especially on enterprise drives, is that by the time we have any useful data to show the drives are already obsolete. A sample size of one isn't enough either for any statistical analysis, so to really test endurance in real world we would need our own mini data center with hundreds of drives to get sufficient amount of data.
In 4KB IOPS category, Samsung beats against most of its competitors and I am surprised no SSD delivers the speed in category 4KB read and writes as this company with this price range. Any body has a reasonable answer. I am not sure whether in house design and manufacturing of components made it possible for Samsung to achieve the difference.
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
Oyster - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link
Maybe I missed it, but warranty information?twizzlebizzle22 - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link
Would there be warrenty information available for the same reason price wasn't?My question is how longevity is affected from 1-2 DWPD
Rekkx - Wednesday, July 22, 2015 - link
5 year or NAND wear out, whichever comes first.marraco - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link
I whish to have also the tests for non enterprise SSDs.These drives are not meant for the mass consumer, but enthusiasts like to try, or at least know how enterprise hardware performs on common PCs.
And is not the same to have "an opinion", even if valid, that actually knowing the experimental data.
Somebody will answer that, obviously, enterprise SSDs have different performance and workload targets, but that is no reason to discard consumer tests.
There is a big difference between actually knowing how they work, and just making an educated guess.
Also, enterprise users need to know how common hardware performs on server environments, because sometimes is cost effective to use common hardware for enterprise.
For example, Google used lots of common hardware on his servers, and that gave him a large advantage over older companies, with larger budgets.
Also, server hardware tends to have large validation and life cycles, and that means that it tends to have obsolete hardware. Sometimes is reasonable to use cheaper hardware, which can fail, but also has lower costs of replacement, or other benefits.
DanNeely - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link
Agreed. Also, as prices drop SSDs will be making their way onto client OS VM servers; and those will mostly see amped up versions of client workloads on them.ZeDestructor - Friday, July 24, 2015 - link
You say that, but I recently picked up two 800GB Intel DC S3500 SSDs for use in my desktop, since they were near enough to the 960-1TB consumer drives, but brought me the nice benefit of full power-loss protection, higher performance than the Crucal M500/M550/M600/MX200 (though I doubt i'll ever notice it), and at $300 each, were really not that far from the $275 I've seen the 960GB M500 go down to.nils_ - Friday, July 24, 2015 - link
It's also always interesting to see if the price differential for "DC" hardware is justified or if you're just paying up for the label.otherwise - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link
Any idea what those ridicluously large caps on the PCB are for? I would hope for better unexpected power failure recovery -- but didn't see anything in the article touting that as a feature.extide - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link
Yes that's what they are for, it mentions it on the first page.Flunk - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link
Your conclusion is based on the manufacturer's reported reliability rating, but you never tested it. Who's to say if this drive actually is more durable than it's competition? Or even a cheap consumer drive?I know that testing this would be impractical, but it's difficult to judge hardware based solely on the manufacturer's claims.
Kristian Vättö - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - link
The endurance rating is basically the warranty for the drive, so it's a quite practical measure. If the drive fails before exceeding the rating, then you are eligible for replacements.nils_ - Friday, July 24, 2015 - link
It's a bit pointless to have a warranty on DC hardware if you have to send in your broken drive to get a replacement, since you're supposed to destroy it.Kristian Vättö - Sunday, July 26, 2015 - link
I'm not sure how exactly enterprise warranties work, but I would expect them to be more flexible given that the customers often do business worth of at least hundreds of thousands of dollars. Besides, with encryption the data is safe even when sent to the manufacturer.toyotabedzrock - Wednesday, July 22, 2015 - link
The 845dc pro was not in the mixed workload.Rekkx - Wednesday, July 22, 2015 - link
The problem with the Samsung 845DC (EVO and Pro) is that it is already EOL.andjohn2000 - Wednesday, July 22, 2015 - link
Micron SSD is not reliable and can easily corrupt the dataZeDestructor - Friday, July 24, 2015 - link
Source? Cause I've seen nothing that indicates they're any better or worse than the comnpetition.ZeDestructor - Friday, July 24, 2015 - link
SandForce SF-2281 excepted....velanapontinha - Friday, July 24, 2015 - link
Hi, Kristian.Long time reader, here (since '98, I think), shy poster, though.
I wonder if you guys would consider evaluating real-life endurance in enterprise SSDs. Much like this:
http://blog.innovaengineering.co.uk/
Cheers,
Fernando
Kristian Vättö - Sunday, July 26, 2015 - link
The problem with evaluating endurance, especially on enterprise drives, is that by the time we have any useful data to show the drives are already obsolete. A sample size of one isn't enough either for any statistical analysis, so to really test endurance in real world we would need our own mini data center with hundreds of drives to get sufficient amount of data.boe - Saturday, July 25, 2015 - link
Bring on the 10TB SSDs. The 512GB-2TB models have lost all interest for me.thulasiram.valleru - Monday, August 10, 2015 - link
In 4KB IOPS category, Samsung beats against most of its competitors and I am surprised no SSD delivers the speed in category 4KB read and writes as this company with this price range. Any body has a reasonable answer. I am not sure whether in house design and manufacturing of components made it possible for Samsung to achieve the difference.