Samsung 64GB 2.5" SATA-II MLC Solid State Hard Drive
- Thread starter woody79
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 211
How long do these drives last?
Well TBH, nobody really knows. All you'll find is people giving out estimations.
We know that MLC flash cells can do approx 10,000 erases compaired to SLC which can do approx 100,000 erases.
Drive manufacturers are giving out Millions of hours of usage before failure.. I think with the tweaks you'll get plenty of years usage out of the drive before you can't write to it anymore. Someone said on another forum that even when you get to a point where you've run out of writes, you should still be able to read whats currently on the drive. So I wouldn't worry about data loss.
From the Be review of the Sammy 64Gb MLC:
"It remains to be seen how reliable they will be. Is the fact that the number of MLC writes is ten times less than with SLC really a problem? With an efficient wear leveling algorithm, necessary to ensure uniform usage of cells, and a cache to limit writes on the memory blocks, you can get an astonishing life span out of your MLC: Intel has announced a 5 year lifespan for its 80GB MLC SSD with 100 GB of writes per day."
We know that MLC flash cells can do approx 10,000 erases compaired to SLC which can do approx 100,000 erases.
Drive manufacturers are giving out Millions of hours of usage before failure.. I think with the tweaks you'll get plenty of years usage out of the drive before you can't write to it anymore. Someone said on another forum that even when you get to a point where you've run out of writes, you should still be able to read whats currently on the drive. So I wouldn't worry about data loss.
From the Be review of the Sammy 64Gb MLC:
"It remains to be seen how reliable they will be. Is the fact that the number of MLC writes is ten times less than with SLC really a problem? With an efficient wear leveling algorithm, necessary to ensure uniform usage of cells, and a cache to limit writes on the memory blocks, you can get an astonishing life span out of your MLC: Intel has announced a 5 year lifespan for its 80GB MLC SSD with 100 GB of writes per day."
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2007
- Posts
- 211
Right thanks for info.So these MLC drives are still a good deal even though the SLC drives were going for about the same a few weeks back.I guess the company were selling the SLC drives at a big loss?
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
LeJimster, are there any other reviews you've seen of the drive as frankly, the numbers seem odd. THe io numbers, while obviously not the same test file as Tonyocz uses, the raptor should be far worse than all but the worst jmicron ssd's shouldn't it under random reading, thats the ssd(even the poor ones) strength compared to a normal drive, even a raptor with not as bad access. Also the mlc sequential reads seem completely odd aswell, I was thinking the random writes could be down to the misallignment problem somewhat, and maybe some other things.
Just noticed more posts I hadn't seen on the last page, I still can't decide what to do, not helped by the fact that a review of the vertex drives says the rrp will be $199 on the 60gb vertex(while they are currently priced at the $249 originally planned) meaning the 60gb version should take a £40 drop, the 30gb will hopefully take a drop also but no idea when
On their forums one of their guys said theres definately room for drops when asked about it, as nand prices are crashing. So i'm wondering if in not to long 60gb mlc's in general from everyone will be dropping in price. grrr, stupid recession, if it wasn't on I'd know the prices wouldn't drop anytime soon and at least I could make a decision
Just noticed more posts I hadn't seen on the last page, I still can't decide what to do, not helped by the fact that a review of the vertex drives says the rrp will be $199 on the 60gb vertex(while they are currently priced at the $249 originally planned) meaning the 60gb version should take a £40 drop, the 30gb will hopefully take a drop also but no idea when
On their forums one of their guys said theres definately room for drops when asked about it, as nand prices are crashing. So i'm wondering if in not to long 60gb mlc's in general from everyone will be dropping in price. grrr, stupid recession, if it wasn't on I'd know the prices wouldn't drop anytime soon and at least I could make a decision
Last edited:
The issue has been that IO's are better on spindle hdd's than consumer SSD's. The results for the Raptor aren't a suprise, i'm pretty sure its down to how it uses the cache ram because the really high I/O's is only sustained for a short burst. Jmicron SSD I/O's are terrible because of lack of cache once again.. Because of the low I/Os in some situations it was causing system stuttering when the user did too many things at once. The alignment fix helped boost random writes and improve I/O's to fix this issue for a lot of people.
The Intel, Samsung and OCZ Vertex drives all have cache which is used in part to boost I/O's.
Eitherway, prices are going to drop thats for sure, at the current rate SSD's are going to be really affordable in the next 12 months. I'm not really sure how the recession is going to affect things if at all? Prices seem to continue to drop regardless.
The Intel, Samsung and OCZ Vertex drives all have cache which is used in part to boost I/O's.
Eitherway, prices are going to drop thats for sure, at the current rate SSD's are going to be really affordable in the next 12 months. I'm not really sure how the recession is going to affect things if at all? Prices seem to continue to drop regardless.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
that I get for sure, but the vertex with cache, basically obliterates the raptor in terms of io, it really doesn't slow down that much under random writes at all, it slows some but, well this isn't the best example but http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=51380&page=3
the i/o numbers in the review are incomparable because i have no idea what the test parameters are, but frankly in the ocz thread that raptor and I think theres more in that thread using the same parameters as the vertex and other drives, it at no stage comes close in any situation, in sequential it doesn't come close in performance, and under random writes the vertex barely slows down, even the other slower ssd's don't seem to slow down that badly. I just can't see any situation where the raptor should win at all basically. for random read or writes the access latency should basically keep it way about the raptor with ease.
Maybe he's got everything misalligned so access latency is taking a huge hit under certain circumstances, i really don't know, but the numbers just don't seem to make sense.
I dunno, I think the more I'm reading the more I'm wondering why the Samsung doesn't do better in that review because, its not far off a vertex in terms of specs, cache, arm cpu controller(which is likely very similar). now the vertex's initially had huge write speeds and not so go i/o throughput, but was tweaked for massive i/o and circa 100mb/s writes, so I'm wondering why the samsung drive has low writes, a controller/cpu with enough power and cache but seems to get no where near a Raptor, where a vertex trashes, utterly trashes a Raptor.
Like I said, would be nice if anandtech or someone a bit bigger was doing some better reviews of the drives.
bah, theres tonnes of reviews, dating back two years all for what is called samsung 64gb drives, none of which list the specs(cache or not) most of which don't have part numbers, those that do indicate older drives with part numbers they don't use anymore, generally tested on laptops or old computers without any tweaking. You'd think they could sell a lot more if they could get someone to review the little blighters properly.
the i/o numbers in the review are incomparable because i have no idea what the test parameters are, but frankly in the ocz thread that raptor and I think theres more in that thread using the same parameters as the vertex and other drives, it at no stage comes close in any situation, in sequential it doesn't come close in performance, and under random writes the vertex barely slows down, even the other slower ssd's don't seem to slow down that badly. I just can't see any situation where the raptor should win at all basically. for random read or writes the access latency should basically keep it way about the raptor with ease.
Maybe he's got everything misalligned so access latency is taking a huge hit under certain circumstances, i really don't know, but the numbers just don't seem to make sense.
I dunno, I think the more I'm reading the more I'm wondering why the Samsung doesn't do better in that review because, its not far off a vertex in terms of specs, cache, arm cpu controller(which is likely very similar). now the vertex's initially had huge write speeds and not so go i/o throughput, but was tweaked for massive i/o and circa 100mb/s writes, so I'm wondering why the samsung drive has low writes, a controller/cpu with enough power and cache but seems to get no where near a Raptor, where a vertex trashes, utterly trashes a Raptor.
Like I said, would be nice if anandtech or someone a bit bigger was doing some better reviews of the drives.
bah, theres tonnes of reviews, dating back two years all for what is called samsung 64gb drives, none of which list the specs(cache or not) most of which don't have part numbers, those that do indicate older drives with part numbers they don't use anymore, generally tested on laptops or old computers without any tweaking. You'd think they could sell a lot more if they could get someone to review the little blighters properly.
Last edited:
sure, the specs are similar in terms of cache but I think you are overlooking the role of the controller and firmware. The reason why the vertex performs so much better is because it the indillix (sp?) controller uses more channels. The firmware can make a big difference too. Tony initially showed us a firmware that did 2500 I/O's on a 4k test. The write speed was limited to 80mb/sec. The actual release has faster writes with the same I/o's. Now he's telling us they're working on a firmware that should boost the writes by 50% while maintaining the same I/o performance. So as u can see it's not just as simple as they both have x amount of cache. It's how it's used that makes the difference.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
yup, that I know, but thats largely whats irking me about finding info on these samsung drives. several people are getting 160mb/s read from a single drive though its rated vastly less, its using the same arm cpu which is new(ish) to the vertex which along with the cache is a large reason why the stuttering is gone.
Clearly the available specs on the samsung are wrong, i just guess i hate buying things I don't know everything about tbh. Also several sites with older drives show differing firmware versions, wondering if samsung are actively working to increase the speed on them, probs not.
I think the main thing i'm wondering is how the performance stacks up the vertex, how close it gets in what area's and then I can decide if the Vertex is the better choice or not(bearing in mind is should be dropping £40 soon).
the speed i pretty much know is higher than spec, but while i like my fast speed I get really really irritated when everything grinds to a halt in a serious multitasking situation generally opening something massive while doing a couple other things, which is whats put me off the early ocz drives as that was there massive downfall. bah, just reading to much and second guessing myself I think. YOu can certainly read to much info and too many opinions.
Clearly the available specs on the samsung are wrong, i just guess i hate buying things I don't know everything about tbh. Also several sites with older drives show differing firmware versions, wondering if samsung are actively working to increase the speed on them, probs not.
I think the main thing i'm wondering is how the performance stacks up the vertex, how close it gets in what area's and then I can decide if the Vertex is the better choice or not(bearing in mind is should be dropping £40 soon).
the speed i pretty much know is higher than spec, but while i like my fast speed I get really really irritated when everything grinds to a halt in a serious multitasking situation generally opening something massive while doing a couple other things, which is whats put me off the early ocz drives as that was there massive downfall. bah, just reading to much and second guessing myself I think. YOu can certainly read to much info and too many opinions.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 344
well, i can't comment about the performance levels of other solid state disk drives but the performance of these samsungs has prompted me to get my second one next week.
I am new to the SSD scene and did not know which drive to buy but from what i have read the samsungs offer a little less performance than other competitors such as OCZ vertex but they offer double the storage space at half the cost of another such 64GB ssd. Really i don't think that you can find a better deal on 64GB SSD's than that, if you have seen one please tell me.
All that i know though at the minute after only using that samsung mlc ssd for a day is that the disk drive never seems to get warm, it uses less power, windows xp boots and shuts down in less than a minute (by a big way), hard drive searches are practically instantaneous and i won't be going back to magnetic drives because this thing just nails them hands down.
I will be getting a second one next week and atleast one more at the end of the month (maybe one of the 128GB models, but they cost almost 3 times as much as the 64GB versions) but usually, cheap means nasty also but with these drives, i am more than impressed and consider them to be an exception to that rule if anything i would say that it's the competition that are ripping off consumers in a big way.
I'm deffinately not going back to Magnetic drives though, i tell you that much, i just want to see how long these drives last for though, that's the only thing i would keep my eyes on. I would get a pair if i were you adam1v, for £200 for 2 64GB drives, it's more or less the deal of the century (considering 2 30GB OCZ Vertex would cost around £240 and rob you of 68GB for perhaps slightly better performance).
I am new to the SSD scene and did not know which drive to buy but from what i have read the samsungs offer a little less performance than other competitors such as OCZ vertex but they offer double the storage space at half the cost of another such 64GB ssd. Really i don't think that you can find a better deal on 64GB SSD's than that, if you have seen one please tell me.
All that i know though at the minute after only using that samsung mlc ssd for a day is that the disk drive never seems to get warm, it uses less power, windows xp boots and shuts down in less than a minute (by a big way), hard drive searches are practically instantaneous and i won't be going back to magnetic drives because this thing just nails them hands down.
I will be getting a second one next week and atleast one more at the end of the month (maybe one of the 128GB models, but they cost almost 3 times as much as the 64GB versions) but usually, cheap means nasty also but with these drives, i am more than impressed and consider them to be an exception to that rule if anything i would say that it's the competition that are ripping off consumers in a big way.
I'm deffinately not going back to Magnetic drives though, i tell you that much, i just want to see how long these drives last for though, that's the only thing i would keep my eyes on. I would get a pair if i were you adam1v, for £200 for 2 64GB drives, it's more or less the deal of the century (considering 2 30GB OCZ Vertex would cost around £240 and rob you of 68GB for perhaps slightly better performance).
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 344
to be honest with you i have no idea. I only have a single 64GB ssd at the minute but that is dedicated solely to being a boot drive. I don't think that i am going to be bothering with raid tbh. My line up is going to be a 64GB SSD for the OS, a 64GB SSD for Games, a 64GB SSD for keeping a few files like drivers and programs on so that i don't have to keep arsing around with cd's/dvd's and *perhaps* a 320GB USB external HDD for storage and media sharing between my PC and my XBox 360.
i went straight for 2 in a RAID0 set up.
i dont bother with benchmarks, but i can tell you that in real world usage they have made the windows boot times/apps loading/searching very very quick and snappy. i still have a 1TB for my data.
as for stripe size, i set mine up as 128k. though there was a thread saying that a smaller size might be better, maybe someone else can comment.
i dont bother with benchmarks, but i can tell you that in real world usage they have made the windows boot times/apps loading/searching very very quick and snappy. i still have a 1TB for my data.
as for stripe size, i set mine up as 128k. though there was a thread saying that a smaller size might be better, maybe someone else can comment.
I think that has convinced me
What is the best stripe size to set in the raid0? Ive seen mixed settings in this post and im about to start a clean install shortly.
Iv'e set my stripe size to 128 for raid 0 which is the maximum i could in my bios. And as far as these SSD's go... put it this way, i will not be going back to HDD's either. I am so impressed with these Samsungs and SSD'd in general.
LeJimster posted that these SSD's should last you a good few years with the tweaks that can be done. A few years is good for me as i always upgrade with new stuff within a year
Might make a sticky with all the tweaks that can be done if there aint one already made
^^ sounds like a good idea, and im of the same opinion, my PCs never last me more than a year or two.
Where can the SSD Tweaker be downloaded from?
As I have two Samsung F1s, im also going to connect these as normal disks (non raid) will there be benefit to setting windows temp settings and page file to the F1 disks?
Where can the SSD Tweaker be downloaded from?
As I have two Samsung F1s, im also going to connect these as normal disks (non raid) will there be benefit to setting windows temp settings and page file to the F1 disks?
Can get the tweak tool from here
SSD tweak tool
Setting the temp folder to another drive will also save on writes to the SSD. Ive set my windows temp to my raptor. Got the idea from another website. Iv'e just turned my page file off.
SSD tweak tool
Setting the temp folder to another drive will also save on writes to the SSD. Ive set my windows temp to my raptor. Got the idea from another website. Iv'e just turned my page file off.
Last edited:
Can get the tweak tool from here
SSD tweak tool
Setting the temp folder to another drive will also save on writes to the SSD. Ive set my windows temp to my raptor. Got the idea from another website. Iv'e just turned my page file off.
Yeah just be aware that if you use this tool and press autotweak, it does clear page file by default which takes AGES on shutdown. So its best to re-disable after doing autotweak by clicking its box.
I know how your feeling m8 as I've been watching the SSD scene for a couple of years now and I after seeing the deal for these drives I felt like I couldn't hold off any longer.
I don't think you'll be upset with the performance you'd get with these drives. However, if you don't *need* to upgrade yet just hold off until the Vertex's or Intel drives are cheaper as they are clearly the best drives on the market right now.