:On 04/04/11 14:38, Matthew Dillon wrote:
:> * Add a section describing the difference between 34nm flash and 25nm
flash
:> with regards to durability.
:
:How is that long term wear test going?
Lets see. I was running normal swapcache operation the last few months
so I haven't stressed it continuously, but now that I am testing with
swapcache's data caching enabled I expect it will be stressed a bit more.
Here is where it is to date:
9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 100 100 000
Old_age Always - 9722 (405 days)
225 Load_Cycle_Count 0x0030 200 200 000
Old_age Offline - 299917 (9.3TB)
233 Unknown_Attribute 0x0032 093 093 000 (99->93 = 6%)
Old_age Always - 0
That's 299917 x 32MB = 9.3TB, and the wear counter is down from
99% to 93%. That's a run rate of around 155TB so this particular
40GB Intel X25-V SSD is doing quite well. The manufacturer durability
guarantee is ~35TB and it's on track for 155TB or better.
It will be interesting to see what the wear looks like with one of the
new 25nm-based SSDs, but all the small ones are out of stock at the
moment and I don't want to intentionally blow away a more expensive one.
When I see the cheaper ones back in stock I'll buy one and start messing
with it.
My last order was getting a bunch of Crucial SSD C300 64GB's, in order
to test SATA-III, but I think those use the 34nm flash technology. The
newer Crucial M4's (and Intel 510 series) use the 25nm technology but
the ones currently in stock seem rather expensive.
-Matt
Matthew Dillon
<[email protected]>
