The SSD Anthology: Understanding SSDs and New Drives from OCZ
by Anand Lal Shimpi on March 18, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Storage
New vs Used SSD Performance
We begin our look at how the overhead of managing pages impacts SSD performance with iometer. The table below shows iometer random write performance; there are two rows for each drive, one for “new” performance after a secure erase and one for “used” performance after the drive has been well used.
| 4KB Random Write Speed | New | "Used" |
| Intel X25-E | 31.7 MB/s | |
| Intel X25-M | 39.3 MB/s | 23.1 MB/s |
| JMicron JMF602B MLC | 0.02 MB/s | 0.02 MB/s |
| JMicron JMF602Bx2 MLC | 0.03 MB/s | 0.03 MB/s |
| OCZ Summit | 12.8 MB/s | 0.77 MB/s |
| OCZ Vertex | 8.2 MB/s | 2.41 MB/s |
| Samsung SLC | 2.61 MB/s | 0.53 MB/s |
| Seagate Momentus 5400.6 | 0.81 MB/s | - |
| Western Digital Caviar SE16 | 1.26 MB/s | - |
| Western Digital VelociRaptor | 1.63 MB/s | - |
Note that the “used” performance should be the slowest you’ll ever see the drive get. In theory, all of the pages are filled with some sort of data at this point.
All of the drives, with the exception of the JMicron based SSDs went down in performance in the “used” state. And the only reason the JMicron drive didn’t get any slower was because it is already bottlenecked elsewhere; you can’t get much slower than 0.03MB/s in this test.
These are pretty serious performance drops; the OCZ Vertex runs at nearly 1/4 the speed after it’s been used and Intel’s X25-M can only crunch through about 60% the IOs per second that it did when brand new.
So are SSDs doomed? Is performance going to tank over time and make these things worthless?
"Used" SSD performance vs. conventional hard drives.
Pay close attention to the average write latency in the graph above. While Intel’s X25-M pulls an extremely fast sub-0.3ms write latency normally, it levels off at 0.51ms in its used mode. The OCZ Vertex manages a 1.43ms new and 4.86ms used. There’s additional overhead for every write but a well designed SSD will still manage extremely low write latencies. To put things in perspective, look at these drives at their worst compared to Western Digital’s VelociRaptor.The degraded performance X25-M still completes write requests in around 1/8 the time of the VelociRaptor. Transfer speeds are still 8x higher as well.
Note that not all SSDs see their performance drop gracefully. The two Samsung based drives perform more like hard drives here, but I'll explain that tradeoff much later in this article.
How does this all translate into real world performance? I ran PCMark Vantage on the new and used Intel drive to see how performance changed.
| PCMark Overall Score | New | "Used" | % Drop |
| Intel X25-M | 11902 | 11536 | 3% |
| OCZ Summit | 10972 | 9916 | 9.6% |
| OCZ Vertex | 11253 | 9836 | 14.4% |
| Samsung SLC | 10143 | 9118 | 10.1% |
| Seagate Momentus 5400.6 | 6817 | - | - |
| Western Digital VelociRaptor | 7500 | - | - |
The real world performance hit varies from 0 - 14% depending on the drive. While the drives are still faster than a regular hard drive, performance does drop in the real world by a noticeable amount. The trim command would keep the drive’s performance closer to its peak for longer, but it would not have prevented this from happening.
| PCMark Vantage HDD Test | New | "Used" | % Drop |
| Intel X25-M | 29879 | 23252 | 22% |
| JMicron JMF602Bx2 MLC | 11613 | 11283 | 3% |
| OCZ Summit | 25754 | 16624 | 36% |
| OCZ Vertex | 20753 | 17854 | 14% |
| Samsung SLC | 17406 | 12392 | 29% |
| Seagate Momentus 5400.6 | 3525 | - | |
| Western Digital VelociRaptor | 6313 | - |
HDD specific tests show much more severe drops, ranging from 20 - 40% depending on the drive. Despite the performance drop, these drives are still much faster than even the fastest hard drives.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
250 Comments
View All Comments
GlItCh017 - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
I just wanted to comment that the backstory portion to this article is simply the most interesting part to an article (or almost even an article inside the main article). On top of that, it is easily the most interesting article I have ever read simply because of that section. Really really must say that I enjoyed reading it!radguy - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
I have been waiting for this one for a while and it was very informative. Thank you very much for it. I did pick up one of the patriot warp drives for my netbook. I was really happy until I installed avg free. So not running an antivirus on it anymore but I have drive image backup incase it goes bad. Overall pretty happy as it was only 80 bucks if I get my mir.I think I'm going to wait until windows 7 till I upgrade my primary desktop. 2 of those vertexs in raid 0 would be sweet though.
sleepeeg3 - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
They were one of the first SSDs you reviewed and they use their own controller. How does their random write performance compare to everything else out now?These reviews made me totally reassess the purchase of the two Samsungs I bought. I had no idea the random writes on the Samsung drives were so bad. Other reviews show the Samsung drives doing better or at least near the X25-M in write tests: http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/15433/6">http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/15433/6 However, those tests probably would have been somewhat sequential.
nubie - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
Grammatically awkward sentence on Page 21:"so if you own one of these drives - you owned a fixed version."
The tense is incorrect (own/owned). I think "own a fixed version" is still awkward, perhaps "you have the fixed version", also the "so" may be superfluous. You can replace the ", so if" with a "; if". Here is how I might re-write the sentence:
"The old firmware never shipped thanks to OCZ's quick acting; if you own one of these drives - you have a fixed version."
(I am not an expert, so feel free to correct me if I am wrong.)
Awesome article btw, thanks for setting me straight on SSD, I have been steering clear of them. I hope soon you can review SSD's and most are good to excellent. :)
Flyboy27 - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
This article has answered every question I've had regarding SSDs recently. Thanks Anand!Flyboy27 - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
If a 120gb Vertex was around $250 I would get one yesterday. I suppose I can wait though.7Enigma - Thursday, March 19, 2009 - link
For me, 2 60's or 2 80's for around that price and I'm sold. Want the Raid0.kgwagner - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
I almost didn't read this article, as everybody and their brother seems to want to explain SSDs these days and most of the articles aren't much more than glorified press releases. But, this one truly took the drives to task and presented some valid information and explanations about the state of the art and where it needs to go. Kudos, Anand. Awesome show. Good job.Mr Perfect - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
"Needless to say, there was some definite fallout from that review. I’m used to negative manufacturer response after a GPU review, but I’m always a bit surprised when it happens in any other segment."Obviously you can't make a business out of irritating manufacturers, but when there really are issues, the readers want to know about them. After all, that's why we come here!
gwolfman - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
You own Anand. Keep up the good work. I've seen you cited from many sites about the work you've done, in particular with SSDs. Best article I've read in months!