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
The Verdict
There’s no skirting the issue: even the best SSDs lose performance the more you use them. Eventually their performance should level off but what matters the most is how their performance degrades.
In using the X25-M I’d say that the performance drop was noticeable but not a deal breaker - and the data tends to agree with me. With average write latencies still well under 1ms, the drive maintained its most important performance characteristic - the ability to perform random accesses much faster than a conventional hard drive.
Keep in mind that with the cost per GB being as high as it is, these SSDs aren’t going to be used for large file storage in a desktop or notebook. You’re far more likely to use one as your boot/applications drive. As such, what matter the most aren’t peak transfer rates but rather fast access times. On a well designed drive with a good controller, peak transfer rates may fall over time, but latency remains good.
You end up with a drive that still manages to be much faster than the fastest 3.5” hard drives, but slower than when you first got it.
If, however, you aren’t ok with the performance drop over time then it’s worth considering what your options will be. When drives ship with ATA-TRIM support, hopefully late this year, they will do a better job of staying closer to their maximum performance. But the problem won’t be solved completely. Instead, what we’ll need to see is a more fundamental architectural change to eliminate the problem.
I still believe that a SSD is the single most effective performance upgrade you can do to your PC; even while taking this behavior into account. While personally I wouldn’t give up a SSD in any of my machines, I can understand the hesitation in investing a great deal of money in one today.
Intel’s X25-M: Not So Adaptive Performance?
The Intel drive is in a constant quest to return to peak performance, that’s what its controller is designed to do. The drive is constantly cleaning as it goes along to ensure its performance is as high as possible, for as long as possible. A recent PC Perspective investigation unearthed a scenario where the X25-M is unable to recover and is stuck at a significantly lower level of performance until the drive is secure erased once more.
There’s not much I can say about the issue other than I’ve been working with Intel on it very closely and it’s not something I’m overly concerned about at this point. I can replicate the PC Perspective data but not by using my machine normally. Through the right combination of benchmarks I can effectively put the drive in a poor performance state that it won’t recover from without a secure erase. I should also mention that I can do the same to other drives as well.
I’ll be able to say more soon but for now just hang tight. I’d venture a guess that Intel would not leave its most loyal customers out in the cold after spending $400 - $800 on a SSD. I can’t speak for Intel but like I said, stay tuned.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
250 Comments
View All Comments
strikeback03 - Thursday, March 19, 2009 - link
If you get Newegg's specials, one of the codes is for the 30GB for $103 with a $20MIR, so $83 with shipping if the rebate comes through. At the size I would want (~120) the Super Talent undercuts the OCZ slightly.Does anyone know if you can install the firmware of one maker to another maker's SSD? For example, assuming both the Ultradrive ME and the Vertex use the same Indilinx controller, and say Super Talent chose to release it with the firmware which optimizes for higher sequential speeds, would the user be able to choose the firmware which optimizes for less latency?
Testtest - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
Ah, no editing?!A-Data's "300 plus" SSD also uses the Indilinx controller.
vailr - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
"The Anatomy of a SSD" should instead read: "The Anatomy of an SSD"Flunk - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
Yes, because S is a vowel...abudd - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
Assuming SSD = "es-es-dee" then "an SSD" is right. If it *sounds* like a vowel, use "an".JarredWalton - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
Yes, *but* SSD could also be read as "Solid State Drive" instead of "ess ess dee", in which case you would say "a SSD". I tend to read it as "ess ess dee", but Anand thinks of those letters as "Solid State Drive".Potato, potato, tomato, tomato... let's call the whole thing off!
Azsen - Thursday, March 19, 2009 - link
When reading acronyms you're supposed to think of them as the letters, i.e. when you see RAM, you think "ram" straight off not Random Access Memory. When you see "IBM" you think "eye bee emm" not International Business Machines etc etc. It would take ages to read an article if you had to stop and think out all the full wording of acronyms as you're reading them.I'm going with the correction of "Anatomy of an SSD". Correct English fullstop.
JarredWalton - Thursday, March 19, 2009 - link
By your comment, you suggest two different things, and that's really okay. That was my point: when you see "RAM" you probably thing "ram" as in the animal... not "Are A Em". You say "a RAM stick" not "an RAM stick". I'd guess most people think of SATA as "Ess A Tee A", but if you talk to most computer techs that are in the know, it's "say-te" so you would say "a SATA drive".And you know, I'm sure plenty of people will agree with the correct way of saying SATA, and that's perfectly okay. English really is a very flexible thing - particularly in the tech world - and rarely is there an "always right" way of saying things. If Anand wants to say "a SSD" and others want to say "an SSD", I'm not going to try to declare one group or the other correct. They both are, depending on your viewpoint.
"I believe the world is neither black nor white, but only shades of gray."
Pythias - Friday, March 20, 2009 - link
Can't have gray without black and white.7Enigma - Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - link
HAHAHA. What a tool. I love it when people critique grammar.....and get it wrong.