Trending Games | ArcheAge | Elder Scrolls Online | WildStar | EverQuest Next

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,794,202 Users Online:0
Games:723  Posts:6,194,886
Recent forum postsRSS
Active threads
Cloud view
List all forums
General Forums
Developers Corner General Discussion
Popular Game Forums
Click a status to find game forum
Game Forums
Click a letter to find game forum
A-C
2029 Online 2112: Revolution 2Moons 4Story 8BitMMO 9 Dragons A Mystical Land A Tale in the Desert III A3 ACE Online ARGO Online Aberoth Absolute Force Online Absolute Terror Achaea Adellion Aerrevan Aetolia, the Midnight Age Age of Armor Age of Conan Age of Empires Online Age of Mourning Age of Wulin Age of Wushu Aida Arenas Aika Aion Albion Online Alganon All Points Bulletin (APB) Allods Online Altis Gates Amazing World Anarchy Online Ancients of Fasaria Andromeda 5 Angels Online Anime Trumps Anmynor Anno Online Applo Arcane Hearts Arcane Legends ArchLord ArcheAge Archeblade Archlord X Asda 2 Asda Story Ashen Empires Asheron's Call Asheron's Call 2 Astera Online Astonia III Astro Empires Astro Lords: Oort CLoud Asura Force Atlantica Online Atriarch Aura Kingdom Aurora Blade Auto Assault Avatar Star Battle Dawn Battle Dawn Galaxies Battle for Graxia Battle of 3 Kingdoms Battle of the Immortals Battlecruiser Online Battlestar Galactica Online Battlestar Reloaded Beyond Protocol Black Aftermath Black Desert Black Gold Black Prophecy Black Prophecy Tactics: Nexus Conflict Blacklight Retribution Blade & Soul Blade Hunter Blade Wars Blazing Throne Bless Blitz 1941 Blood and Jade Bloodlines Champions Bounty Bay Online Brain Storm Brawl Busters. Brick-Force Bright Shadow Bullet Run Business Tycoon Online CTRacer Cabal Online Caesary Call of Camelot Call of Gods Call of Thrones Camelot Unchained Canaan Online Cardmon Hero Cartoon Universe CasinoRPG Castle Empire Castlot Celtic Heroes Champions Online Champions of Regnum Chaos Online Chrono Tales Citadel of Sorcery CitiesXL Citizen Zero City of Decay City of Heroes City of Steam City of Transformers City of Villains Civilization Online Clan Lord Clash of Clans Cloud Nine Club Penguin Colony of War Command & Conquer: Tiberium Alliances Company of Heroes Online Conquer Online Conquer Online 3 Continent of the Ninth (C9) Core Blaze Core Exiles Corum Online Craft of Gods Crimecraft Crimelife 2 Cronous Crota II Crusaders of Solaris Cultures Online Cyber Monster 2 Céiron Wars
D-F
D&D Online DC Universe DK Online DOTA DOTA 2 DUST 514 DV8: Exile Dalethaan Dance Groove Online Dark Age of Camelot Dark Ages Dark Legends Dark Orbit Dark Relic: Prelude Dark Solstice Dark and Light DarkEden Online DarkSpace Darkblood Online Darkest Dungeon Darkfall Darkfall: Unholy Wars Darkwind: War on Wheels Das Tal Dawn of Fantasy Dawntide DayZ Dead Earth Dead Frontier Deco Online Deepworld Defiance Deicide Online Dekaron Demons at the Horizon Desert Operations Destiny Diablo 3 Diamonin Digimon Battle Dino Storm Disciple Divergence Divina Divine Souls Dofus Dominus Online Dragon Ball Online Dragon Born Online Dragon Crusade Dragon Empires Dragon Eternity Dragon Nest Dragon Oath Dragon Pals Dragon Raja Dragon's Call Dragon's Call II Dragon's Prophet DragonSky DragonSoul Dragona Dragonica Dragons and Titans Dream of Mirror Online Dreamland Online Dreamlords: The Reawakening Drift City Duels Dungeon Blitz Dungeon Fighter Online Dungeon Overlord Dungeon Party Dungeon Rampage Dungeon Runners Dynastica Dynasty Warriors Online Dynasty of the Magi EIN (Epicus Incognitus) EVE Online Earth Eternal Earth and Beyond Earthrise Eclipse War Ecol Tactics Online Eden Eternal Edge of Space Einherjar - The Viking's Blood Elder Scrolls Online Eldevin Elf Online Elite: Dangerous Embers of Caerus Emil Chronicle Online Empire Empire & State Empire Craft Empire Universe 3 EmpireQuest Empires of Galldon End of Nations Endless Ages Endless Blue Moon Online Endless Online Entropia Universe EpicDuel Erebus: Travia Reborn Eredan Eternal Blade Eternal Lands Eternal Saga Ether Fields Ether Saga Online Eudemons Online EuroGangster EverEmber Online EverQuest Next EverQuest Online Adventures Evernight Everquest Everquest II Evony Exarch Exorace F.E.A.R. Online Face of Mankind Fairyland Online Fall of Rome Fallen Earth Fallen Sword Fallout Online Family Guy Online Fantage Fantasy Earth Zero Fantasy Realm Online Fantasy Tales Online Fantasy Worlds: Rhynn Faunasphere Faxion Online Ferentus Ferion Fiesta Online Final Fantasy XI Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn Firefall Fists of Fu Florensia Flyff Football Manager Live Football Superstars Force of Arms Forge Forsaken World Fortnite Fortuna Forum for Discussion of Everlight Freaky Creatures Free Realms Freesky Online Freeworld Fung Wan Online Furcadia Fury Fusion Fall
G-L
GalaXseeds Galactic Command Online Game of Thrones: Seven Kingdoms Gameglobe Gate To Heavens Gates of Andaron Gatheryn Gauntlet Gekkeiju Online Ghost Online Ghost Recon Online Gladiatus Glitch Global Agenda Global Soccer Gloria Victis Glory of Gods GoGoRacer Goal Line Blitz Gods and Heroes GodsWar Online Golemizer Golf Star GoonZu Online Graal Kingdoms Granado Espada Online Grand Chase Grand Fantasia Grepolis Grimlands Guild Wars Guild Wars 2 Guild Wars Factions Guild Wars Nightfall H1Z1 Habbo Hotel Hailan Rising HaloSphere2 Haven & Hearth Hawken Hearthstone: Heroes of Warcraft Helbreath Hellgate Hellgate: London Hello Kitty Online Hero Online Hero Zero Hero's Journey Hero: 108 Online HeroSmash Heroes & Generals Heroes in the Sky Heroes of Bestia Heroes of Gaia Heroes of Might and Magic Online Heroes of Thessalonica Heroes of Three Kingdoms Heroes of the Storm Hex Holic Online Hostile Space Hunter Blade Huxley Illutia Illyriad Immortals USA Imperator Imperian Inferno Legend Infestation: Survivor Stories Infinite Crisis Infinity Infinity Iris Online Iron Grip: Marauders Irth Worlds Island Forge Islands of War Istaria: Chronicles of the Gifted Jade Dynasty Jagged Alliance Online Juggernaut Jumpgate Jumpgate Evolution KAL Online Kakele Online Kaos War Karos Online Kartuga Kicks Online King of Kings 3 Kingdom Heroes Kingdom Under Fire II Kingdom of Drakkar Kingory Kings and Legends Kings of the Realm KingsRoad Kitsu Saga Kiwarriors Knight Age Knight Online Knights of Dream City Kothuria Kung Foo! Kunlun Online L.A.W. LEGO Universe La Tale Land of Chaos Online Landmark Lands of Hope: Phoenix Edition LastChaos League of Angels League of Legends - Clash of Fates Legend of Edda: Vengeance Legend of Golden Plume Legend of Katha Legend of Mir 2 Legend of Mir 3 Legendary Champions Lego Minifigures Online Life is Feudal Light of Nova Lime Odyssey Line of Defense Lineage Lineage Eternal: Twilight Resistance Lineage II Linkrealms Loong Online Lord of the Rings Online Lords Online Lost Saga Lucent Heart Lunia Lusternia: Age of Ascension Luvinia World
M-Q
MU Online Mabinogi Maestia: Rise of Keledus MagiKnights Magic Barrage Magic World Online Manga Fighter MapleStory Martial Heroes Marvel Heroes Marvel Super Hero Squad Online Marvel: Avengers Alliance MechWarrior Online Megaten Meridian 59 : Evolution Merlin MetalMercs Metaplace Metin 2 MicroVolts Midkemia Online Might & Magic Heroes: Kingdoms MilMo Minecraft Mini Fighter Minions of Mirth Ministry of War Monato Esprit Monkey King Online Monkey Quest Monster & Me Monster Madness Online MonsterMMORPG Moonlight Online: Tales of Eternal Blood Mordavia Mortal Online Mourning My Lands Myst Online: URU Live Myth Angels Online Myth War Myth War 2 Mytheon Mythic Saga Mythos N.E.O Online NIDA Online Nadirim Naviage: The Power of Capital Navy Field Need for Speed World Nemexia Neo's Land NeoSteam Neocron Nether Neverwinter Nexus: The Kingdom Of The Winds NinjaTrick NosTale Novus Aeterno Oberin Odin Quest Odyssey RPG Ogre Island Omerta 3 Online Boxing Manager Onverse Order & Chaos Online Order of Magic Original Blood Origins Return Origins of Malu Orion's Belt Otherland Forums OverSoul Overkings Oz Online Oz World Pandora Saga Pantheon: Rise of the Fallen Panzar Parabellum Parallel Kingdom Parfait Station Path of Exile Pathfinder Online Perfect World Perpetuum Online Phantasy Star Online 2 Phantasy Star Universe Phoenix Dynasty Online Phylon Pi Story Picaroon Pirate Galaxy Pirate Storm Pirate101 PirateKing Online Pirates of the Burning Sea Pirates of the Caribbean Online Pixie Hollow Planeshift Planet Arkadia Planet Calypso PlanetSide 2 Planetside Planets³ Playboy Manager Pocket Legends Pockie Ninja Pockie Pirates Pockie Saints PoxNora Prime World Prime: Battle for Dominus Priston Tale Priston Tale II Prius Online Project Blackout Project Powder Project Titan Forums Project Wiki Puzzle Pirates Quickhit Football
R-S
R2 Online RAN Online RF Online ROSE Online Rage of 3 Kingdoms Ragnarok Online Ragnarok Online II RaiderZ Rakion Rappelz RappelzSEA Ravenmarch Realm Fighter Realm of the Mad God Realm of the Titans Realms Online Reclamation Red Stone Red War: Edem's Curse Regnum Online Remnant Knights Renaissance Repulse Requiem: Memento Mori Rift RiotZone Rise Rise of Dragonian Era Rise of Empire Rise of the Tycoon Rising of King Risk Your Life Rivality Rockfree Rohan: Blood Feud Role Play Worlds Roll n Rock Roma Victor Romadoria Rosh Online Roto X Rubies of Eventide Ruin Online Rumble Fighter Runes of Magic Runescape Rust Rusty Hearts Ryzom S4 League SAGA SD Gundam Capsule Fighter Online SMITE SUN Sagramore Salem SaySayGirls Scarlet Blade Scions of Fate Seal Online: Evolution Second Life Secret of the Solstice Seed Serenia Fantasy Seven Seas Saga Seven Souls Online Sevencore Shadow of Legend Shadowbane Shadowrun Online Shaiya Shards Online Shattered Galaxy Sho Online Shot Online Shroud of the Avatar SideQuest Siege on Stars Sigonyth: Desert Eternity Silkroad Online Skyblade Skyforge SmashMuck Champions Smoo Online Soldier Front Soul Master Soul Order Online Soul of Guardian Space Heroes Universe Sparta: War of Empires Spellcasters Sphere Spiral Knights Spirit Tales Splash Fighters Squad Wars Star Citizen Star Sonata 2 Star Stable Star Supremacy Star Trek Online Star Trek: Infinite Space Star Wars Galaxies Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures Star Wars: The Old Republic StarQuest Online Stargate Worlds Starlight Story Starpires State of Decay SteelWar Online Stone Age 2 Stormfall: Age of War Storybricks Stronghold Kingdoms Sudden Attack Supremacy 1914 Supreme Destiny Sword Girls Sword of Destiny: Rise of Aions SwordX Swords of Heavens Swordsman
T-Z
TERA TS Online Tabula Rasa Tactica Online Tales Runner Tales of Fantasy Tales of Pirates Tales of Pirates II Tales of Solaris Talisman Online Tamer Saga Tank Ace Tantra Online Tatsumaki: Land at War Terra Militaris TerraWorld Online Thang Online The 4th Coming The Agency The Aurora World The Black Watchmen The Chronicle The Chronicles of Spellborn The Crew The Division The Hammers End The Legend of Ares The Lost Titans The Matrix Online The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot The Missing Ink The Mummy Online The Myth of Soma The Pride of Taern The Realm Online The Repopulation The Secret World The Sims Online The Strategems The West Theralon There Therian Saga Thrones of Chaos Tibia Tibia Micro Edition Tiger Knight Titan Siege Titans of Time Toontown Online Top Speed Topia Online Torchlight Total Domination Transformers Universe Traveller AR Travia Online Travian Trials of Ascension Tribal Hero Tribal Wars Tribes Universe Trickster Online Trove Troy Online True Fantasy Live Online Turf Battles Twelve Sky Twelve Sky 2 Twilight War Tynon U.B. Funkeys UFO Online URDEAD Online Ultima Forever: Quest for the Avatar Ultima Online Ultima X: Odyssey Ultimate Naruto Ultimate Soccer Boss Uncharted Waters Online Undercover 2: Merc Wars Underlight Unification Wars Universe Online Utopia Valkyrie Sky Vampire Lord Online Vanguard: Saga of Heroes Vanquish Space Vector City Racers Vendetta Online Victory - Age of Racing Vindictus Virtonomics Vis Gladius Visions of Zosimos VoidExpanse Voyage Century Online W.E.L.L. Online WAR (Warhammer Online) WAR2 Glory WYD Global Wakfu War Thunder War of 2012 War of Angels War of Legends War of Mercenaries War of Thrones War of the Immortals WarFlow Waren Story Wargame1942 Warhammer 40,000: Eternal Crusade Warhammer 40K: Dark Millennium Online Warhammer Online: Wrath of Heroes Warkeepers Warrior Epic Wartune WebLords Wild West Online WildStar Wind of Luck WindSlayer 2 Wings of Destiny Wish Wizard101 Wizardry Online Wizards and Champions Wonder King Wonderland Online World Golf Tour World of Battles World of Darkness World of Heroes World of Kung Fu World of Pirates World of Speed World of Tanks World of Tanks Generals World of Warcraft World of Warplanes World of Warships World of the Living Dead WorldAlpha Wurm Online Xenocell Xiah Xsyon Xulu YS Online Yitien ZU Online Zentia Zero Online Zero Online: The Andromeda Crisis Zodiac Online Zombies Ate My Pizza eRepublik

MMORPG.com Discussion Forums

General Discussion

General Discussion 

Hardware  » Crucial launches MX100 SSD, uses 16 nm NAND flash for aggressive pricing

2 Pages 1 2 » Search
21 posts found
  Quizzical

Guide

Joined: 12/11/08
Posts: 13179

 
OP  6/02/14 8:38:17 PM#1

I noted recently on another thread that Crucial and Mushkin are the two SSD vendors that have done the most to push prices down on quality drives.  Most SSD launches aren't terribly scintillating; the performance numbers basically don't matter past verification that the drive isn't terrible, and Crucial easily met that threshold three generations ago.

But I think this one is notable for several reasons:

1)  It's the first SSD with 16 nm NAND flash.  As compared to previous generation 20 nm chips, a back-of-the-envelope computation is that this takes only 64% of the die space for the same capacity--meaning that if wafer cost is the same, they can pack 56% more capacity into a given cost.  There are a lot of process node reasons why the 64% figure could be off, and wafer cost on a new node probably isn't the same.  Regardless, die shrinks are what drive prices down, and this is the first SSD on the new generation of process nodes.

2)  The pricing is notably aggressive.  New products often charge a premium price at first, and then the price settles down a ways.  Here, Crucial is starting at an MSRP of $110 for 256 GB and $225 for 512 GB.  That's competitive with the cheapest 240 and 480 GB drives on the market, respectively, and while offering the latest features.

3)  The catch is--well, there isn't one, really.  The drive fares well in AnandTech's performance consistency measurements that were the last benchmark to find performance problems with a lot of SSDs.  Crucial claims idle power consumption of a mere 0.1 W.  For a while, brand new SSD launches tended to have problems, but it's been a while since there was a major flop there.

It's worth noting that Crucial is the consumer brand name for Micron, which owns half of IMFT, one of the major NAND flash producers.  That naturally gets them early access to NAND flash, which can help in writing firmware to use the new flash sooner.  I sometimes think that Crucial pushes SSDs as a way to sell more NAND, and that the latter is what they're really interested in.  Regardless of whether that is the case, the new MX100 is priced to sell an awful lot of NAND.

A lot of people seem to tout the Samsung 840 EVO as a budget SSD.  The TLC NAND certainly puts it in that market, but the price tag really doesn't.  For example, New Egg has a shell shocker deal on the 250 GB drive right now--at $135, or $25 more than the 256 GB Crucial MX100.

  syntax42

Elite Member

Joined: 3/30/07
Posts: 1092

6/03/14 6:26:43 PM#2
Process shrinks on SSD memory chips result in reduced durability, usually.  I would like to see this new 16nm compared to others in a destructive test.
  Dihoru

Elite Member

Joined: 1/11/06
Posts: 2732

6/03/14 6:36:18 PM#3
-points up- What syntax said.. I heard 20 nm had a durability decrease over the generation before it.

  Quizzical

Guide

Joined: 12/11/08
Posts: 13179

 
OP  6/03/14 6:51:58 PM#4

The general tendency has been toward fewer write cycles per cell but larger capacities in a given die space.  I'm not sure if there is any technical reason for this, but judging by the write endurance numbers that various vendors have claimed, it looks like for an x nm process node, the number of writes you get is proportional to x--so yes, older, larger process nodes get you more writes.  But the amount of data you can store in a given die space is proportional to 1/x^2--and yes, there are technical reasons for this one.  So on net, the amount of data that you can write before wearing out a drive at a given price tag tends to increase as you go to new process nodes, but just not as fast as the capacity of the drive increases.

Regardless, the amount of writes you can do with one of these drives is still enormous.  You could install and delete a large game every single day, and you'd have several years before you had to worry about wearing the drive out from the writes.  Furthermore, going from MLC to TLC has a much larger impact on write endurance than a die shrink, so if write endurance becomes a problem, I'd bet on TLC SSDs--such as the Samsung 840 EVO--as being the first place it surfaces.  Indeed, that's one reason why I've been hesitant to recommend TLC SSDs, recommending MLC alternatives for the same price--even if they happened to be somewhat slower.

Ultimately, NAND flash is probably going to go 3D, with many cells stacked on top of each other.  Samsung is already shipping NAND flash with cells stacked 32 high, and IMFT and Hynix plan to start production on their own 3D NAND later this year.  Everyone seems to expect that it will be a couple of years before anyone can do this cheaply enough to compete with traditional methods, though; the process geometries are much larger to start.

  Ridelynn

Elite Member

Joined: 12/19/10
Posts: 3323

6/03/14 7:33:38 PM#5

Also keep in mind that SSDs have aggressive self-testing to detect write-induced cell degredation, have a certain large amount of overprovisioning and to compensate for cells that may get flagged as degraded.

As the density goes up, that extra space that is overprovisioned and not normally used as "drive capacity" gets cheaper as well. So even if the write durability per cell goes down, the overprovisioning can be adjusted to compensate for that, and you won't necessarily see any meaningful change in the overall durability of the drive.

  Dihoru

Elite Member

Joined: 1/11/06
Posts: 2732

6/04/14 4:31:23 AM#6
Originally posted by Quizzical

The general tendency has been toward fewer write cycles per cell but larger capacities in a given die space.  I'm not sure if there is any technical reason for this, but judging by the write endurance numbers that various vendors have claimed, it looks like for an x nm process node, the number of writes you get is proportional to x--so yes, older, larger process nodes get you more writes.  But the amount of data you can store in a given die space is proportional to 1/x^2--and yes, there are technical reasons for this one.  So on net, the amount of data that you can write before wearing out a drive at a given price tag tends to increase as you go to new process nodes, but just not as fast as the capacity of the drive increases.

Regardless, the amount of writes you can do with one of these drives is still enormous.  You could install and delete a large game every single day, and you'd have several years before you had to worry about wearing the drive out from the writes.  Furthermore, going from MLC to TLC has a much larger impact on write endurance than a die shrink, so if write endurance becomes a problem, I'd bet on TLC SSDs--such as the Samsung 840 EVO--as being the first place it surfaces.  Indeed, that's one reason why I've been hesitant to recommend TLC SSDs, recommending MLC alternatives for the same price--even if they happened to be somewhat slower.

Ultimately, NAND flash is probably going to go 3D, with many cells stacked on top of each other.  Samsung is already shipping NAND flash with cells stacked 32 high, and IMFT and Hynix plan to start production on their own 3D NAND later this year.  Everyone seems to expect that it will be a couple of years before anyone can do this cheaply enough to compete with traditional methods, though; the process geometries are much larger to start.

If I am understanding of what you said is correct then to get similar endurance you'd have to go higher in storage capacity, so a 20 nm 120 gb drive would last longer than a 16nm 120 gb drive, am I correct? (not taking TLC or MLC into account here, I rather go with proven metrics, IE quality of SSD provider, over theoretical ones)

  Ridelynn

Elite Member

Joined: 12/19/10
Posts: 3323

6/04/14 10:49:55 AM#7


Originally posted by Dihoru
If I am understanding of what you said is correct then to get similar endurance you'd have to go higher in storage capacity, so a 20 nm 120 gb drive would last longer than a 16nm 120 gb drive, am I correct? (not taking TLC or MLC into account here, I rather go with proven metrics, IE quality of SSD provider, over theoretical ones)


Each cell has a limited number of write cycles - this is true. As the dies get smaller, that number goes down.

SSD firmware does a couple of things to combat this. First, it has a random allocation pattern - it mixes up your data across random cells and spreads the wear around, so that the first few cells don't get hit with all the write cycles and wear out early. That is called "wear leveling" Second, it either checks or counts (depending on the firmware) each cell, and once a cell is degraded, it flags that cell as exhausted and stops using it. Now, you don't want the size of your drive to shrink over time, so SSD manufacturers actually put in extra cells to compensate - that's called "overprovisioning". Your 120G SSD actually has something on the order of 140-160G of cells in it, but the drive only uses 120G at a time, and uses that extra space in the wear leveling algorithm, then as cells get flagged, that comes out of the overprovision stash, not your usable drive space.

So where the smaller die size comes in -- smaller die size reportly lowers write endurance, but it also makes a cell much cheaper to produce (or rather, the density of cells on a wafer goes up, and the cost per cell on a wafer goes way down). So wear leveling and overprovisioning already compensate for that, since cells are cheaper, you just throw more in there for the wear leveling and overprovisioning to have to work with, and you don't see any change in overall drive life.

A 16nm Cell won't last as long as a 20nm cell - that is true.

But a drive based on 16nm cells could have a similar lifespan as one with 20nm cells -- depending on how the manufacturer programs the firmware. I know in Samsung drives you can actually change the amount of overprovisioning.

  Quizzical

Guide

Joined: 12/11/08
Posts: 13179

 
OP  6/04/14 4:41:26 PM#8
Originally posted by Dihoru
Originally posted by Quizzical

The general tendency has been toward fewer write cycles per cell but larger capacities in a given die space.  I'm not sure if there is any technical reason for this, but judging by the write endurance numbers that various vendors have claimed, it looks like for an x nm process node, the number of writes you get is proportional to x--so yes, older, larger process nodes get you more writes.  But the amount of data you can store in a given die space is proportional to 1/x^2--and yes, there are technical reasons for this one.  So on net, the amount of data that you can write before wearing out a drive at a given price tag tends to increase as you go to new process nodes, but just not as fast as the capacity of the drive increases.

Regardless, the amount of writes you can do with one of these drives is still enormous.  You could install and delete a large game every single day, and you'd have several years before you had to worry about wearing the drive out from the writes.  Furthermore, going from MLC to TLC has a much larger impact on write endurance than a die shrink, so if write endurance becomes a problem, I'd bet on TLC SSDs--such as the Samsung 840 EVO--as being the first place it surfaces.  Indeed, that's one reason why I've been hesitant to recommend TLC SSDs, recommending MLC alternatives for the same price--even if they happened to be somewhat slower.

Ultimately, NAND flash is probably going to go 3D, with many cells stacked on top of each other.  Samsung is already shipping NAND flash with cells stacked 32 high, and IMFT and Hynix plan to start production on their own 3D NAND later this year.  Everyone seems to expect that it will be a couple of years before anyone can do this cheaply enough to compete with traditional methods, though; the process geometries are much larger to start.

If I am understanding of what you said is correct then to get similar endurance you'd have to go higher in storage capacity, so a 20 nm 120 gb drive would last longer than a 16nm 120 gb drive, am I correct? (not taking TLC or MLC into account here, I rather go with proven metrics, IE quality of SSD provider, over theoretical ones)

If you're comparing a 20 nm 120 GB drive to a 16 nm 120 GB drive and everything else is just as well optimized around the NAND flash for both, then yeah, it would take longer to wear out the NAND flash on the 20 nm drive.  But it could easily be a difference between 50 years and 40 years--long enough that the drive will probably die of something else first either way.

But my argument is that that's looking at things the wrong way.  If you're comparing a 25 nm 120 GB drive to a 16 nm 240 GB drive, the latter will probably give you more writes before it wears out.  It will probably also be cheaper to build--and hence cheaper eventually at retail.  And that's even ignoring that you get double the capacity.

Also, Crucial is only using 16 nm NAND flash for their 256 and 512 GB versions of the MX100.  The 128 GB version uses the older 20 nm NAND flash--and at $80, really isn't that good of a deal.

  naami

Hard Core Member

Joined: 4/02/14
Posts: 59

6/08/14 3:28:21 AM#9
So I just put one of these in my laptop but is there any utility I can use for maintenance purposes? I use samsung 830 in my desktop and that has the "Samsung SSD Magician" but as far I know crucial has not made a similar utility.
  syntax42

Elite Member

Joined: 3/30/07
Posts: 1092

6/08/14 3:53:10 AM#10
Originally posted by naami
So I just put one of these in my laptop but is there any utility I can use for maintenance purposes? I use samsung 830 in my desktop and that has the "Samsung SSD Magician" but as far I know crucial has not made a similar utility.

From skimming over this document, it looks like the SSD Magician only sets some registry settings and other things you can do manually in Windows.  It does nothing to make the drive perform better, nor does it do anything for maintaining the drive.  It only changes OS settings to make the OS utilize the drive better.  You could completely skip those settings and you wouldn't likely notice much of a difference.

You might even be able to use that software without a Samsung SSD since it doesn't do anything to the drive.

Crucial's SSDs come with Acronis TrueImage for migrating your OS and resizing partitions.

  syntax42

Elite Member

Joined: 3/30/07
Posts: 1092

6/08/14 4:12:32 AM#11
Originally posted by Quizzical
Originally posted by Dihoru
Originally posted by Quizzical

The general tendency has been toward fewer write cycles per cell but larger capacities in a given die space.  I'm not sure if there is any technical reason for this, but judging by the write endurance numbers that various vendors have claimed, it looks like for an x nm process node, the number of writes you get is proportional to x--so yes, older, larger process nodes get you more writes.  But the amount of data you can store in a given die space is proportional to 1/x^2--and yes, there are technical reasons for this one.  So on net, the amount of data that you can write before wearing out a drive at a given price tag tends to increase as you go to new process nodes, but just not as fast as the capacity of the drive increases.

Regardless, the amount of writes you can do with one of these drives is still enormous.  You could install and delete a large game every single day, and you'd have several years before you had to worry about wearing the drive out from the writes.  Furthermore, going from MLC to TLC has a much larger impact on write endurance than a die shrink, so if write endurance becomes a problem, I'd bet on TLC SSDs--such as the Samsung 840 EVO--as being the first place it surfaces.  Indeed, that's one reason why I've been hesitant to recommend TLC SSDs, recommending MLC alternatives for the same price--even if they happened to be somewhat slower.

Ultimately, NAND flash is probably going to go 3D, with many cells stacked on top of each other.  Samsung is already shipping NAND flash with cells stacked 32 high, and IMFT and Hynix plan to start production on their own 3D NAND later this year.  Everyone seems to expect that it will be a couple of years before anyone can do this cheaply enough to compete with traditional methods, though; the process geometries are much larger to start.

If I am understanding of what you said is correct then to get similar endurance you'd have to go higher in storage capacity, so a 20 nm 120 gb drive would last longer than a 16nm 120 gb drive, am I correct? (not taking TLC or MLC into account here, I rather go with proven metrics, IE quality of SSD provider, over theoretical ones)

If you're comparing a 20 nm 120 GB drive to a 16 nm 120 GB drive and everything else is just as well optimized around the NAND flash for both, then yeah, it would take longer to wear out the NAND flash on the 20 nm drive.  But it could easily be a difference between 50 years and 40 years--long enough that the drive will probably die of something else first either way.

But my argument is that that's looking at things the wrong way.  If you're comparing a 25 nm 120 GB drive to a 16 nm 240 GB drive, the latter will probably give you more writes before it wears out.  It will probably also be cheaper to build--and hence cheaper eventually at retail.  And that's even ignoring that you get double the capacity.

Also, Crucial is only using 16 nm NAND flash for their 256 and 512 GB versions of the MX100.  The 128 GB version uses the older 20 nm NAND flash--and at $80, really isn't that good of a deal.

I'm currently using an OCZ Agility 3 SSD.  I have been using the drive a little over 2 years with some heavy gaming.  I bounce around a lot between games and uninstall/install games more often than some people.  Crystal Disk Info reports the drive health to be 77%.  I'm guessing that is based on the manufacturer's guaranteed writes per block and my total writes to the drive.  Based on that information, I can expect the drive to last about 10 years before blocks start failing.

I have read some destructive SSD test articles which showed many SSDs getting double or even triple the number of manufacturer guaranteed writes before they start to fail.  While I can expect my drive to last ten years, it may actually last twenty.  However, I'm definitely not going to hang onto it that long.  I would be surprised if my computer lasts ten years before being replaced.  Newer and better storage technology could be out by then.  Even if we don't have faster storage, we will at least have cheaper storage per byte and I will likely have a need for the increased capacity.

My point is that very few people may actually push their SSDs to failure.  As long as the drives have at least a ten-year life for heavy gaming use, I will continue to recommend others build their systems with a SSD.

  Quizzical

Guide

Joined: 12/11/08
Posts: 13179

 
OP  6/08/14 6:34:30 AM#12
Originally posted by syntax42

I'm currently using an OCZ Agility 3 SSD.  I have been using the drive a little over 2 years with some heavy gaming.  I bounce around a lot between games and uninstall/install games more often than some people.  Crystal Disk Info reports the drive health to be 77%.  I'm guessing that is based on the manufacturer's guaranteed writes per block and my total writes to the drive.  Based on that information, I can expect the drive to last about 10 years before blocks start failing.

I have read some destructive SSD test articles which showed many SSDs getting double or even triple the number of manufacturer guaranteed writes before they start to fail.  While I can expect my drive to last ten years, it may actually last twenty.  However, I'm definitely not going to hang onto it that long.  I would be surprised if my computer lasts ten years before being replaced.  Newer and better storage technology could be out by then.  Even if we don't have faster storage, we will at least have cheaper storage per byte and I will likely have a need for the increased capacity.

My point is that very few people may actually push their SSDs to failure.  As long as the drives have at least a ten-year life for heavy gaming use, I will continue to recommend others build their systems with a SSD.

I agree with your main point, but I'd like to emphasize that using SSDs until they die is a bad idea, for about the same reasons that doing that with hard drives is also a bad idea.  Losing data is a much bigger problem than merely having to replace a part.

We really don't know if SSDs would realistically last 10 years under typical consumer use.  USB flash drives don't seem to last me that long, even with fairly little activity.  There haven't been good SSDs on the market for 10 years yet, and the typical lifespan of the early Intel and Indilinx drives might not be at all similar to the typical lifespan of today's latest.

  Ridelynn

Elite Member

Joined: 12/19/10
Posts: 3323

6/08/14 3:44:00 PM#13

A USB flash drive gets subjected to more harsh environment than a typical SSD would as well..

Or at least, I know if I were a USB drive I would rather be installed inside a ventilated computer case rather than thrown on a keychain, carried around in a pocket, run through the laundry, left out in a car in the winter/summer, chewed on by the dog, constructed in extreme bulk at a cut-rate factory by children using tears and unicorn blood for solder, etc...

That, and expecting any drive to actually last 10 years in unrealistic, SSD or not. A traditional HDD drive I would ~expect~ to last 5 years, and I would seriously consider replacing after 3 years. Quiz is right - having a drive outright fail is bad - you don't want to get to that point, but on the flip side, you don't want to waste money unless you have to, so I can understand both sides of the equation. Right now, with the lack of history data, I have no reason to treat SSDs any differently than HDDs with regard to lifespan, either for good or bad, and for me, data loss (or the potential of it) is often worth much, much more to me than the price of a drive.

The benchmark for longevity for the SSD is the traditional HDD. And if you can exceed that, all the better, although we won't know if SSDs can actually do that for some time.

  syntax42

Elite Member

Joined: 3/30/07
Posts: 1092

6/09/14 7:47:32 AM#14
Originally posted by Ridelynn

A USB flash drive gets subjected to more harsh environment than a typical SSD would as well..

Or at least, I know if I were a USB drive I would rather be installed inside a ventilated computer case rather than thrown on a keychain, carried around in a pocket, run through the laundry, left out in a car in the winter/summer, chewed on by the dog, constructed in extreme bulk at a cut-rate factory by children using tears and unicorn blood for solder, etc...

That, and expecting any drive to actually last 10 years in unrealistic, SSD or not. A traditional HDD drive I would ~expect~ to last 5 years, and I would seriously consider replacing after 3 years. Quiz is right - having a drive outright fail is bad - you don't want to get to that point, but on the flip side, you don't want to waste money unless you have to, so I can understand both sides of the equation. Right now, with the lack of history data, I have no reason to treat SSDs any differently than HDDs with regard to lifespan, either for good or bad, and for me, data loss (or the potential of it) is often worth much, much more to me than the price of a drive.

The benchmark for longevity for the SSD is the traditional HDD. And if you can exceed that, all the better, although we won't know if SSDs can actually do that for some time.

It wouldn't surprise me if the electronic components fail before the memory components show failed blocks.

I have washed a few  MicroCenter flash drives in the laundry.  They worked fine after going through the dryer.

  Vrika

Elite Member

Joined: 10/03/05
Posts: 1990

6/09/14 9:49:46 AM#15
Originally posted by syntax42
I'm currently using an OCZ Agility 3 SSD.  I have been using the drive a little over 2 years with some heavy gaming.  I bounce around a lot between games and uninstall/install games more often than some people.  Crystal Disk Info reports the drive health to be 77%.  I'm guessing that is based on the manufacturer's guaranteed writes per block and my total writes to the drive.  Based on that information, I can expect the drive to last about 10 years before blocks start failing.

Can I ask, what "Total Host Writes" does CrystalDiskInfo show for your SSD?

I've got OCZ Agility 3 120GB that shows total host writes 31 173GB and disk health status is still 98%.

  lizardbones

Elite Member

Joined: 6/11/08
Posts: 10429

I've become dependent upon spell check. My apologies for stupid grammatical errors.

6/09/14 10:19:02 AM#16
Originally posted by Quizzical
Originally posted by syntax42

I'm currently using an OCZ Agility 3 SSD.  I have been using the drive a little over 2 years with some heavy gaming.  I bounce around a lot between games and uninstall/install games more often than some people.  Crystal Disk Info reports the drive health to be 77%.  I'm guessing that is based on the manufacturer's guaranteed writes per block and my total writes to the drive.  Based on that information, I can expect the drive to last about 10 years before blocks start failing.

I have read some destructive SSD test articles which showed many SSDs getting double or even triple the number of manufacturer guaranteed writes before they start to fail.  While I can expect my drive to last ten years, it may actually last twenty.  However, I'm definitely not going to hang onto it that long.  I would be surprised if my computer lasts ten years before being replaced.  Newer and better storage technology could be out by then.  Even if we don't have faster storage, we will at least have cheaper storage per byte and I will likely have a need for the increased capacity.

My point is that very few people may actually push their SSDs to failure.  As long as the drives have at least a ten-year life for heavy gaming use, I will continue to recommend others build their systems with a SSD.

I agree with your main point, but I'd like to emphasize that using SSDs until they die is a bad idea, for about the same reasons that doing that with hard drives is also a bad idea.  Losing data is a much bigger problem than merely having to replace a part.

We really don't know if SSDs would realistically last 10 years under typical consumer use.  USB flash drives don't seem to last me that long, even with fairly little activity.  There haven't been good SSDs on the market for 10 years yet, and the typical lifespan of the early Intel and Indilinx drives might not be at all similar to the typical lifespan of today's latest.

 

I would fall into the category of "slow adopter", upgrading my PC only when the games I want to play just don't work any longer, no matter what settings I pick.  I've never used a hard drive until it's reached "end of life".  They have either failed quickly, or end up on the stack of hard drives in my basement.  If SSDs have a lifespan comparable to HDDs, then it doesn't seem like their total lifespan would be a real issue for most gamers, given their tendency to have faster upgrade cycles than regular users.

 

For every large, complex problem, there is a simple, clear solution that also happens to be absolutely wrong.

  nbtscan

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/06/06
Posts: 433

6/09/14 12:20:09 PM#17

I might have to look into one of those new Crucial drives.  I originally bought a 128GB Intel SSD a couple years ago, but games are getting much larger in size now and I can only manage to fit maybe 2 or 3 installed games + my OS before it's reaching the point where I'm not comfortable with how much space is left on it.

Crucial/Micron has been a respectable brand for well over a decade so I wouldn't have any qualms about picking up one of their drives.  I think the technology has matured enough at this point.

  syntax42

Elite Member

Joined: 3/30/07
Posts: 1092

6/10/14 8:08:13 AM#18
Originally posted by Vrika
Originally posted by syntax42
I'm currently using an OCZ Agility 3 SSD.  I have been using the drive a little over 2 years with some heavy gaming.  I bounce around a lot between games and uninstall/install games more often than some people.  Crystal Disk Info reports the drive health to be 77%.  I'm guessing that is based on the manufacturer's guaranteed writes per block and my total writes to the drive.  Based on that information, I can expect the drive to last about 10 years before blocks start failing.

Can I ask, what "Total Host Writes" does CrystalDiskInfo show for your SSD?

I've got OCZ Agility 3 120GB that shows total host writes 31 173GB and disk health status is still 98%.

Maybe my power on hours has an effect on it.  Total writes for me show 5017GB.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

CrystalDiskInfo 5.6.2 (C) 2008-2013 hiyohiyo

                                Crystal Dew World : http://crystalmark.info/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

 (1) OCZ-AGILITY3

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

           Model : OCZ-AGILITY3

        Firmware : 2.15

   Serial Number : Redacted

       Disk Size : 240.0 GB (8.4/137.4/240.0/240.0)

     Buffer Size : Unknown

     Queue Depth : 32

    # of Sectors : 468862128

   Rotation Rate : ---- (SSD)

       Interface : Serial ATA

   Major Version : ATA8-ACS

   Minor Version : ACS-2 Revision 3

   Transfer Mode : SATA/600

  Power On Hours : 5739 hours

  Power On Count : 933 count

      Host Reads : 7573 GB

     Host Writes : 5017 GB

     Temparature : 30 C (86 F)

   Health Status : Good (77 %)

        Features : S.M.A.R.T., APM, 48bit LBA, NCQ, TRIM

       APM Level : 00FEh [ON]

       AAM Level : ----

 

  Vrika

Elite Member

Joined: 10/03/05
Posts: 1990

6/13/14 9:33:50 AM#19
Originally posted by syntax42
Originally posted by Vrika
Originally posted by syntax42
I'm currently using an OCZ Agility 3 SSD.  I have been using the drive a little over 2 years with some heavy gaming.  I bounce around a lot between games and uninstall/install games more often than some people.  Crystal Disk Info reports the drive health to be 77%.  I'm guessing that is based on the manufacturer's guaranteed writes per block and my total writes to the drive.  Based on that information, I can expect the drive to last about 10 years before blocks start failing.

Can I ask, what "Total Host Writes" does CrystalDiskInfo show for your SSD?

I've got OCZ Agility 3 120GB that shows total host writes 31 173GB and disk health status is still 98%.

Maybe my power on hours has an effect on it.  Total writes for me show 5017GB.

 ....

  Power On Hours : 5739 hours

  Power On Count : 933 count

Can't be power on hours either, mine is about the same. And my power on count is 3 times as large as yours.

Maybe it has something to do with:

Raw Read Error Rate: 94

Retired Block Count: 100

  Ridelynn

Elite Member

Joined: 12/19/10
Posts: 3323

6/13/14 6:33:52 PM#20

I've got a Crucial C300 that I got near release date (mid-2010). It has almost 10,000 hours on-time. CrystalDisk isn't showing me read/write amounts (maybe I'm doing it wrong). It's at "60%" health, whatever that means. This is my boot volume, and has been for quite some time. I do have an older SSD around somewhere, but this was the replacement, and this one is due to be replaced "soon" - I've been holding out longer than normal looking at just building a new system outright.

I have an M4 in the same system, only around ~5000 hours, 100% health.
And a standard Toshiba HDD, maybe 6 months old, 1800 hours on it, with a "Caution" flag based on reallocated sector count.

I did notice you can set the threshold for CrystalDisk, so I think that 60% and warnings are more or less arbitrary and generic values just based on some SMART data, and may not really have much of a basis on anything. Then again, I'm not terribly familiar with this program, I've just been poking around with it this afternoon.

2 Pages 1 2 » Search