Intel 730 and powerloss protection

[hojnikb]

So lately i'm seeing some reports, that Intel 730 does not feature powerloss capababilities; apperently reviewers got engineering sample with caps, while retail ones dont have them.

Anyone has this drive and can confirm that ?

Infact, intel's website actually states, that drive doesn't have it, even though every review site claims it has it.

😕😕😕

 

[VirtualLarry]

That would be disappointing news. In that case, I would choose Crucial over Intel then.

 

[hojnikb]

That would be disappointing news. In that case, I would choose Crucial over Intel then.

Well, crucial doesnt have full powerloss protection either.

 

[CiPHER]

The Intel ARK talks about 'Enhanced Power Loss Data Protection' as a fully DRAM-backed power buffer. But most SSDs have only enough power to protect in-flight writes, not the full DRAM backed writes.

The Intel datacenter SSDs are among those; the S3500/S3700 have the same kind of power-safe capacitor protection as the Crucial M500 and siblings.

You also do not need full capacitor protection, as it is perfectly ok to lose the data in DRAM in all consumer-related scenarios and most server-related scenarios as well. The capacitors are not there primarily to protect the data in DRAM, but to protect the mapping tables from becoming inconsistent with the stored data; hence causing corruption which could potentially be very severe.

Only the Intel 320 has fully protected buffercache; but that is easy since this SSD does not have a DRAM chip, but rather internal 192KiB SRAM embedded in its Intel controller.

 

[hojnikb]

The Intel ARK talks about 'Enhanced Power Loss Data Protection' as a fully DRAM-backed power buffer. But most SSDs have only enough power to protect in-flight writes, not the full DRAM backed writes.

The Intel datacenter SSDs are among those; the S3500/S3700 have the same kind of power-safe capacitor protection as the Crucial M500 and siblings.

You also do not need full capacitor protection, as it is perfectly ok to lose the data in DRAM in all consumer-related scenarios and most server-related scenarios as well. The capacitors are not there primarily to protect the data in DRAM, but to protect the mapping tables from becoming inconsistent with the stored data; hence causing corruption which could potentially be very severe.

Only the Intel 320 has fully protected buffercache; but that is easy since this SSD does not have a DRAM chip, but rather internal 192KiB SRAM embedded in its Intel controller.

Thats not true at all, 320 had DRAM cache, just like any other drive.

 

[Cerb]

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/storage/66208-intel-730-240gb-ssd-review-comment-thread-5.html

 

[CiPHER]

Thats not true at all, 320 had DRAM cache, just like any other drive.

That is not true. That is only partly true.

The Intel 320 has a DRAM-chip, but it is not used for buffercache to buffer writes from the host. The controller uses its internal 192KiB SRAM buffercache for that. The DRAM chip is only used to cache the mapping tables (FTL) and not any user data!

 

[hojnikb]

Thats not true at all, 320 had DRAM cache, just like any other drive.

That is not true.

The Intel 320 has a DRAM-chip, but it is not used for buffercache to buffer writes from the host. The controller uses its internal 192KiB SRAM buffercache for that. The DRAM chip is only used to cache the mapping tables (FTL) and not any user data!

Can you contradict yourself any more ? 😵😵😵

The matter of fact is, that 320 HAS dram cache. What its used for, doesnt really matter at this point. It has it and therefore negates your first statement.

 

[CiPHER]

It does matter what it is used for. We are discussing power-loss protection. Virtually all SSDs use the DRAM-chip to store in-flight buffercache, but not the X25-M, X25-V and 320 series. This means the DRAM chip on those SSDs have no relevance to the question of power-loss protection.

When you said the '320 had DRAM cache, just like any other drive' i interpreted that as 'the 320 uses the DRAM for buffercache, just like any other drive'. But as said, the early Intel SSDs are an exception.

 

[aman74]

This update seems to say it does have it and that the rumor was started because of incorrect info provided by a CSR:

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/storage-news/rumor-control-intel-730-data-loss-protection/

There's this thread:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2401856

This guy seems to think the caps don't mean much:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36768326&postcount=21

This chap seems to think it does though:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=36775852&postcount=23