SSD performance over time, a few results

[deeppow]

Since there has been discussion of SSD performance over time I had a little time and thought I would take a look at my particular setup. I'm running Win7 so TRIM is active on one SSD with my OS; it is an Inter 510 120G (using SATAIII) that has < 48G used. I also have two older previously-employes Vertex2 60G SSDs that I used to created a RAID0 configuration using Intel RST, about 67.5G is used out of ~110G available.

Since RAID SSDs don't currently use TRIM plus I've used Diskeeper for years and it now has an addition called HyperFast for SSDs, I was curious what the behavior of the SSD RAID array would display. (By the way, I have no connection to Diskeeper. I bought it just like anyone else would.)

Two sets of ATTO results for the Intel 510 SSD. Left are results for 4/23/2011 and right is 1/05/2012.

There are differences, the Writes in general are a little lower and Reads are higher. I can't explain these but I'm happy there is no significant deterioration.

For the Vertex2 RAID0, the two results are shown with the left for 4/23/2011 and right is 1/05/2012.

The OCZ quote for the Vertex2 speed is Max Sequential Read up to 285MB/s and Max Sequential Write up to 275MB/s. As well known these quoted speeds are a high-ball number, at best. Anyway, important to me is I see no significant deterioration of the array behavior. The increase speed of the array I would assume is due to the RAID0 behavior.

A little further info included with results from AS-SSD for the current status of the drives. Unfortunately I didn't take their initial state back with I did the setup.

Intel SAD

Vertex2_RAID

If you find any problems with what I've done, I'm always ready to learn more so please point them out. Anyway, I would be careful about extending my results to other setups but thought you might find them interesting.

 

[postmortemIA]

you mean right is for 2012?
I wish that my results wre like yours. I have seen significant decrease in reads and writes on my intel G2; on Windows 7 as well.

 

[imaheadcase]

That is a older version of AS SSD..not sure if that matters. Those are some terrible scores for AS SSD for Vertex 2 raid and Intel one.

You might as well not RAID it at all.

Single crucial M4 will be 600ish score. I've had mind for 5 months or more and it does not change much. I right/read to mine constantly.

 

[deeppow]

you mean right is for 2012?
I wish that my results wre like yours. I have seen significant decrease in reads and writes on my intel G2; on Windows 7 as well.

You are correct. I'll correct the original post.

 

[Burner27]

Do you have write-back cache enabled for your RAIDs? (Assuming you are using the IRST drivers and software)

 

[deeppow]

Do you have write-back cache enabled for your RAIDs? (Assuming you are using the IRST drivers and software)

Hummm, I thought that was associated with caching, SRT?

A look at IRST and that is the only reference I can see is related to caching. How do you do it on RAID? Do I need more recent drivers?

 

[Burner27]

Use these:

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Det...l&#37;c2%ae+Rapid+Storage+Technology&lang=eng

 

[deeppow]

That is a older version of AS SSD..not sure if that matters.

I did a quick check with the more recent version and as you guessed it doesn't really matter.

.... Those are some terrible scores for AS SSD for Vertex 2 raid and Intel one.

Since this is a business working machine and I had 3 out of 6 failures with OCZ Vertex2 SSDs, I selected the SSD with the lowest failure rate (Intel) I could find knowing full well it wasn't the fastest. RMAs and rebuilding my OS because of the OCZ failures cost me a lot of time even though backups were available.

Regarding the RAID array, I did have a couple of the Vertex2 setting around unused and figured whether RAID helped speed or not, it did combine the space of the two. When one of these fails I'll just buy a single bigger replacement SSD.

I greatly appreciate your comments but bottom line is that there are other reasons for what I did than balls-to-the-wall speed. Thanks again.

 

[deeppow]

Use these:

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Det...duct=Intel®+Rapid+Storage+Technology&lang=eng

Thanks for pointing to those. I had downloaded them but not bothered to install but I will now.

 

[imaheadcase]

I did a quick check with the more recent version and as you guessed it doesn't really matter.




Since this is a business working machine and I had 3 out of 6 failures with OCZ Vertex2 SSDs, I selected the SSD with the lowest failure rate (Intel) I could find knowing full well it wasn't the fastest. RMAs and rebuilding my OS because of the OCZ failures cost me a lot of time even though backups were available.

Regarding the RAID array, I did have a couple of the Vertex2 setting around unused and figured whether RAID helped speed or not, it did combine the space of the two. When one of these fails I'll just buy a single bigger replacement SSD.

I greatly appreciate your comments but bottom line is that there are other reasons for what I did than balls-to-the-wall speed. Thanks again.

Well reliably and performance are not exclusive for SSD. Since most people who have SSD back up to bigger spindle drives since they are not ideal backup drivers. Performance is easier to shoot for.

 

[deeppow]

Use these:

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Det...duct=Intel®+Rapid+Storage+Technology&lang=eng

That does improve the write performance, thanks.

 

[Burner27]

It still doesn't look like you have write-back cache enabled. Open the Intel software and enable it!

 

[groberts101]

still looks low for 2 of those drives in R0. Did you specifically enable write-back caching in the Intel raid utility?

Other way to control the same exact setting is to go to device mgr>disk drives>choose your array>policies tab>uncheck enable write-caching>click ok>recheck once more and click ok. Caching is now active for that array. It is off by default on ALL Intel raids and needs to be manually enabled regardless of that device mgrs checkbox being checked.

The other thing to keep in mind is that all first gen SF drives will throttle by design once all nand has been written to at least once and it has been fully mapped. So, it's not odd at all that the array will write incompressible benchmarks more slowly(like that AS SSD uses) after the array has been fully mapped/written to. ATTO will NOT show those effects and is a terrible benchmark to use for testing Sandforce drives settled in states such as yours. Just a quick and friendly FYI for ya.

PS.. TRIM(or lack of) will never recover full speeds to any sandforce controlled drive and only secure erase will wipe the map and fully restore fresh speeds. At least until all nand is written and the map is fully formed once more anyways. Is just the way that particular controller was designed and no way around Durawrite. I have a 6 drive array that see's major vid work and I use dedicated secure erase/image restores to maintain fresh speeds. There are another couple of tricks to help consistency.. but is usually just fro the extremeists like myself so I won't go into them unless you want that specific info.

Good luck with it all

PPS.. a word of caution here.. do not sleep that array consistently if you want to keep that data intact or reduce the risk of panic locking those first gen SF drives. the latest gen SF's don't have the same issue though.

 

[deeppow]

I have write-back enabled in two places.
- Opening IRST->Manage->open Advanced->"Write-back cache" Enabled
- open Device Manager->open Disk drives->open Properties of RAID drive->Policies tab-> "Enable write caching on the device" is checked.

Results don't change.

These SSDs have seen enough use that they might have reached the throttling point as groberts101 noted. groberts101 do you have time to point me at "dedicated secure erase/image restores". I know how to restore from my backups so would assume it the erase portion I need. Thanks!

 

[groberts101]

use the Linux tool here. Is customized parted magic with the option to initiate the drives built in all sata drives SE protocol. Takes less than 2 seconds to zap(literally a flood of voltage across the entire drive at once) the entire drives map/controller back to factory fresh state.
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/f...rtex2-3-Agility2-3-Solid3-Revo-and-Ibis-SSD-s


or the toolbox here.
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/f...3-Agility2-3-Solid3-and-Revo3-Revo3-x2-drives.

Is easiest to use the toolbox from another OS volume and image immediately after the SE has been done. Or use Linux and then boot up to a recovery disk and point at the other HDD with the backup needed to refresh the image. Will improve the snappiness and overall feel of the array once you boot back up to it. Well worth the time when dealing with the potential gains from multiple drives in raid.

 

[Tsavo]

you mean right is for 2012?
I wish that my results wre like yours. I have seen significant decrease in reads and writes on my intel G2; on Windows 7 as well.

My G2 120 is bang-on in reads and writes a year after it was new. I don't hit it very hard though; only 2.32 TB in writes.

 

[deeppow]

use the Linux tool here. Is customized parted magic with the option to initiate the drives built in all sata drives SE protocol. Takes less than 2 seconds to zap(literally a flood of voltage across the entire drive at once) the entire drives map/controller back to factory fresh state.
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/f...rtex2-3-Agility2-3-Solid3-Revo-and-Ibis-SSD-s


or the toolbox here.
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/f...3-Agility2-3-Solid3-and-Revo3-Revo3-x2-drives.

Is easiest to use the toolbox from another OS volume and image immediately after the SE has been done. Or use Linux and then boot up to a recovery disk and point at the other HDD with the backup needed to refresh the image. Will improve the snappiness and overall feel of the array once you boot back up to it. Well worth the time when dealing with the potential gains from multiple drives in raid.

Used the first method, PartedMagic is now downloaded as an iso so you can create a bootable CD or USB stick. I did have to use the "Alternate graphics server" option to get the wake up after sleep to be visible. Don't see much if any improvement in performance. At some point in the future, I'll replace these SSDs with a newer single drive but for now they provide the storage I need.

Thanks for your help and comments folks.