What's wrong with sandforce?

[John Connor]

I keep hearing that a Sandforce chipset is not too reliable, but I heard they have good garbage collection abilities. I'm currently running a desktop with XP 64 and have no TRIM support. I chose the Sandforce chipset thinking it had better garbage collection. is this true?

 

[BrightCandle]

The controllers seem to have high failure rates when implemented by certain companies resulting in lots of early deaths.

They and OCZ have gained a reputation for plan or quality as a result. There are other issues like in the past their controllers struggling without trim but these should be historic problems now.

 

[groberts101]

While we can certianly generalize about that controllers overall function.. the firmware implementation can have impact on what the drives capability will be under certain workloads.

So, it would be down to the specific mfgrs firmware used on the drive since SF do allow for some customizations to be done. Some mfgrs have slightly better on-the-fly recovery than others and some just need more idle time and slack space to keep up on the process.

General rules for SF controlled drives would be these:

In heavier write environments do not exceed/fill more than 70% of the available space on the drive. Which mean that larger drives than needed will have more stamina and throttle less than smaller ones will.

Allowing additional slack space.. or manual overprovisioning(OP).. in the form of unallocated space can help with larger write loads since the drive always has a larger fresh block pool to use in those heavier write demand environments.

Allowing some additional idle time for GC and wear leveling to work it's magic can allow the fresh block pool to be rebuilt to its maximum size prior to the next write session. This is best done with logoffs or bios idles since that reduces disk demand and frees up the SF processor to concentrate on the task at hand(recovery of those previously written and dirtied blocks). The little known fact to some is that the drive MUST maintain full power during the recovery process and deep sleeps such as the typically defaulted S3 setting will not allow this to occur. S1 will maintain power and offers the best method if you do need to sleep the PC.

Adding additional idle time immediately after a heavier than typical write load should also be implemented if you'd like the drive to be fully freshened(fully repooled) before another anticipated heavy write load.

Adding an ocassional SE(secure erase) is something that I do on all my drives and it will keep any SF drive feeling factory fresh. Those with smaller or overfilled drives can benefit from it if they implement "SE/reimage" protocols as well.

Also keep in mind that many don't realize the extent of fresh blocks eaten up by streaming media these days. Especially streaming HD content as it not only hits the ram through caching but does in fact temp scratches to the drive in the process. I've seen this cause throttling even on systems that are not what most would call "heavy write environments".

Short on time here.. so hopefully that's enough of an overview to help you reduce the drives tendency to do on-the-fly recovery(which temporarily limits performance as it robs processing power at that specific time).. or longer term throttles due to exceeding the mfgrs "writes vs time vs fresh pool availability" firmware limitations(which only time or secure erase can relieve).

Fact of the matter is that ALL SSD controllers/drives have some inherent shortcomings or weaknesses these days.. but SF controllers are just a few steps behind all the newer gen's these days as time and tech marches on. Many mfgrs are constantly improving their on-the-fly recovery process and faster processors and larger amounts of on-board DRAM are surely helping in that regard. Either way.. you need to study and learn those weaknesses and work around them to get the very most from an SSD. Sandforce controlled drives just need a bit more user implemented help, is all.

PS. most of the SF controlled drives I use are in raids without TRIM and if I use all of the above methods to maintain them.. will never throttle or struggle at reduced speeds with on-the-fly recovery. TRIM is highly overrated, IMHO. Unless of course you need the drive to last more than 10 years.. which TRIM can help with.

 

[Mfusick]

most of the sandforce issues are resoloved and/or over exaggerated.

It is a near non existent issue for most normal folks.

You can expect to buy and use a sandforce ssd without issue.

They perform well and sell for cheap making it a great value.

That is all.

 

[Mfusick]

most of the sandforce issues are resoloved and/or over exaggerated.

It is a near non existent issue for most normal folks.

You can expect to buy and use a sandforce ssd without issue.

They perform well and sell for cheap making it a great value.

That is all.

I forgot to mention it's popular and "trendy" to hate on Sandforce and OCZ for some beginner troubles a while back... But technology changes quickly and it's more a myth and legend at this point than a reality.

Even OCZ has moved most of it's line up to newer controllers but people still hate on them.

I think Sandforce takes some crap because OCZ was a big player originally in them- and the OCZ haters jumped on board with bashing Sanforce too.

I have owned 15+ Sandforce drives and never had an issue. In contrast I RMA the only CRUCIAL M4 I ever owned.. so.. I'm not sure how much I believe the idiots crapping on Sandforce.

I personally believe with any electronics it comes down to good and bad luck and nothing more.

If I was buying today I would look at a Samsung or a VERTEX4 (Vector if it was cheaper) as my first choice. They don't use Sandforce. If I had a limited Budget I would not hesitate to grab a deal on a sandforce controlled 120GB VERTEX3 ($>80) or a BEASTY TOGGLE NAND VERTEX3 MAX IOPS ($>110) over a crappy crucial m4 or like non sandforce drive.

 

[groberts101]

I'm only guessing here.. but I don't think there's any need to get into "it" again in this particular thread since the OP was generalizing about the SF controller.. in and unto itself.

No names were mentioned and posts like that^ will surely just cause the thread to derail very quickly.

PS.. I can also assure you that there are still issues remaining out there with some combo's as well. Old firmwares combined with old bios combined with old drivers combined with some power mgmt features will make you hate them very quickly, regardless of who mfgrs them.

 

[IGemini]

IMO a lot of the anger towards Sandforce is really aimed at OCZ. Every controller design has had some significant bug along the way, but with them they paired it with bad marketing decisions. When they went from 34nm to 25nm with lower NAND longevity and available space, they didn't bother to tell the consumers that they were doing this on current SSD models even in the packaging itself. SF just got caught up in the crapstorm that followed, even though their competitors (eg. Corsair) did proper introduction of new NAND.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Sandforce is simply one of the worst controller in terms of reliability. Also why its mainly used is cheap products.

Intel for example directly destroyed their good name when they changed to Sandforce. No wonder they now have made a new controller. Even tho that wasnt the original plan.

 

[JellyRoll]

A big problem with SandForce that many do not realize is that the majority of files that are highly compressible are operating system files. Most workloads do not benefit tremendously from compression, and the SandForce form of compression is very limited in terms of actual compression power.

 

[taltamir]

Sandforce is notorious for having a ton of bugs; and no this is not due to OCZ treating their customers like crap.
OCZ doesn't even use sandforce anymore in new offerings (they bought a controller maker and now make their own controllers; they might still be manufacturing some of their older sandforce drives though but are not developing new ones).

Both firmware and hardware bugs are found in sandforce more then any other SSD (although most have some bugs).

Intel solved several known issues of sandforce (such as the random BSODs on mobos with unusual but within spec power frequencies in SATA ports that sandforce controller was not designed as being able to handle; sandforce supposedly fixed that but their fix never really worked for all scenarios; and one more I can't remember right now) those firmware fixes are ONLY available on the intel drive suggestion sandforce is either unable to solve this themselves. Or made a deal with intel that any bug intel solves they will not fix for other customers. Either of which is very concerning. There are also several other bugs that OCZ fixed that sandforce did not make available to non-ocz customers... but intel was able to replicate those... but only intel. so again, buyer beware.

Intel also had to do a recall on the sandforce drives due to another issue that was unsolvable via firmware (the 256bit hardware encryption was actually 128bit encryption)

And still has at least one unsolved issue even on intel firmware (if it is allowed to get too full with random data performance tanks and cannot be recovered via anything short of secure erase).
That being said, they have phenomenal performance. So I still use an intel sandforce SSD... I am just avoiding the bugs.

Almost all controllers have a bug or two but no other company has such a large amount, take so long to solve bugs, or have so many unsolvable bugs.

 

[kbp]

Look - Why not upgrade to windows 8 for $30.00. This offer expires shortly and for $30 your almost crazy not to. XP and Vista will not be suported by microsoft for much longer.

http://photographylife.com/upgrade-to-windows-8-for-15

 

[John Connor]

I won't be using my XP 64 machine much longer. I plan on building a new system by July and will format the current desktop to Windows 7. So far my Adata Sandfoce has been good to me. I've had it for around 7 months now. The laptop I'm using now is using a G.Skill Sniper SSD with Windows 7.

 

[JellyRoll]

Groberts, your post is unfortunately has a few inaccurate comments.

So, it would be down to the specific mfgrs firmware used on the drive since SF do allow for some customizations to be done. Some mfgrs have slightly better on-the-fly recovery than others and some just need more idle time and slack space to keep up on the process.

SandForce does not allow the manufacturers to change the firmware. They can only adjust a few settings, such as the life time throttle rate. There is virtually no difference between the firmwares.
There is no such thing as a 'reference' firmware for the SandForce SSDs that mfrs can modify. There is only one firmware, the one the SF creates.



btw, TRIM keeps the drive fresh, simply because it enables GC to clean up. With SandForce this really is a misnomer, since GC and TRIM do not work well due to the type of compression that SandForce utilizes, even when they are actually working.

 

[taltamir]

Look - Why not upgrade to windows 8 for $30.00

because he has no touchscreen on his desktop/laptop?

SandForce does not allow the manufacturers to change the firmware. They can only adjust a few settings, such as the life time throttle rate. There is virtually no difference between the firmwares.
There is no such thing as a 'reference' firmware for the SandForce SSDs that mfrs can modify. There is only one firmware, the one the SF creates.

This is false, both intel and OCZ has custom firmware for sandforce

 

[John Connor]

Yeah, Windows 8 is more for touch screens of which I don't own.

 

[BFG10K]

I forgot to mention it's popular and "trendy" to hate on Sandforce and OCZ for some beginner troubles a while back... But technology changes quickly and it's more a myth and legend at this point than a reality.

http://www.behardware.com/articles/881-7/components-returns-rates-7.html

- Intel 0.45% (against 1.73%)
- Samsung 0.48% (N/A)
- Corsair 1.05% (against 2.93%)
- Crucial 1.11% (against 0.82%)
- OCZ 5.02% (against 7.03%)

OCZ has a 5x - 10x higher return rate overall than other vendors.

- 40.00% for the OCZ Petrol 64 GB
- 39.42% for the OCZ Petrol 128 GB
- 30.85% for the OCZ Octane 128 GB SATA II
- 29.46% for the OCZ Octane 64 GB SATA II
- 9.73% for the OCZ Vertex 2 120 GB 3.5"
- 9.59% for the OCZ Vertex 2 120 GB
- 6.73% for the OCZ Vertex 2 60 GB
- 5.43% for the OCZ Agility 3 240 GB
- 5.12% for the OCZ Vertex Plus 128 GB

OCZ is the only SSD vendor with >5% return rate. When two recent products of yours have ~40% return rates, that's neither myth nor legend.

 

[Zxian]

http://www.behardware.com/articles/881-7/components-returns-rates-7.html


OCZ has a 5x - 10x higher return rate overall than other vendors.


OCZ is the only SSD vendor with >5% return rate. When two recent products of yours have ~40% return rates, that's neither myth nor legend.

OCZ != Sandforce

The top offenders on that list were based off Indilinx controllers. Both the Petrol and Octane were plagued with horrible firmware bugs, which is why they were returned so frequently.

Most of the negative attitude towards OCZ came from the first few months after the Vertex3 was released. Sandforce firmware was unstable on certain platforms during this time (this affected ALL SF-2281 drives - not just OCZ). All of these firmware issues have since been resolved.


Return rates are also not proof of failure rates. I've returned my fair share of fully functioning hardware because it didn't meet my expectations or it didn't have a feature that I needed. The product had not failed at all.

 

[kbp]

Yeah, Windows 8 is more for touch screens of which I don't own.

Funny. I have no touch screen. It's a Dell IPS panal that I do alot of photo editing on. Be warned - do not touch my screen. No fingerprints or dust allowed.
I've been on Win 8 for about a month now. With "Start-8". If you where to look at my desktop you could not tell the differance at all. OK.... The start orb is a win8 icon .... that would surely give it away.
What I am saying is that for $30.00 right now for Win8 Pro you would be crazy to not get it at this price.
Start8 will set you back another $4.99

 

[BFG10K]

OCZ != Sandforce

Did you read the quote I replied to? OCZ still being unreliable is no myth, regardless of what controller they use.

Return rates are also not proof of failure rates. I've returned my fair share of fully functioning hardware because it didn't meet my expectations or it didn't have a feature that I needed. The product had not failed at all.

Nobody else's product reached a 5% return rate. All SSDs that did (or exceeded it) were OCZ's.

If the SSDs aren't faulty, what expectations or features do you think caused OCZ users to completely blow out return rates, but not other vendors?

It's one thing to bury your heard in the sand an ignore the stats, but it doesn't change the fact that the other SSD vendors are leagues better. Remember, these are recent figures.

 

[groberts101]

It's one thing to bury your heard in the sand an ignore the stats, but it doesn't change the fact that the other SSD vendors are leagues better.

unless of course ones own personal perspective includes having owned dozens of them without issue through the years. Then those "stats" are only useful for those who are looking to find ammo to use against them.

I do definitely agree that there are plenty of ostrich's out there for sure.. but just keep in mind that there are plenty of chickens running around actively pecking for any speck of food they can find too.

Is purely a perspective kind of thing.

PS. I would think it safe to assume that an Anandtech mod's job would be to keep every single "Sandforce" thread from turning back into yet another OCZ bashfest.. but it appears that would be assuming too much. Pretty sad as it just brings the whole place's credibility down a notch or two.

 

[jwilliams4200]

PS. I would think it safe to assume that an Anandtech mod's job would be to keep every single "Sandforce" thread from turning back into yet another OCZ bashfest..

Then you think wrong. It is not their job to control the subject matter of discussions, except to try to keep personal attacks and obvious spam to a minimum.

And I'm not sure why you seem to think they have no right to express their own views in the forum.

If you do not like the subject matter being discussed, you are of course free not to discuss it.

 

[Hulk]

Intel for example directly destroyed their good name when they changed to Sandforce. No wonder they now have made a new controller. Even tho that wasnt the original plan.

Yeah I heard Intel is filing for bankruptcy and it is all because of that darn Sandforce controller. So long Intel, it was nice knowing you

 

[Seven]

Nothing wrong. My Intel 520 is going strong for 24/7 since its release.

 

[JellyRoll]

OCZ does not have custom firmware, and neither does Intel. As a matter of fact, many of the fixes for the SandForce firmware came at the behest of Intel. However, Intel still uses the same as all SF SSDs.
These mfrs would try to have you believe otherwise, but just ask any SF rep.

 

[groberts101]

Then you think wrong. It is not their job to control the subject matter of discussions, except to try to keep personal attacks and obvious spam to a minimum.

And I'm not sure why you seem to think they have no right to express their own views in the forum.

If you do not like the subject matter being discussed, you are of course free not to discuss it.

actually.. you might just be tad bit of wrong yourself there. It's also in their job description to keep threads from going repeatedly off topic as well. If you look back a bit.. and you surely won't need to go to France to find it.. there are other mod's around here who occasionally chime in to do just that.

So, if you'd just reread the threads name?.. it seems quite apparent that this was not intended to be an OCZ only discussion. Not to mention how many friggin' links to that site do you really need to keep pasting around here? LOL

So, keep on trying to knock me off my self-righteous high horse?.. and I'll gladly keep returning the favor in like fashion. Because you sure ain't sittin' on no itty bitty pony yourself there either. ()