Storage


Intel Releases SSD DC S3510

Intel Releases SSD DC S3510

In February Intel refreshed its enterprise SATA SSD lineup with the DC S3610 and S3710 SSDs, but left the entry-level S35xx series untouched. That changes today with the launch of the DC S3510, which succeeds the popular S3500 that has been around since late 2012.

Similar to its big brothers, the S3510 features Intel’s second generation SATA 6Gbps controller that was first introduced in the high capacity S3500 models late last year. Intel has remained quiet about the specifics of the second generation controller (and the SATA 6Gbps controller as a whole), but we do know that it adds support for larger capacities, which suggests the internal caches and DRAM controller could be larger. 

The most significant change in the S3510 is the NAND. The S3510 switches to IMFT’s latest 16nm 128Gbit MLC NAND node, which is a rather surprising move given that all Intel’s client SSDs are still utilizing 20nm NAND. The reason lies behind the fact that Intel didn’t invest in IMFT’s 16nm node, meaning that Micron produces and owns all 16nm NAND output. Intel and Micron reconsider the partnership and investments for each generation separately and for 16nm Intel decided not to invest — likely because Intel’s focus is in the enterprise nowadays and 16nm is more geared towards the client market given its lower endurance, and Intel also wanted to concentrate more heavily in the companies’ upcoming 3D NAND.

That said, Intel and Micron do have strong supply agreements in place, which gives Intel access to Micron’s 16nm NAND despite not investing in its development and production. I suspect the use of 16nm NAND is why the S3510 wasn’t launched alongside the S3610 and S3710 earlier this year because validating a new NAND node is time consuming and might be that the 16nm node wasn’t even mature enough for the enterprise back then. In any case, the S3510 is the first enterprise SSD to utilize sub-19nm NAND, which is a respectable achievement on its own already. 

Intel SSD DC S3510 Specifications
Capacity 80GB 120GB 240GB 480GB 800GB 1.2TB 1.6TB
Controller Intel 2nd Generation SATA 6Gbps Controller
NAND Micron 16nm 128Gbit Standard Endurance Technology (SET) MLC
Sequential Read 375MB/s 475MB/s 500MB/s 500MB/s 500MB/s 500MB/s 500MB/s
Sequential Write 110MB/s 135MB/s 260MB/s 440MB/s 460MB/s 440MB/s 430MB/s
4KB Random Read 68K IOPS 68K IOPS 68K IOPS 68K IOPS 67K IOPS 67K IOPS 65K IOPS
4KB Random Write 8.4K IOPS 5.3K IOPS 10.2K IOPS 15.1K IOPS 15.3K IOPS 20K IOPS 15.2K IOPS
Avg Read Power 1.93W 2.14W 2.21W 2.32W 2.39W 2.61W 2.69W
Avg Write Power 1.91W 2.14W 3.06W 4.45W 4.74W 5.24W 5.59W
Endurance 45TB 70TB 140TB 275TB 450TB 660TB 880TB

On the performance side, the S3510 provides slightly better random write performance at larger capacities than its predecessor (you can find the S3500 specs here), but other than that the S3510 is a very close match with the S3500. Typical to enterprise SSDs, the S3510 features AES-256 hardware and full power loss protection that protects all data, including in-flight user writes, from sudden power losses. 

Comparison of Intel’s Enterprise SATA SSDs
  S3510 S3610 S3710
Form Factors 2.5″ 2.5″ & 1.8″ 2.5″
Capacity Up to 1.6TB Up to 1.6TB Up to 1.2TB
NAND 16nm MLC 20nm HET MLC 20nm HET MLC
Endurance 0.3 DWPD 3 DWPD 10 DWPD
Random Read Performance Up to 68K IOPS Up to 84K IOPS Up to 85K IOPS
Random Write Performance Up to 20K IOPS Up to 28K IOPS Up to 45K IOPS

The endurance is also equal to the S3500 and comes in at 0.3 drive writes per day for five years, which is a typical rating for entry-level enterprise SSDs that are mostly aimed for read intensive workloads like media streaming. For more write-centric applications, Intel offers the S3610 and S3710 with higher endurance and better write performance (but at a higher cost, of course). I didn’t get the S3510 MSRPs from Intel yet, but I suspect that the S3510 is priced around $0.80 per gigabyte, but I’ll confirm this as soon as I hear back from Intel.

All in all, even though the industry is transitioning more and more towards PCIe and NVMe, there is still a huge market for SATA drives. Many applications don’t necessarily benefit much from higher performance and especially hyperscale customers are looking at cost and compatibility, which is where SATA is still the king of the hill. 

Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 USB 3.0 256GB Flash Drive Capsule Review

Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 USB 3.0 256GB Flash Drive Capsule Review

The rise of USB 3.0 as a high speed interface for PCs and the increasing affordability of flash memory has led to some very interesting products. USB flash drives are a dime a dozen, but there is scope for manufacturers to differentiate themselves. High-performance flash drives have traditionally employed a SATA SSD controller behind a USB 3.0 – SATA bridge. However, this increases the drive cost in what is essentially a price-sensitive market. Controller vendors have recently started to introduce native high-performance USB 3.0 flash controllers. Today, we will be looking at the performance of the Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 256GB, a high-end USB 3.0 flash drive sporting a recently introduced native USB 3.0 flash controller.

The list of flash drives used for comparison purposes in this review is provided below.

  • Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 256GB
  • Corsair Voyager GTX 256GB
  • VisionTek Pocket SSD 240GB

Hardware Design and Internals

In terms of external design and features, the Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 doesn’t depart from the older members in its lineup. It still features a retractable USB connector, allowing for a compact design. There is also no need for an  explicit cap on the USB connector. The design also supports hanging the flash drive off a keychain. As we can see from the photograph below, the Supersonic Rage 2 256GB is the smallest flash drive that we have evaluated in its capacity class.

Without opening up the unit, it is possible to identify the controller and flash inside the unit.

We see that the Supersonic Rage 2 uses the Phison PS2251-08 controller with firmware version 5.00.10. The controller was introduced at CES earlier this year. The drive uses Toshiba MLC NAND.

Testbed Setup and Testing Methodology

Evaluation of DAS units on Windows is done with the testbed outlined in the table below. For devices with USB 3.0 connections (such as the Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 that we are considering today), we utilize the USB 3.0 port directly hanging off the PCH. This port supports UASP, even though the drive we are considering today doesn’t advertise support for it.

AnandTech DAS Testbed Configuration
Motherboard Asus Z97-PRO Wi-Fi ac ATX
CPU Intel Core i7-4790
Memory Corsair Vengeance Pro CMY32GX3M4A2133C11
32 GB (4x 8GB)
DDR3-2133 @ 11-11-11-27
OS Drive Seagate 600 Pro 400 GB
Optical Drive Asus BW-16D1HT 16x Blu-ray Write (w/ M-Disc Support)
Add-on Card Asus Thunderbolt EX II
Chassis Corsair Air 540
PSU Corsair AX760i 760 W
OS Windows 8.1 Pro
Thanks to Asus and Corsair for the build components

The full details of the reasoning behind choosing the above build components can be found here.

Synthetic Benchmarks – ATTO and Crystal DiskMark

Patriot claims read and write speeds of 400 MBps and 300 MBps respectively. These might be achievable in specific benchmark modes with appropriate queue depths, but they are not backed up by the ATTO benchmarks provided below. That said, these access traces are not very common in real-life scenarios.

Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 256GBCorsair Voyager GTX 256GBVisionTek Pocket SSD 240GB

CrystalDiskMark, despite being a canned benchmark, provides a better estimate of the performance range with a selected set of numbers. As evident from the screenshot below, the performance can dip to the KBps range for 4K random acceses.

Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 256GBCorsair Voyager GTX 256GBVisionTek Pocket SSD 240GB

Benchmarks – robocopy and PCMark 8 Storage Bench

Our testing methodology for DAS units also takes into consideration the usual use-case for such devices. The most common usage scenario is transfer of large amounts of photos and videos to and from the unit. The minor usage scenario is importing files directly off the DAS into a multimedia editing program such as Adobe Photoshop.

In order to tackle the first use-case, we created three test folders with the following characteristics:

  • Photos: 15.6 GB collection of 4320 photos (RAW as well as JPEGs) in 61 sub-folders
  • Videos: 16.1 GB collection of 244 videos (MP4 as well as MOVs) in 6 sub-folders
  • BR: 10.7 GB Blu-ray folder structure of the IDT Benchmark Blu-ray (the same that we use in our robocopy tests for NAS systems)

robocopy - Photos Read

robocopy - Photos Write

robocopy - Videos Read

robocopy - Videos Write

robocopy - Blu-ray Folder Read

robocopy - Blu-ray Folder Write

In the above use-cases, the Supersonic Rage 2 manages to handle itself very well. It comes out on top in the majority of the benchmarks.

For the second use-case, we take advantage of PC Mark 8’s storage bench. The storage workload involves games as well as multimedia editing applications. The command line version allows us to cherry-pick storage traces to run on a target drive. We chose the following traces.

  • Adobe Photoshop (Light)
  • Adobe Photoshop (Heavy)
  • Adobe After Effects
  • Adobe Illustrator

Usually, PC Mark 8 reports time to complete the trace, but the detailed log report has the read and write bandwidth figures which we present in our performance graphs. Note that the bandwidth number reported in the results don’t involve idle time compression. Results might appear low, but that is part of the workload characteristic. Note that the same testbed is being used for all DAS units. Therefore, comparing the numbers for each trace should be possible across different DAS units.

Units sporting a SATA SSD controller tend to perform very well in this benchmark. Drives such as the Supersonic Rage 2 do not target the market for portable SSDs.

robocopy - Photoshop Light Read

robocopy - Photoshop Light Write

robocopy - Photoshop Heavy Read

robocopy - Photoshop Heavy Write

robocopy - After Effects Read

robocopy - After Effects Write

robocopy - Illustrator Read

robocopy - Illustrator Write

Performance Consistency

Yet another interesting aspect of these types of units is performance consistency. Aspects that may influence this include thermal throttling and firmware caps on access rates to avoid overheating or other similar scenarios. This aspect is an important one, as the last thing that users want to see when copying over, say, 100 GB of data to the flash drive, is the transfer rate going to USB 2.0 speeds. In order to identify whether the drive under test suffers from this problem, we instrumented our robocopy DAS benchmark suite to record the flash drive’s read and write transfer rates while the robocopy process took place in the background. For supported drives, we also recorded the internal temperature of the drive during the process (unfortunately, not for the Supersonic Rage 2). The graphs below show the speeds observed during our real-world DAS suite processing. The first three sets of writes and reads correspond to the photos suite. A small gap (for the transfer of the videos suite from the primary drive to the RAM drive) is followed by three sets for the next data set. Another small RAM-drive transfer gap is followed by three sets for the Blu-ray folder.

An important point to note here is that each of the first three blue and green areas correspond to 15.6 GB of writes and reads respectively. Throttling, if any, is apparent within the processing of the photos suite itself.

Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 256GBCorsair Voyager GTX 256GBVisionTek Pocket SSD 240GB

We find that the unit doesn’t suffer from any throttling issues, with transfer rates being quite consistent after the initial startup phase.

Concluding Remarks

Coming to the business end of the review, the Supersonic Rage 2 continues Patriot’s tradition of improving the performance of their USB 3.0 flash drive every year. This time around, they have been helped by Phison’s new high-performance native USB 3.0 flash controller. While SATA SSD controllers enable features such as TRIM and over-provisioning control (such as what we saw in the Corsair Voyager GTX), they are not user-controllable in devices with native USB 3.0 controllers.

Price per GB

A typical 256 GB SSD in a 2.5″ bus-powered USB 3.0 enclosure retails for around $125. The Patriot Supersonic Rage 2 256GB has a current street price of $190 on Amazon. The form factor of the USB drive carries a premium. Compared to flash drives in its capacity class, the Rage 2 is cheaper than the Corsair Voyager GTX, thanks to doing away with the USB 3.0 – SATA bridge. However, it is priced higher than the VisionTek Pocket SSD based on a SandForce SF-2281 SATA SSD controller. Then, again, the Rage 2 doesn’t suffer from the thermal throttling issues that plague the VisionTek unit.

Ultimately what we find is that the Supersonic Rage 2 makes for a great flash drive (decent write speeds and very fast reads for large-sized files, but mediocre random access speeds). It is also the smallest and most compact 256GB flash drive that we have evaluated so far. That said, users should not mistake it for a portable SSD, and to Patriot’s credit, they don’t advertise it as one.

New Samsung SSD 840 EVO Read Performance Fix Coming Later This Month

New Samsung SSD 840 EVO Read Performance Fix Coming Later This Month

The Samsung SSD 840 EVO read performance bug has been on the table for over six months now. Initially Samsung acknowledged the issue fairly quickly and provided a fix only a month after the news hit the mainstream tech media, but reports of read performance degradation surfaced again a few weeks after the fix had been released, making it clear that the first fix didn’t solve the issue for all users. Two months ago Samsung announced that a new fix is in the works and last week Samsung sent us the new firmware along with Magician 4.6 for testing, which will be available to the public later this month.

I covered the reason behind the issue in one of our earlier articles, but in short the read performance degradation is a result of cell charge decay over time that caused extensive read-retry cycles to retrieve the correct data. The new firmware fixes this by periodically refreshing (i.e. rewriting) old data, which recovers the cell charge back to its original state and ensures that no read-retry or ECC that would degrade the performance is needed. Samsung says that the refresh operation does not impact user performance, suggesting that it’s a relatively low priority process that is run when the drive is idling. 

The new Magician 4.6 also includes an Advanced Performance Optimization feature, which is similar to the performance restoration tool that Samsung released earlier. Basically, it’s a command that tells the SSD to rewrite all of its internal data, which resets all cell charges and hence recovers performance. It’s merely a supplementary tool as the firmware upgrade itself should be enough to restore performance, but in case the performance isn’t fully restored after the firmware upgrade (and some idle time to let the drive refresh the cells), the tool can be used to force a cell charge refresh. 

I haven’t run any tests of my own because I don’t have any 840 EVOs deployed in my systems (I only have one 2.5″ EVO anyway), but Allyn Malventano from PC Perspective managed to run some tests on a degraded drive to show the impact of the new firmware.

Before update

After update

After “Advanced Performance Optimization”

Allyn’s tests indicate that the new firmware seems to mostly fix the issue even without running the optimization tool. Note that Allyn didn’t give the drive any idle time after the firmware update, so the update appears the be very effective and with idle time the performance would likely have restored on its own.

Obviously, the big question is whether the performance will stay high because there was never a problem with freshly written data. We won’t know that for sure until a couple of months later, but given the way the new firmware handles old data it does sound more promising because no data should get old enough to be slow to read.

Some of you are likely skeptical about the effect on endurance since rewriting the data will consume P/E cycles, but I find this to be a non-issue. We know that Samsung’s 19nm TLC NAND is rated at 1,000 P/E cycles, so if the drive was to refresh all cells once a week, even that would only consume 52 cycles in a year. In five years time the total would be 260 cycles, which leaves you with 740 cycles for user data writes (for the record, that’s 52GB of NAND writes per day for five years with the 120GB 840 EVO). 

All in all, I hope this fix will finally put an end to the performance degradation. The issue has been bugging many users for months and it’s critical that the users get what they initially paid for. On one hand I’m confident enough to say that this fix is permanent given the way it works, but on the other hand I don’t want to be too optimistic this time around because the first fix didn’t turn out so great. Either way, I think this fix is the last chance for Samsung to provide a permanent solution because they already failed to do so once and it would no longer be fair to ask the customers to wait months for a fix that might or might not fix the issue. For now the only thing we can do is wait for user reports and hope for the best, but at least in theory the new firmware should be a permanent fix. 

Crucial BX100 (120GB, 250GB, 500GB & 1TB) SSD Review

Crucial has been doing very well in the client SSD market during the past year. Crucial’s/Micron’s ability to quickly roll out the 16nm NAND node definitely paid off because the MX100 really nailed it when it came to cost and overall value. The MX100 set a new bar for mainstream SSD prices while still providing solid performance in typical client-level workloads. Back at CES, Crucial introduced some fresh faces to its client SSD lineup by announcing the MX200 and BX100The MX200 is essentially a retail version of Micron’s M600 that was launched last year and which we already reviewed, but the BX100 is a totally new series that utilizes Silicon Motion’s popular SM2246EN controller with custom Crucial firmware. Can the BX100 provide what the MX100 did last year? Read on and find out!

Samsung SM951 PCIe SSD Now Available

Samsung SM951 PCIe SSD Now Available

We reviewed Samsung’s SM951 PCIe 3.0 x4 SSD a little over a month ago and it ended up being clearly the fastest client-level SSD, beating its predecessor XP941 by a large margin. Our initial review sample was pulled from a Lenovo laptop as it was the only way to get early access to the drive, but RamCity just received its first batch last week and the drive is now available for purchase.

  128GB 256GB 512GB
Samsung SM951 (RamCity) $122 $242 $469
Samsung SM951 (Amazon) $160 $260 $510

EDIT: RamCity will also be selling the SM951 through Amazon and I just got the pricing details. With today’s exchange rate it’s actually cheaper to buy from RamCity’s online store despite the shipping fees, although the downside is longer shipping time (about a week versus free two-day shipping for Amazon Prime members). The SM951 isn’t listed on Amazon yet, but the 128GB and 256GB versions will be up early next week once stock arrives to the US. 

Since RamCity is located in Australia, the shipping costs to US and other parts of the world are ~$18 with today’s exchange rate. The pricing is comparable to the XP941 and overall pretty fair when taking the performance gains into account. As the SM951 is an OEM part, there’s no official warranty on behalf of Samsung, but RamCity is giving the drive a three-year warranty.

Currently the 512GB model is out of stock, but RamCity should be receiving another 150 units next week and you’re also able to pre-order one today. The 128GB and 256GB units are both in stock and available immediately. I’ll also be getting the ‘vanilla’ versions that RamCity sells in for review as our initial sample has a Lenovo-specific firmware in it and I want to ensure that our scores represent an actual product that’s available for purchase.

Additionally, you will likely need an M.2 to PCIe adapter because M.2 PCIe 3.0 x4 slots are rather rare (most I’ve seen have been PCIe 2.0 x2). There are various adapters available online, but personally I’ve been using Lycom’s DT-120 and can vouch for it as it hasn’t given me any trouble. 

All in all, there are many PCIe SSD coming during this summer and some will undoubtedly be able to challenge the SM951, but for now it’s one of the only PCIe SSDs available. Intel’s SSD 750 is a serious contender especially for very intensive IO workloads, but if you’re looking for 256GB or smaller drive the SM951 is the best option.