- HOW LONG IS INTEL BURN TEST FULL
- HOW LONG IS INTEL BURN TEST PLUS
- HOW LONG IS INTEL BURN TEST SERIES
HOW LONG IS INTEL BURN TEST FULL
So, during normal use the drive is not full to the extreme, which leads to increased endurance because the drive can operate correctly and mitigate the impact to endurance, and the workload does not span the full LBA range, which leads to increased endurance. The criteria for data retention is that after the endurance rating has been exhausted, you must be able to read back the data after the drive has set unpowered for a year. If you measure endurance with a sequential workload under the same sub-optimal and unrealistic conditions, the flash provides anywhere from 5x to 12x more endurance.Īlso, endurance is rated by data retention, which is a function of time. Think of it as taking a shotgun to the flash. These two factors magnify the impact to endurance to unrealistic levels, but the use of a 4K random write workload is even more brutal. And a 16GB span is still far too large, imo. SNIA guidelines for client SSD testing recommend a 16GB span, which changes the nature of the workload, and the impact to endurance. The workload spans the entire space of the drive, which again just doesn't happen in normal application. The drive is full, which reduces its ability to boost endurance using common methods, like write combining or effective garbage collection, etc, so it forces the drive to not operate, or boost endurance, as it would normally. From an SSDs viewpoint, this is the absolute worst case scenario imaginable. The workload consists of a 4K random write to the full span of the drive while it is completely full of data. It is important to remember how SSD endurance is measured.
HOW LONG IS INTEL BURN TEST PLUS
Plus it's usually super annoying to repair/replace/upgrade the SSD in a laptop if you actually need to transfer any data.Ģ1211903 said:What is the real capacity of the 1TB drive? Intel will refuse to cover non-retail drives and just refer you back to the laptop OEM. I think what is most annoying about QLC drives, is that cheap laptop OEMs are going to switch to them almost immediately, slap a 1 year warranty on the whole computer, then you are SOL when the drive wears out in 18 months. Plus, the 760p of the same capacity will have superior performance, which will be more clear when Toms reviews the 1TB 760p or the 512GB 660p, so there can be a direct comparison. I could buy 1 x 760p at $140 retail, or 3 x 660p for a total of $300 retail. Personally, I don't think a slightly lower price is worth the hassle and cost of replacing your SSD three times as often. It's about one third of the TLC drives (which is not the same thing as "33% lower" by the way), and the TLC drives themselves have somewhat mediocre endurance. So how much over-provisioning is Intel using with QLC compared to TLC?Īlso, is hitting the endurance limits actually covered by the warranty? Or is Intel just planing on replacing a bunch of drives as they wear out in a year or two? Because, to me, calling 100 TBW endurance poor is an understatement. I really doubt the "raw" capacity really matches what the user sees, which is what the table says. What is the real capacity of the 1TB drive? A drive might consume more power during any given workload, but accomplishing a task faster allows the drive to drop into an idle state faster, which ultimately saves power. You might think that lower power consumption is better than high peak values, but performance-per-watt is more important. Average workload power consumption and max consumption are two other important aspects.
Some SSDs can consume watts of power at idle while better-suited ones sip just milliwatts. Idle power consumption is a very important aspect to consider, especially if you're looking for a new drive for your laptop. We use the Quarch XLC Programmable Power Module to gain a deeper understanding of power characteristics.
HOW LONG IS INTEL BURN TEST SERIES
It even outperforms the Samsung 970 series during 4KB random read and write workloads at a queue depth of one. It displays impressive random read performance and strong random write performance. The 660p’s read and write results match the manufacturer’s 1.8 GB/s read and write specifications. CrystalDiskMark is a simple and easy to use benchmarking tool.