Micron M510DC (480GB) Enterprise SATA SSD Reviewby Kristian Vättö on July 21, 2015 8:00 AM EST
AnandTech 2015 Enterprise SSD Suite
It's been close to a year since our last enterprise SSD review and to be honest the last year has just been crazy busy. When Anand retired last year, SSDs became solely my responsibility. I was more or less already running the SSD show, but Anand still covered some of the substantial launches (like the Intel P3700) and most importantly he was always around to help in case there was a tight deadline on a launch or another obstacle. I also quickly realized that the second year at university wasn't going to be as laid-back as the first one was, so in order to graduate on time I decided to prioritize my studies and not let work take over my life just yet.
This all led to me making the executive decision to hold off on enterprise testing until I have enough time to perform both client and enterprise testing properly. I could have continued enterprise testing, but since I thought our enterprise test suite needed an overhaul and I knew extensive testing would have jeopardized our client coverage, I wanted to give 110% to our new 2015 Client SSD Suite and then get back to the enterprise drives when the time is right. While enterprise SSDs are certainly intriguing, especially all the PCIe/NVMe ones, I believe our core competence lies in the client space because of our deep understanding and experience in that field. The enterprise segment is far more complex and testing wise it's simply impossible for me to do what I would ideally like to do because gaining access to real world enterprise workloads is very difficult and I don't think AnandTech server workloads are enough to give an accurate picture of all the different workloads there are.
That said, I think our new tests still do a good job of characterizing performance. I'm not going to overhype and say that the way we test is somehow special because it mostly isn't. All our new tests are based on custom Iometer 1.1.0 settings and results, rather than base sequentials and 4Ks that many other sites do. I think where we distinguish ourselves from other sites is the way we present our test data as a result of our custom design. I find it important to present both easily understandable and comparable data as well as more in-depth graphs for those who really have specific requirements, so in the new 2015 Enterprise Suite I'm trying to cover both grounds as well as possible.
|AnandTech 2015 SSD Test System|
|CPU||Intel Core i7-4770K running at 3.5GHz (Turbo & EIST enabled, C-states disabled)|
|Motherboard||ASUS Z97 Deluxe (BIOS 2205)|
|Chipset Drivers||Intel 10.0.24|
|AHCI Driver||Windows Native|
|NVMe Driver||Vendor Specific|
|Memory||Corsair Vengeance DDR3-1866 2x8GB (9-10-9-27 2T)|
|Graphics||Intel HD Graphics 4600|
|Desktop Resolution||1920 x 1080|
|OS||Windows Server 2012 R2 x64|
- Thanks to Intel for the Core i7-4770K CPU
- Thanks to ASUS for the Z97 Deluxe motherboard
- Thanks to Corsair for the Vengeance 16GB DDR3-1866 DRAM kit, RM750 power supply, Hydro H60 CPU cooler and Carbide 330R case
The test platform is essentially our client SSD testbed. I know some will argue that the system is not suitable for enterprise testing, but in my experience as long we are testing a single drive the CPU won't become a bottleneck. If we were testing a multi-drive RAID array, then I would agree that a more powerful CPU or a dual-CPU setup is needed for maximum performance, but since we aren't the i7-4770K delivers more than enough crunching power to max out the SSD.
For SATA drive testing, I've decided to stick with the native Windows AHCI driver. The reason for this is that in a real server the drive will most likely be connected to a RAID card, meaning that it won't be utilizing the normal Microsoft or Intel AHCI driver anyway. Since Intel RST drivers have some level of performance variation, I decided to just use the native driver to eliminate any driver anomalies. In the end, what matters is that all drives are tested using the same system and settings because it's not really the absolute performance that matters, but how drives compare with each other.
For NVMe and other PCIe SSD testing, I will be using vendor-specific drivers because the native Windows NVMe driver lacks some crucial management features (such as secure erase) that are vital for accurate testing. For now I'm only testing SATA drives anyway because I still need to figure out PCIe power measurement, and to be honest it's not fair to compare SATA and PCIe drives given that they are aimed at totally different market segments.
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
Oyster - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkMaybe I missed it, but warranty information?
twizzlebizzle22 - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkWould there be warrenty information available for the same reason price wasn't?
My question is how longevity is affected from 1-2 DWPD
Rekkx - Wednesday, July 22, 2015 - link5 year or NAND wear out, whichever comes first.
marraco - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkI whish to have also the tests for non enterprise SSDs.
These drives are not meant for the mass consumer, but enthusiasts like to try, or at least know how enterprise hardware performs on common PCs.
And is not the same to have "an opinion", even if valid, that actually knowing the experimental data.
Somebody will answer that, obviously, enterprise SSDs have different performance and workload targets, but that is no reason to discard consumer tests.
There is a big difference between actually knowing how they work, and just making an educated guess.
Also, enterprise users need to know how common hardware performs on server environments, because sometimes is cost effective to use common hardware for enterprise.
For example, Google used lots of common hardware on his servers, and that gave him a large advantage over older companies, with larger budgets.
Also, server hardware tends to have large validation and life cycles, and that means that it tends to have obsolete hardware. Sometimes is reasonable to use cheaper hardware, which can fail, but also has lower costs of replacement, or other benefits.
DanNeely - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkAgreed. Also, as prices drop SSDs will be making their way onto client OS VM servers; and those will mostly see amped up versions of client workloads on them.
ZeDestructor - Friday, July 24, 2015 - linkYou say that, but I recently picked up two 800GB Intel DC S3500 SSDs for use in my desktop, since they were near enough to the 960-1TB consumer drives, but brought me the nice benefit of full power-loss protection, higher performance than the Crucal M500/M550/M600/MX200 (though I doubt i'll ever notice it), and at $300 each, were really not that far from the $275 I've seen the 960GB M500 go down to.
nils_ - Friday, July 24, 2015 - linkIt's also always interesting to see if the price differential for "DC" hardware is justified or if you're just paying up for the label.
otherwise - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkAny idea what those ridicluously large caps on the PCB are for? I would hope for better unexpected power failure recovery -- but didn't see anything in the article touting that as a feature.
extide - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkYes that's what they are for, it mentions it on the first page.
Flunk - Tuesday, July 21, 2015 - linkYour conclusion is based on the manufacturer's reported reliability rating, but you never tested it. Who's to say if this drive actually is more durable than it's competition? Or even a cheap consumer drive?
I know that testing this would be impractical, but it's difficult to judge hardware based solely on the manufacturer's claims.