SanDisk Optimus Eco SSD: A SAS Interface And Up To 2 TB Of Flash

Features
By Drew Riley
published

Consolidation drastically changed the face of enterprise solid-state storage in 2013. One of the bigger moves was SanDisk's acquisition of SMART Storage Systems. Today, we're looking at the first branded SAS-based SSD to come from that purchase.

Under The Hood Of SanDisk's Optimus Eco

As mentioned, our review sample is dressed up in its SMART formal wear, while the final version will be decked out as a SanDisk-branded drive. The outer case is die cast aluminum that feels incredibly solid and should help dissipate heat from the components inside.

The chassis is etched so that the highest-power components can make what we think is direct contact. Thermal considerations like this are important in a device that draws upwards of 7 W, but is cooled passively. Interestingly, though, SanDisk doesn't use any interface material between the enclosure and the parts inside. Instead, it appears to rely on the compression force of the assembled SSD.

Looking at the top of the PCB, we see Marvell's controller, front and center. The 88SS9185-BLN2 is part of the very successful 88SS918x processor family. If you've already seen SanDisk's desktop-oriented Extreme II (SanDisk Extreme II SSD Review: Striking At The Heavy-Hitters), then you already know how fast this platform can be.

Next to the controller, you'll find three DDR3-1600 memory packages from Micron. The two larger ones offer 256 MB each, while the third hosts 128 MB. That gives this particular Optimus Eco 768 MB of DRAM cache.

Next, we encounter the 19 nm Toggle-mode MLC NAND sourced from Toshiba (TH58TEG8DDJBA8C). There are 16 total packages, eight on each side, hosting 32 GB each. That means the 400 GB drive actually has 512 GB of flash on-board. We can't say we're surprised; that's actually a pretty common degree of over-provisioning in the enterprise space.

On both sides of the PCB you see big yellow capacitors. Those help deliver power-loss protection. In the event of an outage, data in-flight is committed to non-volatile NAND so that no information is lost. 

Drew Riley
12 Comments Comment from the forums
  • tripleX
    When aming this statement, did you take Littles Law into consideration:
    Every single one-second average falls between 28,500 and 38,000 IOPS (0.84 and 1.12 ms)
    Reply
  • jkrui01
    toms, your are full of sh*t , consider this as my last read on your site, why not put the samsung pro in the article? because it would win, cheaper and faster.
    Reply
  • danwat1234
    7 watts active power consumption? With the word 'Eco' on the front? Ummm huh? Non-eco SSDs only take maybe 3.5w at full tilt and less than 2w when idle, often around 1w or less
    Reply
  • Haserath
    12177235 said:
    toms, your are full of sh*t , consider this as my last read on your site, why not put the samsung pro in the article? because it would win, cheaper and faster.

    The Samsung Pro is not an enterprise drive. They were comparing Intel's enterprise drive vs Sandisk's.
    Reply
  • utomo
    Samsung 1tb need to be reviewed and compare. The price is much cheaper
    Reply
  • robert3892
    4000 dollars for a 2TB drive? Even in the enterprise I see very few companies rolling out cash for something like this when a mechanical enterprise style hard drive can be bought for far less.
    Reply
  • drewriley
    12177473 said:
    7 watts active power consumption? With the word 'Eco' on the front? Ummm huh? Non-eco SSDs only take maybe 3.5w at full tilt and less than 2w when idle, often around 1w or less

    Many consumer SATA drives are a lot less, but enterprise drives aren't always quite that low. The S3700, at 800GB, is 6W typical and 8W burst. The Eco isn't quite as 'eco' at 400GB, but for 2TB, is actually pretty good. Many of the PCIe add-in SSDs that provide better performance at the same capacity are at least 10-15W and sometimes 25W. There aren't a lot of 6Gbps SAS SSD comparisons, now that 12Gbps drives are out, but even the Toshiba MK line is rated at 6.5W. We plan on doing more power consumption testing in the future.
    Reply
  • drewriley
    12178862 said:
    Samsung 1tb need to be reviewed and compare. The price is much cheaper

    As was said earlier, the Samsung 840 products are not enterprise class. They do not provide the endurance or power loss protection. They could possibly be used in workstations, but not beyond that. Samsung does offer the 843T, but that product is more in line with the Intel S3500 and does not have the random write performance to come close to the Eco. The 843T is also much more expensive than the 840 series.
    Reply
  • drewriley
    12180251 said:
    4000 dollars for a 2TB drive? Even in the enterprise I see very few companies rolling out cash for something like this when a mechanical enterprise style hard drive can be bought for far less.

    When comparing to HDD, there isn't a single SSD that will come close on price, enterprise or not. On the flip side, there isn't a single HDD that can come close on performance either. In order to get that much flash storage, you were previously limited to multiple SSDs or PCIe add-in cards, the Eco allows you to have that capacity in a smaller form-factor while drawing less power. Considering the $/GB, which is in line for it's class, it makes sense since there are plenty of enterprise customers buying 800GB drives, at least enough that companies keep producing them.
    Reply
  • drewriley
    12173519 said:
    When aming this statement, did you take Littles Law into consideration:
    Every single one-second average falls between 28,500 and 38,000 IOPS (0.84 and 1.12 ms)

    No, we didn't, but can you be a little more clear with your question? I am not an expert in the area, but the law, as it applies to performance testing, is valid if the number of jobs in the system is equal to those being completed. Meaning that no new jobs are created in the system and no jobs are lost forever. So, if jobs were being lost, you might see consistent performance centered around the bottleneck, which is not the device under test. Since the system is artificially creating and tracking IOs, I don't believe any are being lost or accidentally created. Also, with our Enterprise Video testing, which I wrote to test a specific use-case, the data is generated and validated as it is written, so there is no chance of data loss. If that doesn't answer your question, please let me know, I am always interested in new subjects....
    Reply