All about Internal Storage
 Latest Internal Storage articles
All Internal Storage articles

Newsletters


Ok !
  • Ask your question about IT issues
  • Post

Partners

The Games selection

action : Yoyo the Star Yoyo is a young girl who recently graduated and dreams to become a movie star (don't we all). You'll have to guide her on the path to stardom,...
kids : Bob Throw bubbles so as to make the ones that appear in the game disappear. For this, use the Right / Left arrow keys to duck or move about, and the...
Ads

Sponsored links

Samsung PB22-J Flash SSD (256 GB)

Previous Next
2:00 AM - 04/27/2009 by Patrick Schmid and Achim Roos

Throughput Testing

Samsung’s 256 GB MLC flash PB22-J SSD typically delivers more than 200 MB/s sequential read throughput, which it cannot maintain when you stress it with heavy I/O operation between sequential tests. However, the performance drop is somewhat predictable: on average, you lose roughly 15% throughput, while the minimum read throughput keeps dropping more with every run. Still, we don’t think there is reason to be worried about read performance here.

The situation is clearly different for sequential write throughput. Average and minimum performance kept dropping with every benchmark cycle that included sequential throughput followed by our intensive I/O performance testing, but the write throughput quickly caught up again once we stopped throwing the I/O operations at the drive. Knowing that this SSD was designed to be a consumer product, the results are very acceptable, as you wouldn’t stress such an SSD with heavy I/O anyway.

I/O Testing

I/O performance of the Samsung PB22-J SSD is far from the levels reached by the Intel products, but the good news is that it is still much faster than any hard drive could ever be, and that I/O performance is consistent across our benchmark torture testing. There were no significant performance drops.

Topics being discussed on the forums
Talkback
mrubermonkey 04/27/2009 9:16 AM
Hide
-1+

Props to you guys for this review.

Tindytim 04/27/2009 9:47 AM
Hide
-3+

I really wish we were able to Thumb up or Thumb down articles. This one would get a large thumbs up from me.

chookman 04/27/2009 9:58 AM
Hide
-1+

Thumbs up on this one too from me. Although if anyone desires more in depth understanding of the problem i found the PC Perspective articles better in that aspect.

Intel Firmware change
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=691

OCZ Indilinx Chip
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=670

chookman 04/27/2009 9:58 AM
Show
chookman 04/27/2009 9:59 AM
Show
empstar 04/27/2009 10:55 AM
Hide
-5+

why don't show the HDD read / write data here together with SDD?

lire210 04/27/2009 12:56 PM
Show
snotling 04/27/2009 1:29 PM
Hide
-4+

lire210 :
this will not matter at all to servers until the price gooes down. the speed does not make sence in the 4+ bucks a gig. normal hd are safer just in the fact that you can put 7 hd and put it in a raid one fails o well. plus 800 bucks for 64gb o my god


Servers are actually where these drives makes the most sense, and you can RAID SSDs just like you RAID HDs... and about being "safe" well I would put my money on the technology with no moving parts!

xsamitt 04/27/2009 2:27 PM
Hide
-6+

I keep waiting for a reviews of new monitors.it seems we keep getting almost the same kind of topic every week lately.

rubix_1011 04/27/2009 3:37 PM
Hide
-0+

I have to agree with most people on this one...a flashback to the really good reviews Tom's did in the past. A very relevant review for most people with some good data and testing steps.

arkadi 04/27/2009 3:39 PM
Hide
-0+

Well it like it was written specially for me. Grate job! One of the best articles i encounter in long time.
I posted a question on storage configuration just few day ago, with no reply btw, with exactly the same thing on my mind. Hope we can go deeper with that, and talk how we can take an advantage of what we learned here in different situations with diffident storage/system configuration's, combining SSD with regular drives, raid configurations, moving tmp/swap some programs etc.. to different drives etc...

arkadi 04/27/2009 3:40 PM
Show
tipoo 04/27/2009 3:45 PM
Hide
-1+

Nice review. So will you guys be reviewing the 1TB PCI-Express OCZ SSD? :-)

Anonymous 04/27/2009 4:50 PM
Hide
-0+

So if your SSD starts to slow down, does a reformat get rid of that issue?

yourhighness 04/27/2009 6:22 PM
Hide
-0+

You guys had any problems with that Power Supply?

I bought an OCZ Elite Extreme 800W PSU last year an dhad 3 of them die in 6 months....The RMA process was long and slow, but they eventually made it right by upgrading me to a PC Power and cooling PSU.

Area51 04/27/2009 6:49 PM
Hide
-2+

lire210 :
this will not matter at all to servers until the price gooes down. the speed does not make sence in the 4+ bucks a gig. normal hd are safer just in the fact that you can put 7 hd and put it in a raid one fails o well. plus 800 bucks for 64gb o my god


You need to have a better understanding of the problem before you make statements like this...

1. The number of HD required to get the same IOPS will put the total price to be higher than SSD's
2. The power requirement is much higher for the number of HD that you need to get the same performance as a single Intel SLC SSD. This can drop the power consumption of a server significantly down from regular HD, and increase it’s performance.
3. Remember that in many servers it’s not the capacity that matters, It’s the performance that is more important.
4. Since SSD's can do a very nice job of simultaneous read, and write running multiple jobs is not derogated by the SSD's as it is with regular HD's.
5. SMART command in SSD’s can give you a predictive failure analysis, something that you cannot do with HD’s, HD’s can only show you if the Drive is good or bad. This is very important since data can be copied before the drive goes bad.
6. MTBF of SSD’s (at lease Intel’s) are much higher than HD’s. 2M hrs. vs 1.2M hrs on HD’s


krazyderek 04/28/2009 1:06 AM
Hide
-2+

wheres the OCZ vertex ?????

krazyderek 04/28/2009 1:08 AM
Hide
-0+

lire210 :
this will not matter at all to servers until the price gooes down. the speed does not make sence in the 4+ bucks a gig. normal hd are safer just in the fact that you can put 7 hd and put it in a raid one fails o well. plus 800 bucks for 64gb o my god


have you seen how much SAS drives are??

hustler539 04/28/2009 1:07 PM
Hide
-0+

Good to see more review sites doing articles on these performance degradations, helps us make a better informed decision when purchasing new hardware.

Here's another great article which gives you a good in depth look at it
http://www.anandtech.com/storage/s [...] i=3531&p=4
a must read if you are thinking of upgrading to some of those new shiny ssds

hustler539 04/28/2009 1:08 PM
Hide
--1+

krazyderek :
wheres the OCZ vertex ?????




^ a review of that is in the article as well


Comments are closed on this page.

Sponsored links

Related forums topics

Related news

Related articles

  • Does Power-Saving Technology Kill SSD Performance?

    Processor speed matters. We found that a fast solid state disk drive, such as Intel’s X25-E, can be greatly impaired by a system running with all of its CPU’s power saving features turned on. Surprised? Read our full analysis for the specifics.

  • The SSD Workload Performance Analysis

    Today we're running a series of benchmarks on the latest SSD offering from Intel and Samsung to see how performance changes over time. We discovered that there are some severe performance issues, but also solutions you should know about.

  • The SSD Power Consumption Hoax

    Manufacturers tout the power savings of flash-based solid state drives compared to conventional hard drives. True? Check out our notebook battery tests.