Micron M500DC 800 GB SSD Review: Cloud And Web 2.0 Storage

Features
By published

Building on the desktop-oriented M500, Micron is announcing its enterprise-focused M500DC. We got a chance to run the 800 GB model through an updated test suite to gauge whether this Marvell-powered SSD keeps up with the best-known enterprise solutions.

Results: 4 KB Random Performance And Latency

We knew going into our testing that the M500DC's random read performance wouldn't match most of our comparison drives. Iometer demonstrates exactly that, too. In fact, the only drive Micron beats at high queue depths is the company's P400m, its other enterprise-oriented SATA-attached SSD. The M500DC isn't positioned as a read-focused product though, so this result comes as no surprise.

The M500DC shines more brightly in random write performance. Its 800 GB model consistently exceeds the 24,000 IOPS claimed in Micron's datasheet. Compared to more read-oriented SSDs that hover in the 10,000 IOPS range, the M500DC delivers excellent performance.

We would have liked to test the 480 GB model as well. Micron says it should do 35,000 IOPS, and dropping that on the competition would have put it on equal footing as SanDisk's first-place Optimus Eco at 400 GB.

Average response time measurements put Micron's M500DC in the middle of the pack, which corroborates our IOPS testing.

Maximum response time lands slightly higher than the best enterprise-focused SSDs, though 26.54 ms is still a great result.

7 Comments Comment from the forums
  • ParrLeyne
    Good article/review!

    Only one _small_ problem. According to the Micron product page (http://www.micron.com/products/solid-state-storage/enterprise-sata-ssd/m500dc-enterprise-sata-ssd) the M500DC is a SATA device, not SAS!
    Reply
  • drewriley
    Thanks - We go that fixed!
    Reply
  • tripleX
    The author obviously does not understand the subject matter. SAS lumped in with SATA? read-centric SSD isnt meant for read workloads? etc. numerous errors, too many to list.
    Reply
  • tripleX
    Author does not understand what "corner case" is. corner case testing? are you doing lab validation work?
    Reply
  • drewriley
    In SSD testing, it is common to call the mix in testing between read/write and random/sequential as '4 corner' or 'corner case' testing. And yes, this is lab verification work, that is kind of the point of the review. Also, SAS and SATA do compete for applications. The point was to put different product that had similar specifications against one another.
    Reply
  • tripleX
    13279486 said:
    In SSD testing, it is common to call the mix in testing between read/write and random/sequential as '4 corner' or 'corner case' testing. And yes, this is lab verification work, that is kind of the point of the review. Also, SAS and SATA do compete for applications. The point was to put different product that had similar specifications against one another.

    The fact you are claiming this is anything even remotely near lab validation exposes your tremendous lack of knowledge on the subject.
    No one refers to 4-corner testing as corner case testing. One link to a reputable site that does so? Instead of arguing an indefensible point you should be attempting to learn exactly what corner case means. Most would have had the good sense to do that before posting.
    SAS v SATA is like Formula 1 compared to Go-Karts. Another example of your lack of understanding. SAS is meant for users who require certain features, and the price demands that users are aware of those features. They do not compete against each other, they are two entirely different classes of hardware.
    Reply
  • tripleX
    The fact you are claiming this is anything even remotely near lab validation exposes your tremendous lack of knowledge on the subject.
    No one refers to 4-corner testing as corner case testing. One link to a reputable site that does so? Instead of arguing an indefensible point you should be attempting to learn exactly what corner case means. Most would have had the good sense to do that before posting.
    SAS v SATA is like Formula 1 compared to Go-Karts. Another example of your lack of understanding. SAS is meant for users who require certain features, and the price demands that users are aware of those features. They do not compete against each other, they are two entirely different classes of hardware.
    Reply