Page 1:Intel On Enterprise Storage: No More SLC; Meet HET MLC
Page 2:Inside The SSD 710: Something Old And Something New
Page 3:HET MLC: Supercharged MLC Or SLC Lite?
Page 4:HET MLC: What Does Endurance Really Look Like?
Page 5:Test Setup And Firmware Notes
Page 6:Benchmark Results: Storage Bench v1.0 & PCMark 7
Page 7:Benchmark Results: 4 KB Random And 128 KB Sequential Performance
Page 8:Benchmark Results: Enterprise Performance
Page 9:Sequential Performance Versus Transfer Size
Page 10:Performance Over Time
Page 11:Intel's SSD 710: Making Enterprise Storage More Affordable?
Performance Over Time
According to the slide above, which we took from this year's Flash Memory Summit in Santa Clara, there are a handful of assumptions made about enterprise environments as they relate to desktops. Enterprise drives are available 24x7, they need to be evaluated after hitting steady-state performance, no down-time is accepted, and the consequences of a failure are catastrophic.
When a drive is getting hit all day, every day, and it's operating at its steady-state point, performance needs to be both acceptable and predictable. If a server's workload is running for an extended period, it won't sit idle long enough for background garbage collection to move scattered pages into single blocks, restoring performance and reducing write amplification. Naturally, that's bad if the drive is unable to cope.
Intel SSD 710: Clean Performance
Intel SSD 320: Clean Performance
Examining how a drive might perform over time isn't that difficult. First, we just have to fill up all user-accessible space using a sequential write, making the drive "dirty." Then, we subject it to a 4 KB random write with a queue depth of 32. Because the drive is full of data, though, garbage collection can't consolidate scattered pages into free blocks. When we start writing sequential data again, the effects of active garbage collection kick in.
Random Writes, 20 Min.
Intel SSD 710
Intel SSD 320
If the drive recovers quickly, you can be fairly certain that there's lots of active garbage collection going on.
When we subject the SSD 710 to 20 minutes of torturous random writes, we start to see small differences. Whereas the 320 employs foreground garbage collection over an extended period, the 710 has a tendency to perform a lot of garbage collection all at once. As a result, we only see one dip in performance, recovered from relatively quickly.
That's not the only difference, though. When you look at the 320's chart, it's apparent that some garbage collection even occurs during read operations. We get confirmation when we revisit the endurance test. After running the database profile for six hours, we see a higher write amplification value.
The SSD 710 doesn't do any garbage collection on reads, but its write amplification goes down as a result of the 40% over-provisioning, which decreases the amount of data rearrangement necessary to optimize performance.
|Endurance Calculations |
|Intel SSD 710|
|Intel SSD 320 |
|4 KB 100% Random Write|
QD= 32, 6 Hours
|WA = 5.09|
|WA = 2.75|
|Database 67% Random Reads|
QD =32, 6 Hours
|WA = 4.03|
|WA = 3.49|
Perhaps all of those pretty pictures depicting performance up in the 100 MB/s range paint an overly optimistic picture of performance, though. Hammering the SSD 320 with 4 KB writes for 20 minutes still represents a fairly desktop-oriented workload. If we sustain that workload for hours, as you might see in an enterprise, random writes fall to as low as 20 MB/s. When we subject Intel's SSD 710 to an hour of random writes, its advantage over the desktop-oriented hardware becomes more clear.
Random Writes, 60 Min.
Intel SSD 710: 60 Minutes Random Write
Intel SSD 320: 60 Minutes of Random Write
According to Iometer, sequential read/write performance should be in the 175-200 MB/s range. Performance drops precipitously, though, as very little garbage collection occurs in real-time.
If we combine these results with our endurance test, we see that the 710 handles foreground garbage collection more adeptly, thanks in part to the large amount of over-provisioning. As a whole, this contributes to a minimum sequential write speed of 60 MB/s. In comparison, the 320 relies more on background garbage collection (particularly during reads) in order to recover performance.
After 30 Min. Idle
Intel SSD 710: After 30 Minutes of Idle
Intel SSD 320: After 30 Minutes of Idle
In either case, if you give the drives some idle time, performance recovers to a clean state, even without TRIM.
- Intel On Enterprise Storage: No More SLC; Meet HET MLC
- Inside The SSD 710: Something Old And Something New
- HET MLC: Supercharged MLC Or SLC Lite?
- HET MLC: What Does Endurance Really Look Like?
- Test Setup And Firmware Notes
- Benchmark Results: Storage Bench v1.0 & PCMark 7
- Benchmark Results: 4 KB Random And 128 KB Sequential Performance
- Benchmark Results: Enterprise Performance
- Sequential Performance Versus Transfer Size
- Performance Over Time
- Intel's SSD 710: Making Enterprise Storage More Affordable?