Skip to main content

Intel SSD 710 Tested: MLC NAND Flash Hits The Enterprise

Test Setup And Firmware Notes

Test Hardware
ProcessorIntel Core i5-2500K (Sandy Bridge), 32 nm, 3.3 GHz, LGA 1155, 6 MB Shared L3, Turbo Boost Enabled
MotherboardASRock Z68 Extreme4, BIOS v1.4
MemoryKingston Hyper-X 8 GB (2 x 4 GB) DDR3-1333 @ DDR3-1333, 1.5 V
System DriveOCZ Vertex 3 240 GB SATA 6Gb/s
Tested DrivesCrucial m4 64 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 0001
Intel SSD 510 250 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 1.7
Intel SSD 320 300 GB SATA 3Gb/s, Firmware: 1.92
Crucial m4 128 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 0001
Crucial m4 256 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 0002
Crucial m4 512 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 0001
Crucial RealSSD 256 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 0006
OCZ Vertex 3 240 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 2.06
OCZ Vertex 3 120 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 2.06
OCZ Agility 3 120 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 2.06
OCZ Solid 3 120 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 2.06
Corsair Force 3 120 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 1.2
Corsair Force 120 GB SATA 3Gb/s, Firmware: 2.0
Adata S511 120 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 311A
Mushkin Chronos Deluxe 120 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 319A
Patriot Wildfire 120 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 319A
Kingston SSDNow V+100 128 GB SATA 3Gb/s, Firmware: CJRA
Western Digital VelociRaptor 300 GB (WD3000HLFS) SATA 3Gb/s
G.Skill FM-25S2S 64 GB SATA 3Gb/s, Firmware: 02.1
Seagate Momentus 5400.6 500 GB SATA 3Gb/s
Intel X25-M G2 160 GB SATA 3Gb/s, Firmware: 1.7
Samsung 470 256 GB SATA 3Gb/s, Firmware: AXMO
Samsung 830 256 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: CXMO
OCZ Vertex 2 (32nm) 120 GB SATA 3Gb/s, Firmware: 1.32
Kingston HyperX 240 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 320A
Intel SSD 710 200 GB SATA 3Gb/s
Micron RealSSD P300 200 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 0001
Corsair Force GT 240 GB SATA 6Gb/s, Firmware: 1.3
Kingston SSDNow V100 128 GB SATA 3Gb/s, Firmware: D110
GraphicsPalit GeForce GTX 460 1 GB
Power SupplySeasonic 760 W, 80 PLUS
System Software and Drivers
Operating SystemWindows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
DirectXDirectX 11
DriverGraphics: Nvidia 270.61 RST: 10.5.0.1022Virtu: 1.1.101

Benchmarks
Tom's Hardware Storage Bench v1.0Trace-Based
Iometer 1.1.0# Workers = # Logical CPUs, 4 KB Random: LBA=16 GB, varying QDs, 128 KB Sequential: QD=1
ATTO BenchmarkLBA=2 GB, QD=2 & 4, varying transfer sizes
PCMark 7Storage Suite
Enterprise Testing: Iometer WorkloadsReadRandomBlock SizeWorkers
Database67%100%8 KB - 100%4
File server80%100%512 Bytes – 10%1 KB – 5%2 KB – 5%4 KB – 60%8 KB – 2%16 KB – 4%32 KB – 4%64 KB – 10%4
Web server100%100%512 Bytes – 22%1 KB – 15%2 KB – 8%4 KB – 23%8 KB – 15%16 KB – 2%32 KB - 6%64 KB – 7%128 KB – 1%512 KB – 1%4
  • whysobluepandabear
    TLDR; Although expensive, the drives offer greater amounts of data transfer, reliability and expected life - however, they cost a f'ing arm and a leg (even for a corporation).

    Expect these to be the standard when they've dropped to 1/3rd their current price.
    Reply
  • RazorBurn
    To some companies or institutions.. The data this devices hold far outweighs the prices of this storage devices..
    Reply
  • nekromobo
    I think the writer missed the whole point on this article.

    What happens when you RAID5 or RAID1 the SSD's??
    I don't think any enterprise would trust a single SSD without RAID.
    Reply
  • DjEaZy
    ... glad, that i have vertex 3...
    Reply
  • halcyon
    Nice. Now let's see how many comments complain about the price. :sarcastic:
    Reply
  • halcyon
    __-_-_-__with the reliability those have they will never ever find their way into any serverMy Vertex 3 has been very reliable and I'm quite satisfied with the performance. However, I've heard reports that some, just like with anything else, haven't been so lucky.
    Reply
  • toms my babys daddy
    I thought ssd drives were unreliable because they can die at any moment and lose your data, and now I see that they're used for servers as well? are they doing daily backups of their data or have I been lied to? ;(
    Reply
  • halcyon
    toms my babys daddyI thought ssd drives were unreliable because they can die at any moment and lose your data, and now I see that they're used for servers as well? are they doing daily backups of their data or have I been lied to? ;(SSDs are generally accepted to be more reliable than HDDs...at least that's what I've been lead to believe.
    Reply
  • Onus
    halcyonSSDs are generally accepted to be more reliable than HDDs...at least that's what I've been lead to believe.Yes, but when they die, that's it; you're done. You can at least send a mechanical HDD to Ontrack (or a competing data recovery service) with a GOOD chance of getting most or all of your data back; when a SSD bricks, what can be done?
    Reply
  • CaedenV
    nekromoboI think the writer missed the whole point on this article.What happens when you RAID5 or RAID1 the SSD's??I don't think any enterprise would trust a single SSD without RAID.The assumption is that ALL servers will have raid. The point of this article is how often will you have to replace the drives in your raid? All of that down time, and manpower has a price. If the old Intel SSDs were about as reliable as a traditional HDD, then that means that these new ones will last ~30x what a traidional drive does, while providing that glorious 0ms seek time, and high IO output.
    Less replacement, less down time, less $/GB, and a similar performance is a big win in my book.
    toms my babys daddyI thought ssd drives were unreliable because they can die at any moment and lose your data, and now I see that they're used for servers as well? are they doing daily backups of their data or have I been lied to? ;(SSDs (at least on the enterprise level) are roughly equivalent to their mechanical brothers in failure rate. True, when the drive is done then the data is gone, but real data centers all use RAID, and backups for redundancy. Some go so far as to have all data being mirrored at 2 locations in real time, which is an extreme measure, but worth it when your data is so important.
    Besides, when a data center has to do a physical recovery of a HDD then they have already failed. The down time it takes to physically recover is unacceptable in many data centers. Though at least it is still an option.
    Reply