Cooler Master MasterBox NR600 review
MSI to unveil 10th Anniversary RTX 2080 Ti Lightning Edition
Ballistix Elite 3600 MHz 16GB Dual Channel DDR4 review
ASUS ROG Rapture GT-AC2900 Gaming Router review
Asustor Nimbustor 4 (AS5304T) NAS Review
Promo: VIP-SCDKey Games and Windows 10 / Office
be quiet! Dark Rock SLIM review
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1660 Gaming OC review
Edifier G4 Pro Headset review
Microsoft Office 2016 Pro and Windows 10 Pro for just $34
HP EX920 1 TB M.2. SSD review
Posted by: on: 04/06/2018 09:21 AM [
18 comment(s) ]
HP has released an ultra-fast new M.2. SSD, the new EX920 series, the rather properly volume sized 1024 GB (1 TB) model which we will review is fast and furious with a rated sequential read speed up to 3200MB/s and sequential write speed up to 1800MB/s. HP is entering the high-end and enthusiast class with their new SSDs.
Read article
Advertisement
Tagged as:
hp
alanm
Senior Member
Posts: 8571
Senior Member
Posts: 8571
Posted on: 04/06/2018 10:34 AM
Excellent! SSD reviews here are always top notch. Not sure I would use the word excruciating though as its leans more towards the negative (ie, painful, tortuous, etc). Was almost expecting disappointing performance.
Excellent! SSD reviews here are always top notch. Not sure I would use the word excruciating though as its leans more towards the negative (ie, painful, tortuous, etc). Was almost expecting disappointing performance.
Clawedge
Senior Member
Posts: 2348
Senior Member
Posts: 2348
Posted on: 04/06/2018 10:44 AM
So was I alanm
So was I alanm
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35095
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 35095
Posted on: 04/06/2018 11:06 AM
Hmmz, Excruciating fast then ?
Hmmz, Excruciating fast then ?
Humanoid_1
Senior Member
Posts: 938
Senior Member
Posts: 938
Posted on: 04/06/2018 12:14 PM
I might point out that people who are heavy web browser users actually write a LOT of data per day to their SSDs, I can Easily hit 30 - 40GB day of writes just from my web browser.
That is from a mix of sites like this and other news sites, ebay + amazon and other streaming sites.
I have my temp internet files on a RAM disk to save some writes and am still in the high 28GB a day of writes. (browser downloads go to a mech HDD)
I might point out that people who are heavy web browser users actually write a LOT of data per day to their SSDs, I can Easily hit 30 - 40GB day of writes just from my web browser.
That is from a mix of sites like this and other news sites, ebay + amazon and other streaming sites.
I have my temp internet files on a RAM disk to save some writes and am still in the high 28GB a day of writes. (browser downloads go to a mech HDD)
wavetrex
Senior Member
Posts: 457
Senior Member
Posts: 457
Posted on: 04/06/2018 12:32 PM
Even 100 GB /day on a 1 TB drive means barely one drive write per 10 days.
Assuming TLC only "survives" for 1000 rewrites (and in practice it has been proven with several tests that they can last much longer, 2500 rewrites and up), that is still 10.000 days of operation..... or 27 years.
Considering how fast these things evolve, I don't really think any drive of today will still be in use 10 years from now, let alone 27 !
I think it's time for people to stop worrying that much about SSD endurance.
Even 100 GB /day on a 1 TB drive means barely one drive write per 10 days.
Assuming TLC only "survives" for 1000 rewrites (and in practice it has been proven with several tests that they can last much longer, 2500 rewrites and up), that is still 10.000 days of operation..... or 27 years.
Considering how fast these things evolve, I don't really think any drive of today will still be in use 10 years from now, let alone 27 !
I think it's time for people to stop worrying that much about SSD endurance.
alanm
Senior Member
Posts: 8571
Senior Member
Posts: 8571
Posted on: 04/06/2018 12:38 PM
I might point out that people who are heavy web browser users actually write a LOT of data per day to their SSDs, I can Easily hit 30 - 40GB day of writes just from my web browser.
That is from a mix of sites like this and other news sites, ebay + amazon and other streaming sites.
I have my temp internet files on a RAM disk to save some writes and am still in the high 28GB a day of writes. (browser downloads go to a mech HDD)
Well many endurance tests we've seen so far have way surpassed the likely lifespan of typical SSDs. Even if 50gb/day would get you more than 10 years service easily (past the SSDs obsolescence point).
wavetrex beat me to it.
I might point out that people who are heavy web browser users actually write a LOT of data per day to their SSDs, I can Easily hit 30 - 40GB day of writes just from my web browser.
That is from a mix of sites like this and other news sites, ebay + amazon and other streaming sites.
I have my temp internet files on a RAM disk to save some writes and am still in the high 28GB a day of writes. (browser downloads go to a mech HDD)
Well many endurance tests we've seen so far have way surpassed the likely lifespan of typical SSDs. Even if 50gb/day would get you more than 10 years service easily (past the SSDs obsolescence point).
wavetrex beat me to it.
wavetrex
Senior Member
Posts: 457
Senior Member
Posts: 457
Posted on: 04/06/2018 12:49 PM
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/excruciating
"causing great pain or anguish"
I don't really think that such great speeds are causing pain. Actually, they might be causing pleasure ... geeky pleasure ;-)
Perhaps rephrase that title.
I'd like to add, after I switched from Sammy 850 EVO to 960 EVO (from SATA to M.2) as my main drive, the 850 EVO got repurposed for torrent downloads. YEP, I'm torturing it with lots of I/O on a fast 400mbps connection every time I'm grabbing something from somewhere.
After half year, it's still at 99% "life left".
By the time it reaches 20% I'll probably be in my retirement years...
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/excruciating
"causing great pain or anguish"
I don't really think that such great speeds are causing pain. Actually, they might be causing pleasure ... geeky pleasure ;-)
Perhaps rephrase that title.
wavetrex beat me to it.
I'd like to add, after I switched from Sammy 850 EVO to 960 EVO (from SATA to M.2) as my main drive, the 850 EVO got repurposed for torrent downloads. YEP, I'm torturing it with lots of I/O on a fast 400mbps connection every time I'm grabbing something from somewhere.
After half year, it's still at 99% "life left".
By the time it reaches 20% I'll probably be in my retirement years...
Humanoid_1
Senior Member
Posts: 938
Senior Member
Posts: 938
Posted on: 04/06/2018 01:39 PM
Yeah those are nice points. I've heard some SSDs make around 9PB of writes before failing.
I was partly wondering how these newer process reduced write drives might hold up and if writes might end up being something to take more care of again.
On my Samsung 850 Pro 512 I have essentially stopped worrying about the issue. I had been about to move the browser save states (what eats the most writes) to a backed up RAM disk but never bothered implementing that after hearing of SSDs achieving about 9PB of writes lol
Excruciating can work for excessively fast though for sure, like edge of your seat, nail bitingly fast !
Yeah those are nice points. I've heard some SSDs make around 9PB of writes before failing.
I was partly wondering how these newer process reduced write drives might hold up and if writes might end up being something to take more care of again.
On my Samsung 850 Pro 512 I have essentially stopped worrying about the issue. I had been about to move the browser save states (what eats the most writes) to a backed up RAM disk but never bothered implementing that after hearing of SSDs achieving about 9PB of writes lol
Excruciating can work for excessively fast though for sure, like edge of your seat, nail bitingly fast !
Koniakki
Senior Member
Posts: 2797
Senior Member
Posts: 2797
Posted on: 04/06/2018 02:30 PM
I quote a bit off HH's conclusion:
"Nearly 10 years ago in 2008 that we reviewed the first SSD. It was 32GB and would cost you €280.76. The read performance was ~150MB/sec at the time, which was just staggering. It had no cache and connected to a regular SATA connector. How things have changed from that ' blisteringly fast' 150 MB/sec towards numbers that are 20 to 30 fold of that whilst offering more capacity, reliability, endurance, and performance. "
Perfect sum of how many of us I believe feel and why we love what we love about technology or the industry in whole and why we find it so interesting, especially witnessing it's evolvement.
I might point out that people who are heavy web browser users actually write a LOT of data per day to their SSDs, I can Easily hit 30 - 40GB day of writes just from my web browser.
That is from a mix of sites like this and other news sites, ebay + amazon and other streaming sites.
I have my temp internet files on a RAM disk to save some writes and am still in the high 28GB a day of writes. (browser downloads go to a mech HDD)
Same here. On my 950 PRO 256GB I got 14,371hrs(598.8 days) of operation with ~15,7TB writen so far.
That comes out at about 26,2GB per day. Heavy chrome user I admit. Sometimes up to 400-500+ tabs.
No judgment pls. :p
......
........
After half year, it's still at 99% "life left".
By the time it reaches 20% I'll probably be in my retirement years...
LOL
I quote a bit off HH's conclusion:
"Nearly 10 years ago in 2008 that we reviewed the first SSD. It was 32GB and would cost you €280.76. The read performance was ~150MB/sec at the time, which was just staggering. It had no cache and connected to a regular SATA connector. How things have changed from that ' blisteringly fast' 150 MB/sec towards numbers that are 20 to 30 fold of that whilst offering more capacity, reliability, endurance, and performance. "
Perfect sum of how many of us I believe feel and why we love what we love about technology or the industry in whole and why we find it so interesting, especially witnessing it's evolvement.
I might point out that people who are heavy web browser users actually write a LOT of data per day to their SSDs, I can Easily hit 30 - 40GB day of writes just from my web browser.
That is from a mix of sites like this and other news sites, ebay + amazon and other streaming sites.
I have my temp internet files on a RAM disk to save some writes and am still in the high 28GB a day of writes. (browser downloads go to a mech HDD)
Same here. On my 950 PRO 256GB I got 14,371hrs(598.8 days) of operation with ~15,7TB writen so far.
That comes out at about 26,2GB per day. Heavy chrome user I admit. Sometimes up to 400-500+ tabs.
No judgment pls. :p
......
........
After half year, it's still at 99% "life left".
By the time it reaches 20% I'll probably be in my retirement years...
LOL
coth
Senior Member
Posts: 367
Senior Member
Posts: 367
Posted on: 04/06/2018 03:35 PM
Even 100 GB /day on a 1 TB drive means barely one drive write per 10 days.
Assuming TLC only "survives" for 1000 rewrites (and in practice it has been proven with several tests that they can last much longer, 2500 rewrites and up), that is still 10.000 days of operation..... or 27 years.
Considering how fast these things evolve, I don't really think any drive of today will still be in use 10 years from now, let alone 27 !
I think it's time for people to stop worrying that much about SSD endurance.
Silicon Motion is usually among least survivable.
https://3dnews.ru/938764/page-3.html
Even 100 GB /day on a 1 TB drive means barely one drive write per 10 days.
Assuming TLC only "survives" for 1000 rewrites (and in practice it has been proven with several tests that they can last much longer, 2500 rewrites and up), that is still 10.000 days of operation..... or 27 years.
Considering how fast these things evolve, I don't really think any drive of today will still be in use 10 years from now, let alone 27 !
I think it's time for people to stop worrying that much about SSD endurance.
Silicon Motion is usually among least survivable.
https://3dnews.ru/938764/page-3.html
Koniakki
Senior Member
Posts: 2797
Senior Member
Posts: 2797
Posted on: 04/06/2018 03:49 PM
Silicon Motion is usually among least survivable.
https://3dnews.ru/938764/page-3.html
Great find! Thanks for the link!
Silicon Motion is usually among least survivable.
https://3dnews.ru/938764/page-3.html
Great find! Thanks for the link!
fOrTy_7
Senior Member
Posts: 338
Senior Member
Posts: 338
Posted on: 04/06/2018 05:21 PM
Even 100 GB /day on a 1 TB drive means barely one drive write per 10 days.
Assuming TLC only "survives" for 1000 rewrites (and in practice it has been proven with several tests that they can last much longer, 2500 rewrites and up), that is still 10.000 days of operation..... or 27 years.
Considering how fast these things evolve, I don't really think any drive of today will still be in use 10 years from now, let alone 27 !
I think it's time for people to stop worrying that much about SSD endurance.
Well, not really.
You assume that write/erase cycles are distributed equally among all NAND cells,
which is not the case. Some cells get more write/erase cycles than others and they will ware out eventually.
And you have only a small amount of spare cells available. Think of it as reallocating a sector on classic old hard driver. You can have a few bad sectors on the hard drive, but if your spare limit expires every new bad sector will mean random data corruption. Same applies for SSDs.
That being said and this point of tech most SSD will easily surpass the life-span of a classic HDD.
But you should still watch out for apps / processes that make trash writes to SSD.
Also keep in mind that SSD firmware will move data by itself to even write/erase cycles among all NAND cells. But it's efficient only to some degree of course.
Even 100 GB /day on a 1 TB drive means barely one drive write per 10 days.
Assuming TLC only "survives" for 1000 rewrites (and in practice it has been proven with several tests that they can last much longer, 2500 rewrites and up), that is still 10.000 days of operation..... or 27 years.
Considering how fast these things evolve, I don't really think any drive of today will still be in use 10 years from now, let alone 27 !
I think it's time for people to stop worrying that much about SSD endurance.
Well, not really.
You assume that write/erase cycles are distributed equally among all NAND cells,
which is not the case. Some cells get more write/erase cycles than others and they will ware out eventually.
And you have only a small amount of spare cells available. Think of it as reallocating a sector on classic old hard driver. You can have a few bad sectors on the hard drive, but if your spare limit expires every new bad sector will mean random data corruption. Same applies for SSDs.
That being said and this point of tech most SSD will easily surpass the life-span of a classic HDD.
But you should still watch out for apps / processes that make trash writes to SSD.
Also keep in mind that SSD firmware will move data by itself to even write/erase cycles among all NAND cells. But it's efficient only to some degree of course.
Humanoid_1
Senior Member
Posts: 938
Senior Member
Posts: 938
Posted on: 04/06/2018 05:46 PM
Silicon Motion is usually among least survivable.
https://3dnews.ru/938764/page-3.html
Thanks also for sharing that, a useful resource. Some SSDs have really pretty low endurance still it seems including some quite new ones.
Nice to see they haven't broken their 850 Pro 256GB yet at currently nearly 6PB of writes
Though their 850 EVO only managed 2.6 PB which is still pretty amazing. (I have 2 of these in my laptop in RAID 0)
Same here. On my 950 PRO 256GB I got 14,371hrs(598.8 days) of operation with ~15,7TB writen so far.
That comes out at about 26,2GB per day. Heavy chrome user I admit. Sometimes up to 400-500+ tabs.
No judgment pls. :p
LOL
Hehe, so easy to do, am at even more than that myself. Too many active fields of interest and research ^^
Silicon Motion is usually among least survivable.
https://3dnews.ru/938764/page-3.html
Thanks also for sharing that, a useful resource. Some SSDs have really pretty low endurance still it seems including some quite new ones.
Nice to see they haven't broken their 850 Pro 256GB yet at currently nearly 6PB of writes
Though their 850 EVO only managed 2.6 PB which is still pretty amazing. (I have 2 of these in my laptop in RAID 0)
Same here. On my 950 PRO 256GB I got 14,371hrs(598.8 days) of operation with ~15,7TB writen so far.
That comes out at about 26,2GB per day. Heavy chrome user I admit. Sometimes up to 400-500+ tabs.
No judgment pls. :p
LOL
Hehe, so easy to do, am at even more than that myself. Too many active fields of interest and research ^^
wavetrex
Senior Member
Posts: 457
Senior Member
Posts: 457
Posted on: 04/06/2018 06:24 PM
From that russian article:
Wow. 960 EVO @ 250GB...
Declared resource 100 TB
Endurance by test results
During the testing of the Samsung 960 EVO, its flash memory was overwritten more than 25,000 times.
My 960 EVO (which is a 500GB) is now at a measly 5.3 TB))) Not even "scratching the surface" yet.
So happy to see these things are becoming so incredibly reliable !
Sad news however about some crappy brands that barely hold 500-700 rewrites, but hey, people get what they pay for !
From that russian article:
Wow. 960 EVO @ 250GB...
Declared resource 100 TB
Endurance by test results
6089 TB
During the testing of the Samsung 960 EVO, its flash memory was overwritten more than 25,000 times.
Simply unreal !!!
My 960 EVO (which is a 500GB) is now at a measly 5.3 TB
))) Not even "scratching the surface" yet.So happy to see these things are becoming so incredibly reliable !
Sad news however about some crappy brands that barely hold 500-700 rewrites, but hey, people get what they pay for !
Agent-A01
Senior Member
Posts: 11335
Senior Member
Posts: 11335
Posted on: 04/06/2018 08:33 PM
@Hilbert Hagedoorn
Thanks for the review, do you mind posting a full screenshot of atto?
Curios on the really small file size performance.
@Hilbert Hagedoorn
Thanks for the review, do you mind posting a full screenshot of atto?
Curios on the really small file size performance.
Netherwind
Senior Member
Posts: 6448
Senior Member
Posts: 6448
Posted on: 04/09/2018 05:22 PM
Will these guys ever drop to somewhat humane prices? Looks absolutely awesome.
Will these guys ever drop to somewhat humane prices? Looks absolutely awesome.
ChinStrap
Member
Posts: 60
Member
Posts: 60
Posted on: 04/27/2018 05:10 PM
Newegg has the 512 version right now for $175.
pretty good price
Newegg has the 512 version right now for $175.
pretty good price
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 570
Hi H.H. thanks for the heads up wow fantastic article and test too I hope that someday I can buy one for me