SandForce Announces Next-Gen SSDs, SF-2000 Capable of 500MB/s and 60K IOPS
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 7, 2010 9:30 AM ESTSecurity: AES-256 and Double Encryption
The SF-1200/1500 controllers have a real time AES-128 encryption engine. Set a BIOS password and the drive should be locked unless you supply that password once again (note I haven’t actually tried this). The SF-2000 implements an AES-256 engine and supports double encryption. The former enables stronger encryption, while the latter allows you to set a different encryption key for multiple address ranges on the drive.
Enhanced ECC
As NAND densities go up, so will error rates and in response SandForce boosted the error correction engine on its controller. The SF-2000 error checks and corrects at a 512-byte granularity with a 55-bit BCH, up from 24-bits per 512-bytes.
The Family
SandForce is announcing three parts today: the SF-2300, SF-2500 and SF-2600. All three controllers have the same performance specs but differ in features.
The SF-2500 is the base enterprise drive. For industrial use there’s the SF-2300 that can operate at more ridiculous temperatures. The SF-2600 ships with the external SAS bridge and a special firmware revision to enable support for non-512B sectors.
Many enterprise storage systems use larger-than-512B sectors to store error correction information among other things. These sizes can be awkward like 520 bytes, 524 bytes, 528 bytes or even a 4K sector with an additional data integrity field. Currently the SF-1200/1500 controllers support these non-standard sector sizes, but you run into performance issues since writes aren’t aligned to how the drive is organized internally. With the SF-2600, there’s firmware support for any one of these sector types. The drive handles alignment issues in hardware, presumably without any performance overhead. SandForce indicated that you’d need to configure the drive for sector size in the firmware, meaning the adjustment isn’t dynamic.
Since this is a very particular type of enterprise SSD feature that’s usually seen in SAS devices, the SF-2600 is paired with a native SAS to SATA bridge. The controller is still SATA internally but the SF-2600 reference design will feature a SAS bridge on-board.
All of the enterprise SF-2000 controllers support TRIM. They also support performance throttling based on remaining program/erase cycles on the drive’s NAND (slow down the drive so the NAND lasts longer, as well as power based performance throttling (slow down the drive to reduce power consumption). SandForce hasn’t announced power specs for the SF-2000 drives, but given Intel’s drive power went up with the 3rd generation X25s I would expect something similar here.
The consumer member of the SF-2000 family will be announced sometime early next year. We will hopefully see a fairly high end version of the consumer part, missing only the enterprise specific features but retaining all of the performance.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
84 Comments
View All Comments
Casper42 - Friday, October 8, 2010 - link
You know what else comes out in Early 2011?Sandy Bridge and the Intel 60 series chipsets.
Intel has already announced they will have 2 SATA 6Gbps ports on those chipsets.
Core i7 2620M with 8GB of DDR3 and a SATA6G SSD? Yes Please!
Stick a 750GB Green SATA Drive where the Optical drive usually goes and then just use a $40 USB DVD Drive when you really need it (rarely now that DVDs include the "digital copy" and software companies are embracing online delivery.
And of course throw in an nVidia Optimus 4xx as well.
Hector2 - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
So we have a battle of Specs ? Sure makes the Marketer's jobs easierjwilliams4200 - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
In a battle of specs, I am going to trust Intel a lot, and Sandforce not at all.The most careful SSD reviews these days are coming from bit-tech.net. They use AS-SSD to test sequential write speed for incompressible data, and also they fill the drive up with data, delete it, run TRIM, and then test the drive again.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/storage/2010/09/0...
Check out the lighter-colored bars on the sequential write speeds. Those are the speeds after writing a lot to the drives and then TRIM. Note that the Intel X25-M 160GB gets 99 MB/s sequential write even after being heavily used. It is spec'ed at 100 MB/s sequential write. Just as Intel specified, so their SSD performs.
Next, look at the Sandforce drives lighter-bar sequential write, for example, the OCZ Vertex 2E 120GB. This is a drive that is spec'ed at 275 MB/s sequential write. But when someone actually measures the speed with realistic data, after the drive has been used, it only manages a pathetic 83 MB/s sequential write. That is only 30.2% of the spec'ed value, and is even lower than Intel's 99 MB/s !
Or look at the Revodrive, which is two SF drives in parallel with a RAID controller. It is spec'ed at 490 MB/s sequential write, which looks quite similar to what Sandforce is claiming for the SF2000 series. But what is the actual, real world sequential write for the Revodrive? bit-tech.net measured it, and it is a pathetic 139 MB/s. A single Crucial C300 256GB drive achieves 190 MB/s !
Bottom line is that none of Sandforce's specifications can be believed.
Chloiber - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
Just wanted to tell you, that the german site computerbase.de came to the same conclusion. They even had a talk with OCZ about it and they admitted it: the sandforce drives lose performance after being heavily used which cannot be restored with TRIM, only with a secure erase.Sequential write on random data dropped from 140MB/s (fresh) to 90MB/s (used) on a Vertex 2 120GB.
Real world usage was still pretty good though.
Zan Lynx - Friday, October 8, 2010 - link
Agreed about real world usage.You have to benchmark the drives with an application you're actually using. If you only write encrypted data that looks random, then do not buy a Sandforce.
On the other hand, if you use real programs the data will not be random and the Sandforce will perform well.
DoktorSleepless - Friday, October 8, 2010 - link
They use incompressable data for what you linked. That's not realistic. That's worst case scenario, which is unlikely to happen. I believe anand did a set of similar tests and got a low speed too. SF's speed relies heavily on compressing data.hackztor - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
they never mentioned price. All is cool for 1gb in 2 seconds, but if the price is 1000, I think many consumers will have a hard time justifying this.Phynaz - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
It's not a consumer device.Chloiber - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
"Enterprise", "Industrial" - everything but conusmer.slickr - Thursday, October 7, 2010 - link
I suspect that SandForce worker force is out of this world. I think the slides that we just witnessed today confirm that indeed Aliens have come to this planet and are working for SandDorce. How else would you explain such amazing performance on very new technology in so short time?I call all UFO hunters and Aliens investigators to go to SandForce HQ and investigate, ladies and gentlemen this way be the most historic day in the history of planet earth by uncovering aliens working for a human firm.