Show us your SSD performance


  1. Posts : 568
    Windows 7 64-bit, Windows 8.1 64-bit, OSX El Capitan, Windows 10 (VMware)
       #1301

    whs said:
    I don't think we disagree. I was only pointing out the significance of access time versus R/W times for the OS. And then went on to say that R/W speeds will have a bearing once we use SSDs for large data transfers.
    We can certainly agree that for the time being the access time is more important....
    For images you run at the speed of the receiving disk which is most likely a HDD or an external drive. The best times I have achieved with a Vertex2 to HDD was 3.6 min for an image of a 21GB OS (about 11GB compressed).
    Yes, it is a Seagate Barracuda 1TBs 7200.12 external HDD connected via the eSATA 3 port. The short image creation time could be due to a number of things, different processor, Sandy Bridge architecture, etc. It may not be the Sandy Bridge since the eSATA port is connected via the Marvell chip and that explains why it has only one internal SATA 3 port on the Marvell chip. As we know, the Marvell chip cannot support the SATA 3's 6Gb/s throughput, due to its limit of 5 Gb/s maximum throughput. The version of Macrium is the same on both machine.
      My Computer


  2. whs
    Posts : 26,210
    Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
       #1302

    I did not have much luck with both eSata and USB3 for Macrium images. They were faster than USB2, but not earthshaking - maybe 30% better. I was quite disappointed. The CPU is an i7. Could be that my enclosures are no good, who knows.
      My Computer


  3. Posts : 568
    Windows 7 64-bit, Windows 8.1 64-bit, OSX El Capitan, Windows 10 (VMware)
       #1303

    eSATA should be a lot faster than USB 2.0 that maxes out at 40 MB/s, although most actual devices max out between 15-30 MB/s. Your external drive doing around 40-50 MB/s is slow and you might be correct; the external case might be the culprit.
    Here's the benchmark for my eSATA drive:

    Show us your SSD performance-cdm-seagate_esata.png

    My system does have USB 3.0 port, but I have no faith in it and also heard, that its throughput is rather on the low end under the best circumstances.

    The other drive connected to the internal SATA 2 port, same as the external one, has this benchmark:

    Show us your SSD performance-cdm-seagate_sata.png

    That's a 20% performance increase. sequential read/write, when compared to the eSATA drive. I may just run a long SATA cable from the inside to the external drive :)

    And might as well, here's Vertex 3 with CDM 3.01:

    Show us your SSD performance-ocz_v_3_cdm3.png

    Once again it proves that the SSD blows away the HDD when it comes to 4K random read and write...
      My Computer


  4. whs
    Posts : 26,210
    Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
       #1304

    Yeah, my Atto data looks promising too, but in real life it is not so impressive.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Show us your SSD performance-2011-04-16_1204.png   Show us your SSD performance-2011-04-16_1217.png  
      My Computer


  5. Posts : 568
    Windows 7 64-bit, Windows 8.1 64-bit, OSX El Capitan, Windows 10 (VMware)
       #1305

    Well, those numbers are pretty much what you can get with a platter based drive...

    It's been bugging me as to why my eSATA drive is slower than the internal drive, same drives just plugged into different interfaces. I had a hunch that the position of the hard drive could be the reason. The previous benchmark posted was recorded with the drive on its edge, in the stand standing tall. I've removed the stand, laid the drive flat, and re-run the benchmark; here's the results:

    Show us your SSD performance-cdm-seagate_esata_flat.png

    That's pretty much the same as the internal drive's benchmark results and it's good enough for me.

    It's interesting and in retrospect logical that the drive on its edge loses about 20% of its performance. After all on its edge, it has to fight gravity to keep heads in correct position, while laying it flat the gravity actually helps the heads staying in the correct position.

    Maybe you should check the position of your external drive, even if it is "not so impressive"...
      My Computer


  6. Posts : 26,869
    Windows 11 Pro
       #1306

    In my system I don't see a huge difference. I have a samsung spinpoint internal and the same drive in an external enclosure. Although, the are the only drives I remember seeing that will write faster than they read.

    This is the internal [ATTACH]150686[/ATTACH
    This the external Show us your SSD performance-samsung-external.png
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Show us your SSD performance-samsung.png  
      My Computer


  7. whs
    Posts : 26,210
    Vista, Windows7, Mint Mate, Zorin, Windows 8
       #1307

    It's interesting and in retrospect logical that the drive on its edge loses about 20% of its performance. After all on its edge, it has to fight gravity to keep heads in correct position, while laying it flat the gravity actually helps the heads staying in the correct position.
    This is an interesting point. I will check that next time I have the unit up.
      My Computer


  8. Posts : 304
    Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit
       #1308

    SSD Performance


    I decided to rerun the same tests that I did on my ssd 3 months ago. I was expecting a performance drop, but nothing this big. I used HDTune and AS SSD benchmarking tools.

    I have the infamous OCZ Vertex 2 25nm ssd. Is the performance drop because of this or all is it the norm for all drves?

    Early Frebuary
    Show us your SSD performance-old.png

    Late April
    Show us your SSD performance-new.png
      My Computer


  9. Posts : 26,869
    Windows 11 Pro
       #1309

    si8mon, I think some of the performance drop is because you were in ACHI mode on the first test and IDE mode on the second test. This is a tutorial that may help.
      My Computer


  10. Posts : 304
    Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit
       #1310

    essenbe said:
    si8mon, I think some of the performance drop is because you were in ACHI mode on the first test and IDE mode on the second test. This is a tutorial that may help.
    Thanks for the help, I followed the tutorial and changed to ACHI mode. My results have improved but there's is still a noticeable drop in performance from february.

    Early February (ACHI Mode)
    Show us your SSD performance-old.png

    Late April (ACHI Mode)
    Show us your SSD performance-new.png
      My Computer


 

  Related Discussions
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

© Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 17:10.
Find Us