Windows 7 Forums

Welcome to Windows 7 Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find support and solutions for any problems regarding your Windows 7 PC be it Dell, HP, Acer, Asus or a custom build. We also provide an extensive Windows 7 tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks.


Windows 7: Show us your SSD performance 2

14 Dec 2013   #1451
paulpicks21

Windows 7 Professional 64 bit
 
 

OK the results are in, it started off real strong with 12GB allocated but dropped off a fair bit in the end.

So the actual times for transferring the 24.1GB file are as follows -

Without the cache tool running - 2m 38s
With 4GB of ram allocated - 2m dead
With 12GB of ram allocated - 2m dead

So the extra ram actually serves no purpose in relation to transferring large files. But at any rate with the cache enabled it saved nearly 40 seconds which is quite impressive for the total time we are talking about.

Paul.


My System SpecsSystem Spec
.
14 Dec 2013   #1452
gldndragn

Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)
 
 

Hmmmmm............it seems as if I may have uncovered a little gem, eh?
Most daily activities don't seem to be affected, but it still works. We are gonna have to follow the development of this proggie.......no?

It seems to be along the same lines as Samsungs "rapid mode" from their "evo" line.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
14 Dec 2013   #1453
Britton30
Microsoft MVP

Windows 7 Ultimate X64 SP1
 
 

Would it be more meaningful to copy a single large file such as a HD video file? I run tests to compare USB 2 vs. USB 3 and it was suggested I do the same.

I'm unsure how Rapid mode works, with it enabled I show all RAM (16GB) available and resource monitor shows no large amount in reserve for it.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
.

14 Dec 2013   #1454
mjf

Windows 7x64 Home Premium SP1
 
 

I clearly need a rethink on caching. The SSD is essentially a solid state memory device which is slower than your high speed RAM and even SATA 3 speeds can't be met. Can multiple threading be assisting here? (probably a dumb question).
Also, can PrimoCache assist with HDDs? - yes I know try it out yourself!

I also need to try out Samsung's Rapid mode since I've got a couple of them.

I find this useful interaction
My System SpecsSystem Spec
14 Dec 2013   #1455
gldndragn

Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by mjf View Post
I clearly need a rethink on caching. The SSD is essentially a solid state memory device which is slower than your high speed RAM and even SATA 3 speeds can't be met. Can multiple threading be assisting here? (probably a dumb question).
Also, can PrimoCache assist with HDDs? - yes I know try it out yourself!

I also need to try out Samsung's Rapid mode since I've got a couple of them.

I find this useful interaction
According to the devs, It can....as l2 cache. (level 2)
Visit the page and read the FAQs....I believe it says so there.
I have not used that feature.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
14 Dec 2013   #1456
Britton30
Microsoft MVP

Windows 7 Ultimate X64 SP1
 
 

Yes Michael Primo does work with HDDs as well. Not SSD speeds but much faster as they show in some snips.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 Dec 2013   #1457
garuda

Windows 7 Ultimate x64
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by paulpicks21 View Post
OK the results are in.... So the actual times for transferring the 24.1GB file are as follows -

Without the cache tool running - 2m 38s
With 4GB of ram allocated - 2m dead
With 12GB of ram allocated - 2m dead

So the extra ram actually serves no purpose in relation to transferring large files. But at any rate with the cache enabled it saved nearly 40 seconds which is quite impressive for the total time we are talking about.
Ordinarily, I try not to get caught up in the SSD-speed fervor, since in the end I agree with ďwhsĒ ó itís real world performance that truly matters, not ideal-situation benches. But when the bench numbers exceed 10K on READ or WRITE, I canít help but become curious as to how they do it ó since over 10K exceeds the speed of current RamDrive technology using the fastest memory available. But Iím having difficulty finding any real specifics on how Primo does it, other than their webpage block diagram.

Paul, your first example comparing Primo/no-Primo file xfers was 158secs Xfer. Your 2nd w/Primo was 120secs at 4G RAM. Then again #3 was 120secs at 12G RAM setting. You concluded that RAM size doesn't matter. Iím not so sure I agree with that in the long run over time.

Based on my vague understanding of Primoís block diagram, and drawing somewhat on my limited RamDisk knowledge ó Iím guessing that the reason xfer #2 and #3 were the same length of time, is because Primo likely uses RAM allocated cache to store and retain certain data from previous transactions (and their webpage description seems to suggest this). Therefore perhaps the #2 and #3 were both the same time (120secs) because the #2 xfer was still stored in the RAM cache or the ďFancy CacheĒ as they call it ó so naturally one would expect all subsequent xfers containing the same data or file would be the same time period; because itís using the same data from the same cached memory.

Thatís just my guess. Iím going to try to get more detail on how Primo does it, to see if itís different from RamDisk techniques. I speculate itís just a variation of RamDrive technology. And likely the huge bench numbers are the product of simply reading RAM speeds, not from using SSD real estate activity. Iíll post if I come up with anything concrete on how it works.

I hope you guys appreciate my additional research on Primo, because itís really cutting into my ďold geezerĒ 4-hour mid-afternoon nap time! lol
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 Dec 2013   #1458
gldndragn

Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by garuda View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by paulpicks21 View Post
OK the results are in.... So the actual times for transferring the 24.1GB file are as follows -

Without the cache tool running - 2m 38s
With 4GB of ram allocated - 2m dead
With 12GB of ram allocated - 2m dead

So the extra ram actually serves no purpose in relation to transferring large files. But at any rate with the cache enabled it saved nearly 40 seconds which is quite impressive for the total time we are talking about.
Ordinarily, I try not to get caught up in the SSD-speed fervor, since in the end I agree with ďwhsĒ ó itís real world performance that truly matters, not ideal-situation benches. But when the bench numbers exceed 10K on READ or WRITE, I canít help but become curious as to how they do it ó since over 10K exceeds the speed of current RamDrive technology using the fastest memory available. But Iím having difficulty finding any real specifics on how Primo does it, other than their webpage block diagram.

Paul, your first example comparing Primo/no-Primo file xfers was 158secs Xfer. Your 2nd w/Primo was 120secs at 4G RAM. Then again #3 was 120secs at 12G RAM setting. You concluded that RAM size doesn't matter. Iím not so sure I agree with that in the long run over time.

Based on my vague understanding of Primoís block diagram, and drawing somewhat on my limited RamDisk knowledge ó Iím guessing that the reason xfer #2 and #3 were the same length of time, is because Primo likely uses RAM allocated cache to store and retain certain data from previous transactions (and their webpage description seems to suggest this). Therefore perhaps the #2 and #3 were both the same time (120secs) because the #2 xfer was still stored in the RAM cache or the ďFancy CacheĒ as they call it ó so naturally one would expect all subsequent xfers containing the same data or file would be the same time period; because itís using the same data from the same cached memory.

Thatís just my guess. Iím going to try to get more detail on how Primo does it, to see if itís different from RamDisk techniques. I speculate itís just a variation of RamDrive technology. And likely the huge bench numbers are the product of simply reading RAM speeds, not from using SSD real estate activity. Iíll post if I come up with anything concrete on how it works.

I hope you guys appreciate my additional research on Primo, because itís really cutting into my ďold geezerĒ 4-hour mid-afternoon nap time! lol
Seems like a good idea to me. I would like to know more myself on this.
Please post back with your results/findings. Thanks
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 Dec 2013   #1459
paulpicks21

Windows 7 Professional 64 bit
 
 

Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by garuda View Post
Quote   Quote: Originally Posted by paulpicks21 View Post
OK the results are in.... So the actual times for transferring the 24.1GB file are as follows -

Without the cache tool running - 2m 38s
With 4GB of ram allocated - 2m dead
With 12GB of ram allocated - 2m dead

So the extra ram actually serves no purpose in relation to transferring large files. But at any rate with the cache enabled it saved nearly 40 seconds which is quite impressive for the total time we are talking about.
Ordinarily, I try not to get caught up in the SSD-speed fervor, since in the end I agree with ďwhsĒ ó itís real world performance that truly matters, not ideal-situation benches. But when the bench numbers exceed 10K on READ or WRITE, I canít help but become curious as to how they do it ó since over 10K exceeds the speed of current RamDrive technology using the fastest memory available. But Iím having difficulty finding any real specifics on how Primo does it, other than their webpage block diagram.

Paul, your first example comparing Primo/no-Primo file xfers was 158secs Xfer. Your 2nd w/Primo was 120secs at 4G RAM. Then again #3 was 120secs at 12G RAM setting. You concluded that RAM size doesn't matter. Iím not so sure I agree with that in the long run over time.

Based on my vague understanding of Primoís block diagram, and drawing somewhat on my limited RamDisk knowledge ó Iím guessing that the reason xfer #2 and #3 were the same length of time, is because Primo likely uses RAM allocated cache to store and retain certain data from previous transactions (and their webpage description seems to suggest this). Therefore perhaps the #2 and #3 were both the same time (120secs) because the #2 xfer was still stored in the RAM cache or the ďFancy CacheĒ as they call it ó so naturally one would expect all subsequent xfers containing the same data or file would be the same time period; because itís using the same data from the same cached memory.

Thatís just my guess. Iím going to try to get more detail on how Primo does it, to see if itís different from RamDisk techniques. I speculate itís just a variation of RamDrive technology. And likely the huge bench numbers are the product of simply reading RAM speeds, not from using SSD real estate activity. Iíll post if I come up with anything concrete on how it works.

I hope you guys appreciate my additional research on Primo, because itís really cutting into my ďold geezerĒ 4-hour mid-afternoon nap time! lol
Hello garuda,

It is certainly interesting testing things out like this, and I will also be interested to hear your findings.

Now regarding what I have highlighted in red, If this is indeed true then I should be able to test it by simply ending the current Cache process, restarting the PC and then creating a new Cache process with 12GB of ram used. Am I correct in thinking that will delete any previously stored data?

I am going to test this out now anyway to see if it makes any difference.

Paul.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
16 Dec 2013   #1460
paulpicks21

Windows 7 Professional 64 bit
 
 

The time was 1m 59.3s so essentially the same time as the 2 previous runs.
My System SpecsSystem Spec
Reply

 Show us your SSD performance 2




Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search




Similar help and support threads
Thread Forum
Show us your hard drive performance
I thought it would be interesting to compare everyones hard drive performances with screenshots from HD Tune utility (get from HD Tune). Maybe after some time we could produce a results table. So heres mine: Im going to show you the single WD Raptor X results first for interest: ...
Hardware & Devices
SSD show low performance
I bought a Samsung 840 EVO120Gb which is showing a very disappointing performance. My system is the following: Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Asus P7P55 WS GSkill 12gb Intel i5 760 2.8Ghz 4x Nvidia Quadro NVS 290
Performance & Maintenance
HDDs Show in BIOS, But Do Not Show in Disk Management
Hello, A newbie here that just completed a first-time new Win7 PC build. Successful installation of Win7 Pro on WD 600GB 10000 system drive. Went back and installed 4 additional HDD. (2) WD Caviar Black 1TB 7200 RPM and (2) WD Caviar 7200 500GB HDD from XP system that were used for storage. ...
Hardware & Devices
Show us your SSD performance
I'm interested to see what others are getting out of their SSD or SSDs in RAID. It's cool to look through the "Show us your hard drive performance" thread but here's a place for just SSD performance. I have a 128GB Patriot Torqx. (F/W v1881) Please post your benchmarks.:) Edit: I now have...
Hardware & Devices
Show us your Mechanical HDD performance...
Since the SSD boys and girls have a "Show us your SSD Performance" thread, I thought I'd start one for us mechanical HDD owners. Simply DL, install, and run HD Tune and post screenshots of results here in this thread. Please also tell us the Make and Model of your HDD(s) and any other specs you...
Hardware & Devices
show hidden folders show file extensions thru registry
I am trying to setup a default user or machine setup for how win7 handles folder view options. I want show hidden folders to be set to on for all users and the hide extensions for know file types to be unchecked or turned off ffor all users (so extensions show) I have located them in the registry...
General Discussion


Our Sites

Site Links

About Us

Find 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 22:06.

Twitter Facebook Google+



Windows 7 Forums

Seven Forums Android App Seven Forums IOS App