I have to say that I don't put a lot of faith in the aggregate WEI. I did run the "winsat disk" on the 0309 firmware but unfortunately didn't save the results.
I am led to believe that access time is a key metric for SSDs and hope AS-SSD hasn't got this one wrong.
I ran that benchmark and I got about the same Acc results as you. Honestly, I would just enjoy the ssd:) Keep the firmware up to date, so you will experience optimum stability and most of the time, performance. Who knows, this version of AS-SSD benchmark may not work as well with the firmware. Enjoy your ssd:)
But the difference between 0.2ms and 0.365 is not going to be very noticeable from a usage experience. A mechanical hard drive is going to run 12-15ms.
I know that benchmarks are used to spot problems and prove performance, but you may just be focusing too much on these numbers. Unless it was something like 5-10ms, I wouldn't lift a finger to figure out why. Let me test my results and I will post results.
Edit, here is what I get from my Intel 320 series in my laptop
I'm a bit of a perfectionist which has its drawbacks. You're probably right that I wouldn't actually perceive a performance impact. Thanks for your inputs.
^ We are all enthusiasts, so I can understand your concerns. When I first joined this forum, I was trying to figure out why a Seagate 7200.12 1TB hard drive was registering 25ms access times on my rig. Never could figure it out. I changed the OS, cables, drivers, etc.....and the problem persisted. I put that 7200.12 into my Linux box and it runs perfect at 12ms. I got a Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB for my new machine and it runs at 12ms like it should.
But I will be honest, aside from the benchmark, I could never prove with a stopwatch that anything changed when I went from the Seagate 7200.12 to the Western Digital Caviar Black. I spent $100 simply to lower my benchmark number in the end. Of course, it did give my Linux machine a new 1TB hard drive...so all was not lost.
Here's the HDTune for the same Crucial M4 128GB I've been complaining about
Benchmarks don't you just love them.
It doesn't necessarily mean ASSSD was wrong. You could run it a dozen times and get a dozen slightly different results. I wouldn't trust HDTune for SSD results. It's meant for HDDs
I'm skipping 000F (unless I experience problems)
My comment "Benchmarks don't you love them" may have been a bit obscure.
I don't think HD Tune is that good for SSDs, also under options you need to specify block size which will influence results.
I am questioning whether some benchmarks represent a controlled test. There may be many system factors influencing the result. My HD Tune result was better than the previous poster yet they were very happy with their performance improvement.
I would agree not to upgrade to firmware 000F unless you really need to. My decision to try it was based on a AS-SSD 4k-64 benchmark result!!!
Quote
