Show us your SSD performance 2

[derekimo]

Sorry, another post real quick: it occurs to me that the best way to show off your SSD would be to use the built-in WinSat benchmark under Windows 7. It already accounts for the proper thread prioritization and gives you metrics that the other benchmark tools cannot.

When I go to run this, even as an Admin, it just pops up with a black CMD looking box and quickly shuts down...What am I doing wrong here?

You should be entering that in an elevated cmd prompt, not trying to elevate winsat.

 

[DaGooN]

Numbers are fun..
When you use cache apps. anyone use them?

Disk Cache, Hybrid Disk Cache and RamDisk

&

FancyCache Overview

i know it ain't going to make your SSD that much better, but sure makes the numbers pretty


Crucal M4 256gb
write Enabled, and write Disabled

 

[whs]

That looks interesting. I am going to try it on my Windows 8 to go which is on a USB3 stick.

 

[Dave76]

I was looking at those apps a while ago, never did try them.

Do you notice any performance improvement?

 

[whs]

I was looking at those apps a while ago, never did try them.

Do you notice any performance improvement?

Dave, unfortunately it does not install in Windows 8. You get a message that the OS is unsupported - and that's the end of it. Would have loved to try it on my stick.

 

[tw33k]

New Intel 320 80GB in my work PC

 

[Homeuser66]

Sorry, another post real quick: it occurs to me that the best way to show off your SSD would be to use the built-in WinSat benchmark under Windows 7. It already accounts for the proper thread prioritization and gives you metrics that the other benchmark tools cannot.

When I go to run this, even as an Admin, it just pops up with a black CMD looking box and quickly shuts down...What am I doing wrong here?

You should be entering that in an elevated cmd prompt, not trying to elevate winsat.

Thanks! This worked...I don't know what I was doing wrong before....

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Windows\system32>winsat -v disk
Windows System Assessment Tool
> Command Line 'winsat -v disk'
> DWM running... leaving it on
> System processor power policy saved and set to 'max performance'
> Running: Feature Enumeration ''
> Gathering System Information
> Operating System : 6.1 Build-7601
> Processor : Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920
@ 2.67GHz
> TSC Frequency : 0
> Number of Processors : 1
> Number of Cores : 4
> Number of CPUs : 8
> Number of Cores per Processor : 4
> Number of CPUs Per Core : 2
> Cores have logical CPUs : YES
> L1 Cache and line Size : 32768 64
> L2 Cache and line Size : 262144 64
> Total physical mem available to the OS : 11.9 GB (12,875,550,720 bytes)
> Adapter Description : NVIDIA GeForce GTX 470
> Adapter Manufacturer : NVIDIA
> Adapter Driver Version : 8.17.12.9573
> Adapter Driver Date (yy/mm/dd) : 2012\2\9
> Has DX9 or better : Yes
> Has Pixel shader 2.0 or better : Yes
> Has LDDM Driver : Yes
> Dedicated (local) video memory : 1248.44MB
> System memory dedicated as video memory : 0MB
> System memory shared as video memory : 2815.84MB
> Primary Monitor Size : 1920 X 1080 (2073600 total pixels)
> WinSAT is Official : Yes
> Run Time 00:00:00.00
> Running: Storage Assessment '-seq -read -n 0'
Mode Flags = 0x%08x
Disk Number = 0
Iterations = 1
IO Count = 256
Sequential IO Size = 65536
Random IO Size = 16384
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[0] - 519.975073 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[1] - 527.649715 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[2] - 503.325934 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[3] - 513.795490 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[4] - 494.654794 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[5] - 516.377409 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[6] - 518.153907 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[7] - 521.404754 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[8] - 526.079467 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[9] - 520.779928 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[10] - 519.573578 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[11] - 524.630668 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[12] - 525.125933 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[13] - 524.208780 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[14] - 523.767843 MB/s
Run[1] Type[0x01080001] Zone[15] - 523.715243 MB/s
> Run Time 00:00:12.60
> Running: Storage Assessment '-ran -read -n 0'
Mode Flags = 0x%08x
Disk Number = 0
Iterations = 1
IO Count = 1000
Sequential IO Size = 65536
Random IO Size = 16384
Run[1] Type[0x01000002] Zone[0] - 300.316778 MB/s
> Run Time 00:00:00.81
> Running: Storage Assessment '-scen 2009 -drive C:'
Mode Flags = 0x%08x
Disk Number = 0
Iterations = 1
IO Count = 9000
Sequential IO Size = 65536
Random IO Size = 16384

Requesting a file of size 1073741824 located at physical offset 0x1bf590
0200.


Are these good numbers?

 

[mjf]

New Intel 320 80GB in my work PC

View attachment 205543 View attachment 205544

If you have the Intel chipset then I understand you may get better performance using Intel drivers in place of the MS drivers (msahci). Others may care to comment.

 

[Albuquerque]

<snip>
Are these good numbers?

Actually, you can skip the -V argument and just run Winsat disk for a more 'optimal' output for the thread. It appears you're missing some data at the end to make the proper estimate. Here's my WD Raptor 150Gb at work:

C:\>winsat disk
Windows System Assessment Tool
> Running: Feature Enumeration ''
> Run Time 00:00:00.00
> Running: Storage Assessment '-seq -read -n 0'
> Run Time 00:00:05.99
> Running: Storage Assessment '-ran -read -n 0'
> Run Time 00:00:05.40
> Running: Storage Assessment '-scen 2009 -drive C:'
> Run Time 00:00:54.29
> Running: Storage Assessment '-seq -write -drive C:'
> Run Time 00:00:07.10
> Running: Storage Assessment '-flush -drive C: -seq'
> Run Time 00:00:03.84
> Running: Storage Assessment '-flush -drive C: -ran'
> Run Time 00:00:06.60
> Running: Storage Assessment '-hybrid -ran -read -n 0 -ransize 4096'
NV Cache not present.
> Run Time 00:00:00.33
> Running: Storage Assessment '-hybrid -ran -read -n 0 -ransize 16384'
NV Cache not present.
> Run Time 00:00:00.11
> Disk  Sequential 64.0 Read                   104.81 MB/s          6.6
> Disk  Random 16.0 Read                       3.23 MB/s          4.7
> Responsiveness: Average IO Rate              1.45 ms/IO          7.6
> Responsiveness: Grouped IOs                  8.20 units          7.5
> Responsiveness: Long IOs                     3.11 units          7.9
> Responsiveness: Overall                      25.50 units          7.6
> Responsiveness: PenaltyFactor                0.0
> Disk  Sequential 64.0 Write                  110.68 MB/s          6.7
> Average Read Time with Sequential Writes     4.972 ms          6.0
> Latency: 95th Percentile                     14.435 ms          5.1
> Latency: Maximum                             54.698 ms          7.8
> Average Read Time with Random Writes         6.636 ms          5.5
> Total Run Time 00:01:25.57

That way you can see access time for reads, writes, sequential speeds, blah-de-blah. WinSat also properly puts Windows into the "high performance" state and submits disk access requests at the highest available priority in the I/O stack. It gives a far more thorough and repeatable set of metrics than most of the other apps.

 

[Albuquerque]

Now that I'm at home, here's my 6-disk OCZ Agility 3 240Gb RAID0 array on the HighPoint 2720 controller...

C:\Windows\system32>winsat disk
Windows System Assessment Tool
> Running: Feature Enumeration ''
> Run Time 00:00:00.00
> Running: Storage Assessment '-seq -read -n 0'
> Run Time 00:00:02.82
> Running: Storage Assessment '-ran -read -n 0'
> Run Time 00:00:00.23
> Running: Storage Assessment '-scen 2009 -drive C:'
> Run Time 00:00:51.29
> Running: Storage Assessment '-seq -write -drive C:'
> Run Time 00:00:01.56
> Running: Storage Assessment '-flush -drive C: -seq'
> Run Time 00:00:00.53
> Running: Storage Assessment '-flush -drive C: -ran'
> Run Time 00:00:00.61
> Running: Storage Assessment '-hybrid -ran -read -n 0 -ransize 4096'
NV Cache not present.
> Run Time 00:00:00.00
> Running: Storage Assessment '-hybrid -ran -read -n 0 -ransize 16384'
NV Cache not present.
> Run Time 00:00:00.02
> Disk  Sequential 64.0 Read                   2304.91 MB/s          7.9
> Disk  Random 16.0 Read                       276.08 MB/s          7.9
> Responsiveness: Average IO Rate              0.24 ms/IO          7.9
> Responsiveness: Grouped IOs                  3.04 units          7.9
> Responsiveness: Long IOs                     0.46 units          7.9
> Responsiveness: Overall                      1.41 units          7.9
> Responsiveness: PenaltyFactor                0.0
> Disk  Sequential 64.0 Write                  2505.84 MB/s          7.9
> Average Read Time with Sequential Writes     0.223 ms          7.9
> Latency: 95th Percentile                     1.546 ms          7.9
> Latency: Maximum                             3.186 ms          7.9
> Average Read Time with Random Writes         0.368 ms          7.9
> Total Run Time 00:00:57.60

C:\Windows\system32>

 

[A Guy]

Well, that looks like a 7.9 to me

A Guy

 

[M1GU31]

nice score, i'm still waiting for the prices to go down. I want a big ssd of around 250-300gbs but I don't want to pay the price they have right now. So i'm playing the waiting game to see the prices drop more

 

[tw33k]

New Intel 320 80GB in my work PC

View attachment 205543 View attachment 205544

If you have the Intel chipset then I understand you may get better performance using Intel drivers in place of the MS drivers (msahci). Others may care to comment.

It's an AMD system and I got better performance with Window's drivers than with AMD's which is strange because my C300 at home is much better with AMD AHCI.

 

[whs]

nice score, i'm still waiting for the prices to go down. I want a big ssd of around 250-300gbs but I don't want to pay the price they have right now. So i'm playing the waiting game to see the prices drop more

If that is for a laptop, a bigger SSD may make sense. But for a desktop, 60GB or 80GB are really enough.

 

[Homeuser66]

Ok, here are my new numbers using the WINSAT DISK command:

What's Good?
What's Bad?

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.1.7601]
Copyright (c) 2009 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

C:\Users\AL>Winsat disk
Windows System Assessment Tool
> Running: Feature Enumeration ''
> Run Time 00:00:00.00
> Running: Storage Assessment '-seq -read -n 0'
> Run Time 00:00:05.73
> Running: Storage Assessment '-ran -read -n 0'
> Run Time 00:00:00.36
> Running: Storage Assessment '-scen 2009 -drive C:'
> Run Time 00:00:51.92
> Running: Storage Assessment '-seq -write -drive C:'
> Run Time 00:00:03.46
> Running: Storage Assessment '-flush -drive C: -seq'
> Run Time 00:00:01.00
> Running: Storage Assessment '-flush -drive C: -ran'
> Run Time 00:00:00.95
> Running: Storage Assessment '-hybrid -ran -read -n 0 -ransize 4096'
NV Cache not present.
> Run Time 00:00:00.01
> Running: Storage Assessment '-hybrid -ran -read -n 0 -ransize 16384'
NV Cache not present.
> Run Time 00:00:00.00
> Disk Sequential 64.0 Read 527.58 MB/s 7.9
> Disk Random 16.0 Read 316.74 MB/s 7.9
> Responsiveness: Average IO Rate 0.39 ms/IO 7.9
> Responsiveness: Grouped IOs 6.53 units 7.7
> Responsiveness: Long IOs 0.97 units 7.9
> Responsiveness: Overall 6.34 units 7.9
> Responsiveness: PenaltyFactor 0.0
> Disk Sequential 64.0 Write 509.33 MB/s 7.9
> Average Read Time with Sequential Writes 0.567 ms 7.9
> Latency: 95th Percentile 2.026 ms 7.6
> Latency: Maximum 31.022 ms 7.9
> Average Read Time with Random Writes 0.552 ms 7.9
> Total Run Time 00:01:04.18

C:\Users\AL>

 

[Albuquerque]

What SSD are you testing? The last four lines are latency figures for read and write; you are looking at around 1/2msec latency for both (on average), which seems a bit high for a single SSD. RAIDed SSD's will experience a tad more latency just for the overhead, so perhaps you've got two SATAII SSD's raided together? Also your maximum latency is WAY out for an SSD (even a RAID set), which makes me wonder if your drive might be due for a zero'ing.

Certainly they aren't bad numbers, but this tool provides a level of detail that allows you to do a different 'level' of analysis.

 

[Homeuser66]

What SSD are you testing? The last four lines are latency figures for read and write; you are looking at around 1/2msec latency for both (on average), which seems a bit high for a single SSD. RAIDed SSD's will experience a tad more latency just for the overhead, so perhaps you've got two SATAII SSD's raided together? Also your maximum latency is WAY out for an SSD (even a RAID set), which makes me wonder if your drive might be due for a zero'ing.

Certainly they aren't bad numbers, but this tool provides a level of detail that allows you to do a different 'level' of analysis.

Sorry, I have 2x120 GB SSD (Corsair-Force GT 3) in a RAID 0....They are only about 1 month old...if that..

 

[Albuquerque]

Ah, cool. Yeah, the RAID answers the extra latency then, so overall those are very good numbers! I might have expected your "long IO's" to score a better (a lower number of "units" is better; units in this case is milliseconds per IO request) but it may be something specific to the Intel controller that I'm just unaware of.

I know most people really place no value in WEI (and rightfully so...) but the WINSAT tool provides a great level of detail for digging into performance data on your machine and its various subsystems. It's too bad Microsoft didn't evangelize it correctly

 

[Dave76]

A couple new SSDs.

Details on Intel SSD 330 Series, Est release date 13 Apr.
No info on the controller.
Size: 120GB
NAND: Intel 25nm MLC
Interface: SATA 6Gb/s
Form Factor: 2.5"
Read Speed: 500MB/s
Write Speed: 450MB/s
4K Random Read: 22.5K IOPS
4K Random Write: 33K IOPS
Street Price: $149


OCZ Vertex 4 Review
Current NAND: 25nm IMFT MLC
Controller: Indilinx Everest 2
Max Seq Read: 535 MB/s
Max Seq Write:475 MB/s
Max Random Read: 95K IOPS
Max Random Write: 85K IOPS

 

[Homeuser66]

Ah, cool. Yeah, the RAID answers the extra latency then, so overall those are very good numbers! I might have expected your "long IO's" to score a better (a lower number of "units" is better; units in this case is milliseconds per IO request) but it may be something specific to the Intel controller that I'm just unaware of.

I know most people really place no value in WEI (and rightfully so...) but the WINSAT tool provides a great level of detail for digging into performance data on your machine and its various subsystems. It's too bad Microsoft didn't evangelize it correctly

ROGER THAT!

Thanks for your input!