SSD Bad Performance?

johnnya · 25 Mar 2014

Curiosity finally got me and I purchased a new 120GB Kingston SV300s SSD. I set ACHI in BIOS and did a fresh install of my Windows 7 OS and let Windows handle partitions, trim, alignment etc. Latest Firmware.
Ran the As SDD Benchmark Test (see attached JPG) and am not too impressed. Seems way short of other Benchmark Test posted on our forum. Notice some difference from old spinner but no WOW Factor.

Running Win 7 64 Bit with 2gb ram.
Oh well can't complain about the price. $74. bucks from Tiger Direct.

Any thoughts
Cheers
JohnnyA

Sir George · 25 Mar 2014

johnnya said:

Curiosity finally got me and I purchased a new 120GB Kingston SV300s SSD. I set ACHI in BIOS and did a fresh install of my Windows 7 OS and let Windows handle partitions, trim, alignment etc. Latest Firmware.
Ran the As SDD Benchmark Test (see attached JPG) and am not too impressed. Seems way short of other Benchmark Test posted on our forum. Notice some difference from old spinner but no WOW Factor.

Running Win 7 64 Bit with 2gb ram.
Oh well can't complain about the price. $74. bucks from Tiger Direct.

Any thoughts
Cheers
JohnnyA

I haven't run any benchmarks, but the SSD in my laptop only shows a noticeable difference when I cold boot; I purchased a Crucial M500 Series 120GB SATA 6.0Gb (SSD) with Marvell Controller. The daily performance appears the same as a spinning disk.

johnnya · 25 Mar 2014

Thanks for the reply George. Now I don't feel so bad. I wonder how some of our other members are getting vastly superior results?

logicearth · 25 Mar 2014

What version of SATA does your computer come with? SATA (1.5 gb/s), SATA2 (3 gb/s), or SATA3 (6 gb/s)?

Based on those numbers, you have the older version of SATA, not version 2 or 3.

* 1.5 gb/s is about 192 MB/s

Sardonicus · 25 Mar 2014

Try installing the Intel RST driver.
Download the floppy drivers and update the driver from the Device Manager (IDE ATA/ATAPI controllers).

https://downloadcenter.intel.com/default.aspx

Sardonicus · 25 Mar 2014

You may get slightly better numbers with the Intel driver, but as mentioned, SATA II vs SATA III will determine the overall numbers.

Layback Bear · 25 Mar 2014

I have absolutely no luck with Marvell sata controlled ports.

dsperber · 25 Mar 2014

johnnya said:

Running Win 7 64 Bit with 2gb ram.

Really?? Your Specs show 4GB.

Spend some money and buy more memory for your laptop. 4GB is minimum recommended, with 8GB ideal for typical normal use and getting the most out of 64-bit Windows 7.

Do you have the latest firmware in the SSD?

And of course, is it on SATA-1, SATA-2, or SATA-3 controller? Big big difference here.

johnnya · 25 Mar 2014

Sorry for the confusion. My system specs do indeed show a Toshiba laptop with 4GM ram.

But for this SSD experiment, I am using a desktop with Win 7 & 2 GB ram. Latest Firmware on SSD. I am pretty sure that the Motherboard ASUS P5QL Pro uses SATA-1 so this could very well be the bottleneck.
JohnnyA

essenbe · 25 Mar 2014

If you are using sata I, you are getting pretty much the speed your hardware is capable of. But, trust me, what you see may not be as fast as some benchmarks you've seen here, but it is considerably faster than a mechanical hard drive. If you would like to compare. This is a test of a 3.5" Western Digital Black 7200 RPM drive connected to a sata III port. It's a WD1002FAEX. In reality for an OS drive the 4kb read speed and access times are all that really make a difference. Most of the other numbers you will never see.