Jump to content



Photo

Poor SSD Drive performance

ssd performance

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 xfx

xfx

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 05-October 04
  • Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64

Posted 18 January 2013 - 06:13

Hi,

I have a Kingston SV200S3128G SDD drive and, although it is faster than any of my other mechanical drives, I feel it is still a tad slow compared to other drives I've seen.

Also, I'm getting a weird result when running Blackmagic's Disk Speed Test program as it shows that the drive's can write faster than it can read, which makes no sense.

speed_test.png

The drive is connected to an on-board Marvell 91xx controller (6Gb)
The motherboard is an Asus Rampage Extreme III
And, I'm running Windows 7 x64

I have tried both, the default Windows' drivers for the controller as those provided at Asus' web site.

Anyone has any idea of what may be happening?


#2 Aletheia

Aletheia

    Neowinian

  • Tech Issues Solved: 1
  • Joined: 30-June 09

Posted 18 January 2013 - 06:42

Did you try a different test? Just to double check, try:

Crystal Disk Mark 3
http://crystalmark.i...rk/index-e.html

BTW, I also have Kingston SSD V+200 60GB for my eee1000HA and it is so much faster than the HDD! My netbook (W7, 2GB Ram) is now usable! :)

#3 OP xfx

xfx

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 05-October 04
  • Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:01

Thanks for the link Aletheia.
Well, you could say it gives "better" results but I was expecting a better reading performance.

speed_test2.png

#4 Abyssus

Abyssus

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 24-March 11

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:09

Make to Enable AHCI SATA mode in the UEFI/BIOS and use the native intel or amd SATA 6Gb/s ports. Dont use Marvell.

#5 OP xfx

xfx

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 05-October 04
  • Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:12

AHCI mode is already enabled, however, the only 6gb SATA port on the motherboard is through the Marvell.

#6 scorpian007

scorpian007

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 03-July 12
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro x64
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 930 Orange

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:26

The Marvell ports are rubbish. I tried my Samsung 830 drive on the Marvell ports on my motherboard and got barely above my native SATA2 speeds.

#7 OP xfx

xfx

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 05-October 04
  • Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:28

I have been reading some posts at oher forums and it looks like the problem is that the controller is connected via PCI-e 1X, instead of PCI-e 2X.
So, I guess there's nothing that can be done...

I will, however, try the SATA3 ports from the Intel controller. Although they are only 3Gb, some say have seen a considerable improvement.
I'll post back with some results tomorrow.

#8 Abyssus

Abyssus

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 24-March 11

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:36

You could try a firmware update?

http://www.kingston....G_128G_e120506a

Also this peson had the same drive and a firmware fixed the speed issue

http://www.overclock...d-write-problem

#9 OP xfx

xfx

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 05-October 04
  • Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64

Posted 18 January 2013 - 07:41

You could try a firmware update?


I did check that the same day I noticed the performance issue, but my drive doesn't have the "E111008a" code printed on the label, on mine it sais "E120506a" so I guess it doesn't need the update...

#10 tsupersonic

tsupersonic

    Neowinian Senior

  • Tech Issues Solved: 3
  • Joined: 30-September 06
  • Location: USA
  • OS: Win. 8.1 Pro. x64/Mac OS X
  • Phone: iPhone 5S/Nexus 5

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:59

Looks normal to me... What kind of results were you expecting, and how does this compare the to reviews of your drive on similar setups?

#11 OP xfx

xfx

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 05-October 04
  • Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64

Posted 18 January 2013 - 13:45

Well, my main concern was seeing that write speed was faster than the read speed but, it appears that after doing some more reasearch you are right: those values appear to fall inside the average for other owners of that particular Kingston drive.

I guess I was expecting/hoping to see ~350/400MB/s reading speed, seeing that the write speed was ~200/MBs

--------------------

Here're the results from Winsat which look quite similar to other users' benchmarks (a bit slower, though):

> Disk Sequential 64.0 Read 222.76 MB/s 7.4
> Disk Random 16.0 Read 140.85 MB/s 7.4
> Responsiveness: Average IO Rate 0.69 ms/IO 7.9
> Responsiveness: Grouped IOs 8.71 units 7.4
> Responsiveness: Long IOs 2.00 units 7.9
> Responsiveness: Overall 17.38 units 7.8
> Responsiveness: PenaltyFactor 0.0
> Disk Sequential 64.0 Write 214.60 MB/s 7.4
> Average Read Time with Sequential Writes 0.508 ms 7.9
> Latency: 95th Percentile 2.183 ms 7.5
> Latency: Maximum 18.907 ms 7.9
> Average Read Time with Random Writes 0.446 ms 7.9


#12 xendrome

xendrome

    In God We Trust; All Others We Monitor

  • Tech Issues Solved: 12
  • Joined: 05-December 01
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro x64

Posted 18 January 2013 - 13:48

Well, my main concern was seeing that write speed was faster than the read speed but, it appears that after doing some more reasearch you are right: those values appear to fall inside the average for other owners of that particular Kingston drive.

I guess I was expecting/hoping to see ~350/400MB/s reading speed, seeing that the write speed was ~200/MBs


How old is it? Return it? Get something else, like a Crucial M4?

#13 OP xfx

xfx

    Neowinian

  • Joined: 05-October 04
  • Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
  • OS: Windows 7 x64

Posted 18 January 2013 - 14:04

How old is it? Return it? Get something else, like a Crucial M4?


It's brand new. I can't. Don't have the money. :D

#14 Wakers

Wakers

    Neowinian Senior

  • Joined: 30-July 07

Posted 18 January 2013 - 17:24

That's normal. Speeds also decrease quite sharply once they get past half full too.

Also, advertised speeds that they sell at are only achievable in specific benchmarks and don't reflect real-life speeds, which is a giant con if you ask me.