Samsung 64GB 2.5" SATA-II MLC Solid State Hard Drive

dirtydog I am wondering how you seem to have an average read speed from 1 drive at 170MB/s. I have been told the average read from 1 drive is only 90MB/s
It seems like only 2 drives in RAID can give you 170MB/s :S
 
jrwagh333 said:
dirtydog I am wondering how you seem to have an average read speed from 1 drive at 170MB/s. I have been told the average read from 1 drive is only 90MB/s
It seems like only 2 drives in RAID can give you 170MB/s :S
Click to expand...

My 7200rpm HDD averages over 90MB/s so I would hope that a fancy SSD would do a lot better :)

Actually looking at the benchmark figures again, I got a higher burst speed with a Velociraptor and also a 7.2k Caviar Black in this machine than the SSD provides. Although the SSD has quicker read performance otherwise.
 
Last edited:
dirtydog said:
I got one of these today and have just done a couple of quick benchmarks in Windows XP. My motherboard is a G31 chipset with ICH7 southbridge.

Oddly the drive was already formatted to NTFS. I am a bit sceptical that the drive can be new when it is already formatted, because surely it doesn't come from the factory like that?
Click to expand...

Vertex's come pre formatted and aligned for vista installs (installing xp needs manual alignment). I think the samsungs will be similar but not sure what they will default be aligned to. Anyone raiding their samsungs will of course need to setup partitions as the initial raid setup wipes everything.

Atto seems to be the only reliable benchmark for SSD's right now, hd tune and hd tack will show double read results while scanning over sections that haven't been previously written to so you will have to basically half what you see there (I know it sucks, got very excited when I first used HD Tune and saw my raids reading over 400mb/s).

The graph should be very straight and average out to about 100mb/s for a single samsung SSD.

GRiDlock said:
I get 150MBsec AVG according to HDTune 2.55. Peak is 170MBsec, Min was 85MBsec. Windows7 clean installation.
Click to expand...

If you bench one after installing an OS on it you'll get even weirder readings as a 1/3rd will be at the normal speed while the other 2/3rds will be double so you get a big fluctuation between peak and min when it should only be about 2-3% on an SSD.
 
Last edited:
DanF said:
If you bench one after installing an OS on it you'll get even weirder readings as a 1/3rd will be at the normal speed while the other 2/3rds will be double so you get a big fluctuation between peak and min when it should only be about 2-3% on an SSD.
Click to expand...

no you should get a straight line, ppl who get that have old software or something else that isn't setup properly.
 
I decided to setup the drive as recommended on the OCZ forums.

However, all it seems to have done is cocked it up:

2uetc2q.png


Whether set to 64 or 128 sectors, it gives identical results to that.


First I set it up from within Windows XP, using the diskpar program.

Then, upon getting the ugly results above, I used diskpart from a Windows Vista disc. Identical results.
 
Dirtydog, thats fine, mine is the same results as yours, and so have the other two I fitted last week.

They were all formated also, so don't worry.

Your burst dropped like mine, once I installed windows on, as many have said, Hdtach does have issues with ssd drives.

Try ATTO, that gives the true speed.
 
I wish I had queried the new drive to see what its offset was set to by default :)

Perhaps someone else who hasn't altered their drive's offset, and whose drive was pre-formatted could do that?
 
dirtydog said:
I wish I had queried the new drive to see what its offset was set to by default :)

Perhaps someone else who hasn't altered their drive's offset, and whose drive was pre-formatted could do that?
Click to expand...



On one of the drives, I did a straight install, and the results were the same as yours above. The tweaks, didn't seem to make it any faster.
 
But then in a few months, we could say that again. Oh 128gb at a lower price. Might as well wait until the 256gb's come lower in price...

Do you see where I'm going? lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom