1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Installed new Samsung 840 250GB Question

Discussion in 'Storage' started by Lazermonkey, Apr 5, 2013.

  1. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    Hey guys,

    I just installed a new Samsung 840 250GB SSD.

    I ran the performance tool and it gave me these numbers.

    The top numbers seem to be okay and in range.

    The bottom numbers (especially the read side) have me concerned.

    Shouldn't this SSD be faster than this?

    Also, I have windows 7 and DO NOT have SP1 installed, would that make a difference?

    Here is a screen shot.

    TIA for any and all responses :)

    [​IMG][/IMG]
     
  2. 1nf3rn0x

    1nf3rn0x

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,032 (1.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    361
    [​IMG]

    Seems like random read and write aren't what they should be, but I'm not really sure.
     
    Lazermonkey says thanks.
  3. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
  4. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
  5. RCoon

    RCoon Gaming Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,415 (8.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,550
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    I can only assume you have it plugged in to a Sata III port on the motherboard that is wired direct into the board, not some stupid media controller card motherboards come with?
    Otherwise the normal read and write is fine, sequencial is all retarded like.
     
  6. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    Exactly.

    My system specs are listed in my info.

    I have everything set up right. Well, I think I do?

    AHCI and all that is correct.
     
  7. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    Correct.

    It is plugged in directly to the board.
     
  8. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    write speeds are not fine at 250Mb/s
     
  9. RCoon

    RCoon Gaming Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,415 (8.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,550
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    according to the specs posted above they are
     
  10. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
  11. repman244

    repman244

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,104 (0.85/day)
    Thanks Received:
    456
    250 MB/s is spot on for this drive.

    Did you try running any other benchmark programs? Try Anvil Storage Utilities and see what kind of IOPS you get.
     
  12. RCoon

    RCoon Gaming Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,415 (8.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,550
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    Quoted from retailers:

    The performance of the 256GB models is below so you can compare. (IOPS = In out Operations per Second)

    Samsung 830 SSD | Read 520MB/s (IOPS 80k) Write 400MB/s (IOPS 36k)

    Samsung 840 SSD | Read 540MB/s (IOPS 96k) Write 250MB/s (IOPS 62k)

    Samsung 840 PRO SSD | Read 540 MB/s (IOPS 100k) Write 520MB/s (IOPS 90k)
     
  13. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    I think he needs to verify exactly what model he has....... 1nF posted different specs....... looks like you may be correct.
     
  14. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
  15. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    I did.

    Samsung 840 250GB

    It is the numbers in the bottom of my first post.

    the IOPS numbers on the read side.
     
  16. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
  17. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    Yes. But, what about those other numbers on the bottom of my first post?

    I don't know if they are within specs?
     
  18. repman244

    repman244

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,104 (0.85/day)
    Thanks Received:
    456
    ATTO doesn't measure IOPS...

    For you to compare (taken from a review site):

    [​IMG]
     
  19. RCoon

    RCoon Gaming Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,415 (8.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,550
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    try increasing the 8192 to say, double the size. 16000k. You might see the IOPS increase to what they should be. Transfer speeds improve the larger the file. Companies tend to over estimate the speed of their drives by bursting larger files through the read/write process in order to improve their IOPS numbers.
    My guess is your drive is working exactly as it should, you're just not seeing the same IOPS because they did a very specific not-so-life-like test on the drive to improve advertising.
     
  20. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    It will not let me go above 8192.
     
  21. RCoon

    RCoon Gaming Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,415 (8.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,550
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    no need to worry. its working fine, just a classic case of misleading advertising. not so misleading if you're transferring 4GB files constantly, however.
     
  22. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    Here is from that Anvil run.

    [​IMG][/IMG]
     
  23. RCoon

    RCoon Gaming Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2012
    Messages:
    7,415 (8.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,550
    Location:
    Gypsyland, UK
    the one previous to this is benched as an SCSI drive, your benchmarks look perfectly normal
     
  24. Lazermonkey

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2013
    Messages:
    318 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Location:
    Central Illinois
    I am okay with the sequential results.

    It's the random results which are confusing to me?

    Maybe this is normal? I don't know?

    Windows boots up in mere seconds and programs open in a flash. So maybe there is nothing to worry about?

    I just wondered if there was a setting I may have been missing?

    Thank you guys for all of your help and super fast responses.

    that is what makes this place great :)
     
  25. repman244

    repman244

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,104 (0.85/day)
    Thanks Received:
    456
    I think the results look okay (I tried it on my 840 Pro 256GB and get a bit lower results than on the one I posted), the drive tested there is empty as well.

    I think the test Samsung provided uses average values as a results. The 96k is the maximum you can get in an ideal scenario (4K data and a queue depth of 32).

    [​IMG]
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page