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

Whats wrong with my SSD?

Discussion in 'Storage' started by fullinfusion, Apr 16, 2011.

  1. fullinfusion

    fullinfusion 1.21 Gigawatts

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    8,473 (3.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,212
    I picked up a brand new Ocz Vertex II 60 gb EXTENDED Version SSD... 22-23NM I believe

    It's rated to run

    MAX PERFORMANCE: READ: UP TO 250MB/S
    Write: UP TO 275MB/S
    SUSTAINED WRITE: UP TO 250MB/S

    Im using AS SSD Benchmark.. to run benchmark's.

    Why are the scores so low?

    Also Im set in the bios to be running AHCI mode

    [​IMG]



    My Vertex Indelinks Barefoot controller was slower but faster :wtf: then this Sanforce 1200 controller.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2011
  2. gpost3

    gpost3 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Messages:
    55 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14
    I think you missed the "upto" part. :) That's the trick. I suppose the upto 250 MB/s would be in sequential reads and writes. But I doubt the write speed would be that much - it is usually less than the read speeds because of the limitation of NAND flash (trim has to do wear level adjustment). That's why seagate used NAND as "read only" cache on their hybrid drives.
     
  3. techspec6 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2009
    Messages:
    40 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Yeah... no.

    Your writes should be well over 200MB.

    I see that your drive is correctly aligned.

    Some possible problems:
    Install official AMD sata driver from your mainboard manufacturers website
    Install AMD chipset driver
    Make sure you've installed the drive on the first red sata port.

    The drive is designed to throttle down enough to compensate for your usage. If you benchmark 5 times in 30 minutes and write to all the "clean" pages, the drive will slow your writes enough to clean pages for future writes. Benchmarking excessively will slow the drives very quickly.

    Lastly, and most probably what your problem is... your drive is too full. SSDs require a little empty space to operate at maximum speeds. It is dealing with cleaning NAND before writing. If there's plenty of free space, it's able to have a large store of clean ready NAND ready to write. Since you've got a 60GB drive, you would need to keep your usage under 45GB to stay at max speeds. I used a 60GB for a time before upgrading to my 120gb. Now I have 7 or 8 SSDs in various systems (and my ps3) around my house but that's another story. When I had my 60GB drive, I used a 500GB HDD for media, programs and other storage. I moved my documents, videos and other user files off the SSD and onto the HDD. I recommend leaving the page file on the SSD so it can benefit from the fast access times.

    There's numerous other tweaks that can be done to pump up the SSDs performance but leave that until after you've resolved your problem. The OCZ forum is a wealth of information, though you will need to spend many hours sorting through it.

    Jason
     
  4. BraveSoul

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Messages:
    991 (0.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    164
    AS SSD Benchmark just crashes with my ssd,, have very little space tho so probably because of that but first too scores were similar as in write is much smaller then read
     
  5. fullinfusion

    fullinfusion 1.21 Gigawatts

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    8,473 (3.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,212
    I've done everything yo recommended, also I have around 32gb of space left on the drive..
     
  6. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,974 (12.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,400
    What do you get for results from ATTO?

    How about transfering a somewhat large file or folder from one SSD to the other?
     
  7. gpost3

    gpost3 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    Messages:
    55 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14
    So did it fix the problem? The limitation of SSD that I told you about is indeed true. Now is not the time for SSD - personally I would run 2 spinners in RAID 0 configuration if performance is that much of a concern. While it may not match SSD's seek time, it would still be ample for a powerful workstation or gaming system. P.S: You won't see any performance gain in Gaming with the use of SSD.

    Wait off until SSD get a little mature - maybe another 4 to 6 months then get them.
     
  8. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    14,150 (4.45/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,355
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    RAID is too unreliable for overclocking. I use Corsair F60(275/285, after 6 months usage still same speed), and a 2TB SATA III "green" platter drive that gets 100-145mb/sec, and the combo works great for me...the 5900RPM "green" drive sips power, yet is faster than any of the SATA2 7200RPM drives I have.


    While SSd's may not be the right option for yourself, gpost3, the are definitely ready for prime-time, and for me, there's no going back to 100% mechanical drives.

    Since I see very few other reviewers using AS SSD bench, I suggest you try different software to check performance, Fullinfusion.
     
  9. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,974 (12.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,400
    If your operating system is installed on the RAID, I agree. If you're using them for storing your games and whatnot there shouldn't be a problem.
     
  10. fullinfusion

    fullinfusion 1.21 Gigawatts

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    8,473 (3.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,212
    I read something about this drive and the low score in AS SSD bench but cant remember what it was.
    I just ran ATTO and got this,

    [​IMG]

    Now thats normal for this drive hey?
     
  11. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,974 (12.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,400
    Yes, your SSD is fine.
     
    fullinfusion says thanks.
  12. BababooeyHTJ New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    907 (0.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    85
    fullinfusion says thanks.
  13. fullinfusion

    fullinfusion 1.21 Gigawatts

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    8,473 (3.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,212
    Yeah thanks for the link, I see ocz are replacing these drives for the 32nm faster drives plus shipping both ways is on there dime :D

    I just put in a support ticket and now the waiting game begins
     
  14. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,974 (12.97/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,400
    Whaa? Why are they replacing them?
     
  15. fullinfusion

    fullinfusion 1.21 Gigawatts

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    8,473 (3.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,212
    Sloooow, read the link buddie posted. I guess they didnt tell ppl what they were getting. There is two links for ppl to send them back for swap outs...It's a good read.

    EDIT, copied from source

    Conclusion

    With the wide selection of SSDs on the market today, there is no question that some drives will be slower than others. Reviewers like ourselves and buyers alike understand that some models will score differently, and we can choose with our wallets. The problem we have with this particular situation is that any choice to make an informed buying decision was taken away when OCZ sold and advertised these models as identical through online retailers. Both list the same 285MB/s read and 275MB/s write speeds, the same three year warranties, and the same retail price. What the average buyer doesn't know is that depending on which model they get, one is up to 49% slower than the other and has only 66% of the rated write-cycles. There are other complaints as well, such as having a 5GB smaller capacity. Considering both models are sold as being 60GB; one being formatted with 55.8GB of space with the other having only 51.2GB is a huge difference. All that said, at least the 25nm version held up well in our real world benchmarks.

    Overall there is no question that OCZ messed up with the way they handled the introduction of 25nm flash with their consumer SSD line. Listing these drives as different models, changing the rated speeds, mentioning the lower expected life-span, and even changing the pricing would have let buyers know what they were getting in to. Instead they took the approach that no one would notice... well we did and plenty of their own buyers did too.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2011

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

Share This Page