• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Post your CrystalDiskMark speeds

Asus ramcache is connected to my sata ssd gaming drive, but yes it seems like Im getting vers Extreme results, my 960 Evo 1tb drive also score High, at the same time my c drive a sata ssd using rapid mode also scores well
 
Well got my new Ryzen 3800x and x570 Gigabyte Master build up and running. The new c: drive is my 1TB Corsair MP600 and the d: drive is my 1 TB Samsung 960 Evo
127219
127220

Have not played with any disk optimazion yet, but it seems that the scores are a bit more reasonable now - though no complaints - nice build but lot to learn

My write score seems much better on the x570 platform on the Corsair disk
 
A little test on Samsung 1Tb Evo Plus, they are really fast as for the old gen already.
nvmeevoplus.jpg


and same test on 2x WD black SN750 1TB in Raid0
nvmeraid.jpg


seems pretty nice speed in raid0, but only for sequential of course... no any cache software used.
 
My corsair MP600 1TB drive result, I'm using Gigabyte X570 pro + AMD 3700, thanks to jesdals, after update Win10 and BIOS, I got the this.
This is CDM result of default setting
127558

This is CDM result using higher QD and Threads setting. Seems Q16T16 is the best.
127559
 
dennisx333 said:
Curious about your raid0 setup. What are the details?
Click to expand...
was setup for test purposes with Asrock Quad M2 card, but with only 2 out of 4 possible ssd's because my current platform won't support more than 2 ssd's with direct link to cpu through provided pci-e lanes. Anyway quad m2 raid is possible with this card only on x299/x399 platforms with adequate cpu of course...
 
theonek said:
was setup for test purposes with Asrock Quad M2 card, but with only 2 out of 4 possible ssd's because my current platform won't support more than 2 ssd's with direct link to cpu through provided pci-e lanes. Anyway quad m2 raid is possible with this card only on x299/x399 platforms with adequate cpu of course...
Click to expand...
Yes, I've seen others get 12,000 MB/s using the Asus Hyper M.2 card. Only problem is that you not only need x299/x399, but the motherboard also needs to support pcie bifurcation. This feature is only present on the more expensive motherboards.
 
dennisx333 said:
Yes, I've seen others get 12,000 MB/s using the Asus Hyper M.2 card. Only problem is that you not only need x299/x399, but the motherboard also needs to support pcie bifurcation. This feature is only present on the more expensive motherboards.
Click to expand...
think mobos with this chipset for higher class cpus are supporting this feature, for example even my x370 mobo supports this function on it's x8 pci-e slot, so that's why I was able to run at least 2 nvme's in a raid card... even better, mobo supports raid with the third nvme installed directly on the mobo m2 slot, so max 3 in raid I can build...
 
Intel 660p 512MB that came with Asus G531GC-AL022T notebook.
 

Attachments

  • Untitled-2 copy.png
    Untitled-2 copy.png
    64 KB · Views: 641
Got this little package by the mail
127854

It went into my third slot in the x570 Gigabyte Master
127855

And did quite well - below my Corsair MP600 and EVO 960 1TB disk scores
127856

127857


Did a heat test - almost 30c outside today and was wondering if my Radeon Vii would make the dics trottle, it does not look that bad and performance still god after download and game for couple of ours.
127900

temps high but not to high
127901
 
Got this drive on clearance for $55.

4TB | Seagate Backup Plus | SATA II (over USB 3.0) | 5526 RPM | 128MB cache

Adw2EUF.png
 
I upgraded my Asus G531GC-AL022T notebook from Intel 660p 512MB to Trenscend S220 1TB.

128656
 
Hi everyone, can someone @T4C Fantasy please tell me if my CrystalDiskMark score is normal/good for a 2TB Micron 1100? I don't know how to read it, so just let me know if it is good/normal/healthy. Thanks! I bought the drive new a year ago, just want to make sure I am getting expected speeds. Do you think the Adata 1Tb 8200 Pro has 3500 read and 3000 writes - would be an upgrade for me (assuming all I do is game would I notice a difference?)

XXFfTH1.png
 
Last edited:
lynx29 said:
Hi everyone, can someone @T4C Fantasy please tell me if my CrystalDiskMark score is normal/good for a 2TB Micron 1100? I don't know how to read it, so just let me know if it is good/normal/healthy. Thanks! I bought the drive new a year ago, just want to make sure I am getting expected speeds. Do you think the Adata 1Tb 8200 Pro has 3500 read and 3000 writes - would be an upgrade for me (assuming all I do is game would I notice a difference?)

XXFfTH1.png
Click to expand...
Normal for SATA 3 speeds. I recently bought Samsung QVO 1TB ran about the same numbers.
 
Sabrent Rocket NVMe 4.0 1TB M.2 drive on 3900X / X570 Aorus Master


129060
 
Last edited:
Divide Overflow said:
Sabrent Rocket NVMe 4.0 1TB M.2 drive on 3900X / X570 Aorus Master


View attachment 129060
Click to expand...

not bad for a $199 drive. samsung's might hit like 7800 read, but i bet it will cost almost twice as much. nice!!! i almost went with an x570 board and a sabrent 1tb myself. i could prob sell my 2tb SSD for around $160
 
Transcend 220S 1TB NVME @ 92% capacity.

129078
 
dennisx333 said:
Don't seem to be any fast results, so thought I would post mine as an fyi. Getting good performance seems to be a challenge as the DMI is a bottleneck, and a lot of configurations do not work. I got two Samsung 970 Pros, but rather than plugging them into the M.2 slots on the motherboard (i7-9800X, Asus X299 Tuf Mark 2), I plugged them into the pci-e slots using riser cards. I tried the VROC, but even with the Standard key, it would not let me create a Raid using the VROC - it seems that you really need Intel drives for this unless you have very specific drives and motherboard. So instead, I setup raid using the Windows Storage Spaces. Interestingly, I tried Raid 0 first, and it only did 3603 MB/s read. Very disappointed as it should have been closer to 7000 MB/s. In fact, it seemed to be practically no faster than a single drive. I then changed it to Raid 1, and got the result below. Write speeds are slightly down with the Raid 1, but I am happy enough overall. Of course, my Intel Optane 905p spanks the Samsung drives in the 4KiB range - but the below drive is for storing GB files only.


View attachment 125710
Click to expand...

Just following up on this, I discovered that the poor Raid 0 performance was because Windows Storage Spaces creates a Raid 0 array with column = 0 by default. This means that files are not distributed across the drives in the array. This is poorly documented, and many webpages do not tell you this. To create a proper Raid 0 array, you need to use a command like the following in Powershell:

New-VirtualDisk -FriendlyName SuperSpeedDelight -StoragePoolFriendlyName SSDPool -NumberOfColumns 2 -Resilie ncySettingName simple -UseMaximumSize

Doing this should get the 7000MB+ performance in Raid 0. Having said that, I've gone away from wanting to use Raid 0 due to reports that, while SSDs are more reliable than hard drives in terms of complete failure, they are actually LESS reliable in terms of data corruption - so using Raid 1 is actually more important for SSD than it is for hard drives. This gels with my experience. I have been using SSDs for many years now and, while I've never had one fail, I have definitely had files get corrupted/lost. So while the move to Raid 1 was originally due to Raid 0 not giving the performance I wanted, I'm now happy to stick with the above setup as it gives both good performance and good reliability - at the cost of halving the storage space.
 
CrystalDiskMark 7 Beta 1
A new test was added - SEQ8M T1

130729
 
Seagate Barracuda 4TB (2016)

130849
 
So below are my scores... can someone explain whats wrong?
Obviously those are misreads as I did correct benchmarks on x470 board.
This came up after switching boards to x570...
2.JPG1.JPG3.JPG
6.JPG
4.JPG
5.JPG

7.JPG
 
TheLostSwede said:
Are you using some kind of RAM cache software?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure they all are now. pretty sure this thread stopped being about HDD speeds around page 3 or 4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top