• 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

View attachment 161945

6 channel memory is kinda fun to play with.
Dual Channel DDR4-3333 MHz FAT32
DDR43333 8GB RAM Disk.jpg
 
here's mine,DC 4133 C16

ramdisk.jpg


I don't even wanna know what QC looks like
 
Last edited:
Prepare to be blown away.

Capture.PNG


I'm using a 16kb stripe, I'm wondering if that might be too small?
 
Prepare to be blown away.

View attachment 162061

I'm using a 16kb stripe, I'm wondering if that might be too small?
If the drives are SSD it might be to small of a chuck size. The only options are 64KB, 128KB, and 256KB for a RAID in the BIOS for my B450 board.
 
32 is better


Thanks. The board auto set to 16kb, Im new to this board, but I haven't run a stripe that small before. IIRC I ran 32 the last time I rolled with raid on my old P8Z77-V.
 
1595229938620.png

GigaByte AORUS M.2 1TB (on Ryzen 3700X / X570 board)
 
Sabrent 1TB Rocket NVMe (SB-ROCKET-NVMe4-HTSK-1TB)
RAID 0 on ASUS AM4 TUF Gaming X570-Plus (WiFi) with AMD Ryzen 9 3900X



1595717785292.png
 
Last edited:
Still on INTEL 600p 512GB
Intel 600p 512GB My Drive Speed Test.JPG


Crucial MX500 256GB
Crucial MX500 My result.JPG


Corsair FORCEGT 128GB
Corsair ForceGT 128GB My Drive Speed.JPG
 
2X 970 evo plus 1tb in raid 0. Any suggestions for improvements in RND4k?
Annotation 2020-08-31 120413.jpg


Also, there is massive loss of IOPS in RAID mode. Not much info available on internet to fix this yet. I guess bad AMD Raid drivers.

Annotation 2020-08-31 123834.jpg
 
Last edited:
970 evo plus 1 tb after 6 months lol
 

Attachments

  • download.png
    download.png
    34.9 KB · Views: 215
i will be accepting 6.0.2 version submissions for 980 PRO and sabrant rocket, you can put 7.0.0 benchmarks in there so when people click on the link they see the new version too.

too much work to make a v7 thread or section and also not enough time to add all v6 submissions

you can also put multiple entries in the submission so people can compare it to your other drives
 
Last edited:
Corsair MP600 M2. Ryzen 3900X and X570 MBO.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2020-11-15 142411.png
    Screenshot 2020-11-15 142411.png
    45.4 KB · Views: 152
ADATA SX8200 and Gammix S11 Pro, Raid 0
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2020-11-15 130811.png
    Screenshot 2020-11-15 130811.png
    41.4 KB · Views: 184
ADATA SX8200 and Gammix S11 Pro, Raid 0

Never a good idea to run two different drive models in raid especially in Raid0 where data is striped across both drives, yeah the speed is great an all but those SSD's will have differing read/write characteristics which could lead to data integrity problems down the line

Also, there is massive loss of IOPS in RAID mode. Not much info available on internet to fix this yet. I guess bad AMD Raid drivers.

it's a consequence of raid overhead I'd guess raid0 is great for maximising sequential read/write speeds but lousy for small file read/write you're probably better off getting a larger SSD and running it on it's own
 
Looks like CrystalDiskMark 8.0 was just released!
Below are the results for my newly installed WD Black SN750 NVME SSD (500GB) - NVME settings, default profile.

I know little about SSD performance - do the results I got look OK?
My motherboard is ASUS H170 PRO GAMING in case it matters :)

CrystalDiskMark_20201121033539.png


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 8.0.0 x64 (C) 2007-2020 hiyohiyo
Crystal Dew World: https://crystalmark.info/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* MB/s = 1,000,000 bytes/s [SATA/600 = 600,000,000 bytes/s]
* KB = 1000 bytes, KiB = 1024 bytes

[Read]
SEQ 1MiB (Q= 8, T= 1): 3353.866 MB/s [ 3198.5 IOPS] < 2499.60 us>
SEQ 128KiB (Q= 32, T= 1): 3420.096 MB/s [ 26093.3 IOPS] < 1224.80 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 32, T=16): 529.925 MB/s [ 129376.2 IOPS] < 3762.81 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 1, T= 1): 42.635 MB/s [ 10408.9 IOPS] < 95.80 us>

[Write]
SEQ 1MiB (Q= 8, T= 1): 2717.684 MB/s [ 2591.8 IOPS] < 3079.57 us>
SEQ 128KiB (Q= 32, T= 1): 2716.600 MB/s [ 20726.0 IOPS] < 1541.84 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 32, T=16): 467.762 MB/s [ 114199.7 IOPS] < 4263.42 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 1, T= 1): 95.453 MB/s [ 23304.0 IOPS] < 42.69 us>

Profile: Default
Test: 1 GiB (x3) [S: 0% (0/466GiB)]
Mode: [Admin]
Time: Measure 5 sec / Interval 5 sec
Date: 2020/11/21 3:35:36
OS: Windows 10 Professional [10.0 Build 18363] (x64)
 
Last edited:
Hmmm something funny 6.02 vs 7.0.0 sequential 1M read/write Q16 T 1 both have differing speeds an the same Adata SX8200PRO 1TB NVMe ssd on the same system

CDM 602 vs 700 2020-11-21 215324.jpg
 
Still badaSSD
 

Attachments

  • CrystalDiskMark8 Samsung 970 Pro.png
    CrystalDiskMark8 Samsung 970 Pro.png
    25.4 KB · Views: 158
Doing some testing with my new setup and fresh win 10 install on the WD SN850 2TB disk
1606928384221.png

compared with my Gigabyte Aorus 2Tb
1606928631264.png

The result are pretty decent
1606928931689.png

And my Corsair MP600 1 Tb
 
Last edited:
Back
Top