Post your CrystalDiskMark speeds

[Tomgang]

Amazing performance from that spinner! Could it be the fastest HDD right now?

I Will say one of the fastest hdd out there. If i remember correctly. Seagate has a hdd with two read heads in one hdd. It's Calle Mach.2. That shut be the world's fastest hdd out there.

There is a downside to the gold hdd. As it is intended for server marked. It is not a silent hdd by any means. It's meant for performance and not silence. So if you are after a silent hdd. WD Gold is not recommended.

 

[sam_86314]

Did some speed tests with my server. This is over a dedicated 10GbE link using two Mellanox ConnectX-3 NICs and a copper SFP+ cable, and the server has eight 5400RPM WD Reds in RAID Z1.

It's interesting how larger files affect performance. The 1GB transfer was hitting the speed limit of 10GbE, while the 4GB test is more indicative of what my array is capable of.

I know that ZFS likes to use memory as a cache, so maybe this is the first sign that 8GB isn't enough memory for my server. Maybe the 1GB transfer is able to fit entirely in my server's memory, while the 4GB file isn't and is coming directly off the HDD array. That would explain the worse random R/W performance.

I Will say one of the fastest hdd out there. If i remember correctly. Seagate has a hdd with two read heads in one hdd. It's Calle Mach.2. That shut be the world's fastest hdd out there.

There is a downside to the gold hdd. As it is intended for server marked. It is not a silent hdd by any means. It's meant for performance and not silence. So if you are after a silent hdd. WD Gold is not recommended.

My 8TB WD White was capable of close to 200MB/s when it was empty. Also, definitely not a silent or cool-running drive, and I think WD falsely marks it as a 5400RPM drive, when it's actually 7200RPM.

Here's a screenshot I took when I first got the drive back in May 2019. This was in my old X470 system.

This drive is currently sitting on a shelf patiently waiting for me to use it again.

 

[Tomgang]

Did some speed tests with my server. This is over a dedicated 10GbE link using two Mellanox ConnectX-3 NICs and a copper SFP+ cable, and the server has eight 5400RPM WD Reds in RAID Z1.

It's interesting how larger files affect performance. The 1GB transfer was hitting the speed limit of 10GbE, while the 4GB test is more indicative of what my array is capable of.

I know that ZFS likes to use memory as a cache, so maybe this is the first sign that 8GB isn't enough memory for my server. Maybe the 1GB transfer is able to fit entirely in my server's memory, while the 4GB file isn't and is coming directly off the HDD array. That would explain the worse random R/W performance.



My 8TB WD White was capable of close to 200MB/s when it was empty. Also, definitely not a silent or cool-running drive, and I think WD falsely marks it as a 5400RPM drive, when it's actually 7200RPM.

Here's a screenshot I took when I first got the drive back in May 2019. This was in my old X470 system.

There have been cases where wd advatized 5400 RPM and the drive was actually 7200 RPM.

200 MB/s is fine for a HDD.

Look in my post. I have a WD Red 4 TB from 2018. It can do nearly 190 MB/s when empty. but HDD will never be a match for an SSD,

If SSD prices came down to same level as HDD pr. gigabyte. I would drop HDD instantly and only run with SSD.

 

[sam_86314]

If SSD prices came down to same level as HDD pr. gigabyte. I would drop HDD instantly and only run with SSD.

Oh, absolutely. Until that happens though, my current plan is to move my main system's HDD into my server so I can have exclusively solid-state storage in it.

I also want to grab another two 1TB Crucial MX500s and upgrade my SSD array in my main system.

 

[Tomgang]

Oh, absolutely. Until that happens though, my current plan is to move my main system's HDD into my server so I can have exclusively solid-state storage in it.

I also want to grab another two 1TB Crucial MX500s and upgrade my SSD array in my main system.

Crucial SSD gets my reccomendation. I have since 2011 only used Crucial and Samsung SSD. Never had a SSD failed on me. I´m around to have had 15 SSD since 2011. Yes i was an early adapter.

 

[AAF Optimus]

My results with the Goldenfir 240GB SSD.
@QuietBob Thanks for the suggestion.
I mention right away that the interface used was SATA II, unfortunately my PC's motherboard doesn't have SATAIII on board.

 

[Tomgang]

My results with the Goldenfir 240GB SSD.
@QuietBob Thanks for the suggestion.
I mention right away that the interface used was SATA II, unfortunately my PC's motherboard doesn't have SATAIII on board.

View attachment 209722

Yeah its clearly limited by sata 2.

But have you seen the warning crystal Disk info?

You might have a failing/dying HDD/SSD.

 

[AAF Optimus]

Yeah its clearly limited by sata 2.

But have you seen the warning crystal Disk info?

You might have a failing/dying HDD/SSD.

I will study in the future to exchange all HDs for SSDs.

 

[QuietBob]

My results with the Goldenfir 240GB SSD.

Random read at 4K QD1 looks good. It should do well as a boot drive. And yeah, keep an eye on that hard drive which says "caution". Definitely do a full backup.

 

[Guelo81]

Team Group MP33 M.2 2280 1TB PCIe 3.0 x4 with NVMe 1.3 3D NAND Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) TM8FP6001T0C101

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 8.0.4 x64 (C) 2007-2021 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): 14474.185 MB/s [ 13803.7 IOPS] < 578.23 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 32, T=16): 1176.927 MB/s [ 287335.7 IOPS] < 1775.65 us>

[Write]
SEQ 1MiB (Q= 8, T= 1): 13004.806 MB/s [ 12402.3 IOPS] < 643.60 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 32, T=16): 1077.892 MB/s [ 263157.2 IOPS] < 1942.21 us>

Profile: Peak
Test: 1 GiB (x5) [C: 9% (82/954GiB)]
Mode: [Admin]
Time: Measure 5 sec / Interval 5 sec
Date: 2021/08/17 20:21:24
OS: Windows 10 Professional [10.0 Build 19043] (x64)

 

[Grawpy]

I registered in this forum just for asking why is my Crucial MX500 showing very high score? It should be some 550 MB/s but it is showing 6400 MB/s, even the task manager showed 6 gbps when this benchmark was running...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CrystalDiskMark 8.0.4 x64 (C) 2007-2021 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): 6404.057 MB/s [ 6107.4 IOPS] < 1145.21 us>
SEQ 1MiB (Q= 1, T= 1): 7791.657 MB/s [ 7430.7 IOPS] < 134.30 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 32, T= 1): 580.315 MB/s [ 141678.5 IOPS] < 218.66 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 1, T= 1): 621.956 MB/s [ 151844.7 IOPS] < 6.48 us>

[Write]
SEQ 1MiB (Q= 8, T= 1): 6702.332 MB/s [ 6391.8 IOPS] < 1093.03 us>
SEQ 1MiB (Q= 1, T= 1): 6748.869 MB/s [ 6436.2 IOPS] < 155.00 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 32, T= 1): 544.201 MB/s [ 132861.6 IOPS] < 233.17 us>
RND 4KiB (Q= 1, T= 1): 576.177 MB/s [ 140668.2 IOPS] < 7.00 us>

Profile: Default
Test: 1 GiB (x5) [D: 9% (76/838GiB)]
Mode: [Admin]
Time: Measure 5 sec / Interval 5 sec
Date: 2021/09/07 1:12:52
OS: Windows 10 [10.0 Build 19043] (x64)

 

[FireFox]

I registered in this forum just for asking why is my Crucial MX500 showing very high score?

I had the same problem with my Samsung 850 evo, solved it upgrading the firmware.

 

[Grawpy]

I had the same problem with my Samsung 850 evo, solved it upgrading the firmware.

The firmware shows latest version... I guess I will wait for new firmware or forget about it

 

[AVATARAT]

Silicon Power P34A80

 

[pyrotenax]

Sabrent Rocket Plus 1TB

 

[yoosefheidari]

my new drive WD SN550
F/W:211210wd
CPU: i5-8265u

 

[jesdals]

My Seagate 530 4TB in the secondary slot is a bit all over the place

My WD850 2TB boot driver in the primary slot is more in line with specs

My third drive Gigabyte 2TB Aorus is also almost at specs

But cant reach the 7000mb mark on the Seagate drive

 

[theborv]

Just some more crystal mark runs

WD_BLACK_SN850_nvme_1TB_model-WDS100T1X0E-00AFY0_sn-20515E801344:
Seems within advertised spec

Samsung_970_PRO_nvme_512GB_model-MZ-V7P512BW_sn-S463NF0KC12864P:
Not far from advertised read spec (3500/2300)

Samsung_960_EVO_nvme_1TB_model-MZ-V6E1T0BW_sn-S3ETNX0HC02651Z:
Advertised read spec close enoug, but write spec is lacking (3500/3300). Crystalmark 6.0.2 is reporting the same numbers.

Samsung_860_EVO_sata_2TB_model-MZ-76E2T0B-EU_sn-S4X1NJ0NB07229F:
Read spec on par, and write within margin of error (550/520)

 

[Kapone33]

2 Silicon Power 2 TB 1st Gen 4.0 in an Asus M2 expander card with 3.0 support. On an X570 board with running at x4x4.

 

[neopolaris]

SAMSUNG MZVLB1T0HBLR-000H1 1024.2 GB on an HP Z Turbo Drive G2 M.2 PCIe adapter

SAMSUNG MZVPW256HEGL-000H1 256.0 GB on an unlocked HP Z Turbo Drive G2 M.2 PCIe adapter on my Z220 machine #2

 

[BPasion]

3x Samsung 980 PRO NVMe M.2 Gen4.0 1TB Drives. In Raid 5, configuration with the OS on the array (Win 10). Planning to switch to Raid 10 once the other drive gets here.

Having issues with the IOPS, not exactly happy with the hit there. Thoughts?

edit: This machine is used to support FEA/CAD and other simulation/3D modeling work.

CPU: 3975wx ThreadRipper PRO
MB: Asus Sage SE

 

[INSTG8R]

My new 2TB Gen4 MP600 Core It's not as fast as the Pro but I'm getting it's rated speeds and I'm just using it as a game drive

 

[RY2Savage06]

Idk the ssd name tbh but if any of yall have the file for CrystalDiskMark 8 Tsukumo Tokka Edition
Add me on Discord (Riyadh#2657), if it does not work, find me on snap (riyadhmumin)
Dont include the brackets when adding me

 

[AlwaysHope]

I don't like looking at disk benchmarks unless you know the mobo or controller they are plugged into. Also versions of Crystal disk mark are regularly updating a lot too. Hard to compare diff configs really...

 

[Ivan Bliminse]

I wanted to see the differences whils Folding and Not Folding.

https://imgur.com/x5rQb71