SSD slow, probably

[rtwjunkie]

My Samsung 840 120GB is slower than the 240GB, but only by about 20-30MB/s in synthetic benchmarks fwir. The BX100 are pretty solid SSD's, I feel he is close, and it could be a benchmark thing more-so than real world results, but usually that stuff is pretty consistent. Being an OS drive slows it a little too..but again nothing too major usually.

Honestly, if the system boots quickly and is snappy, and does fast file transfers, it's probably fine. But I think he stated it takes 30+ seconds to get to login/desktop, which on a fresh installation should take closer to half that in my experience with that SSD part and others, and that chipset. Though admittedly when I use a B85 board it's the Biostar B85S3+ if at all possible, it's a bruiser that Newegg keeps at sub-$60 that kicks major ass. But this MSI part should be fairly similar in performance I would imagine. Though the slowest CPU I've ever used was the Intel Pentium G3220, on up to i7 4790k's, all with similar results.

I agree with Static, recheck what port(s) you're using. Even consider placing DVD and SSD on the Intel-side and disabling the extra ports (though shouldn't need to).

Thanks for such a detailed reply. I agree the long boot time is weird, but it's the only thing that jumped out at me. Personally, other than that, his numbers look close to the M500 120GB my Fiance has, that's why I had to ask.

 

[Static~Charge]

For the folks that can't see images it's from HD Tune, it ranges from 187-216MB/s. Systems specs are as follows.

[ snip ]

Windows 7 Pro with all the updates installed.

"All the updates installed" . . . hmmm, I wonder if Windows 7 could be downloading your free Windows 10 update in the background? That would definitely impact your drive's performance. Check if "Update for Microsoft Windows (KB3035583)" is installed.

 

[tabascosauz]

@Frick Aside from the possibility of the wrong SATA port, bad cable, or wrong BIOS settings, the BX100 shouldn't be incredibly fast. SM2246EN has really bad consistency and even though the BX100's firmware is more custom, it can't escape the 2246EN's shortcomings. Random reads are also not a strength for the BX100. I also find that Win 7 does have slower boot times overall than Win 8.1 and 10 (UEFI install); this does not mean really slow HDD times, but it also isn't very zippy even with 850 EVOs.

Also, how much has the drive been filled? I don't know about 2246EN but SF2281 has horrible performance when the drive has been filled close to 75%.

 

[Jeffredo]

@Frick SM2246EN has really bad consistency and even though the BX100's firmware is more custom, it can't escape the 2246EN's shortcomings.

You'll never notice in day to day use. I'm using a PC right now with a PNY Optima 240 GB with that controller and it browses and games just as well as any of my other SSDs. Benchmarks tend to make people think they have a turkey when the vast majority of the time you couldn't tell the difference if someone swapped it for a very fast (benchmarking) SSD.

 

[krusha03]

Here is my MX100 256GB on a G620 and a Sata 2 port. So it seems that your BX100 really score as if on Sata 2 port or the capacity has a really big impact. Can you test it on another machine?

However with that being said i don't notice any difference in daily use between now and when it was hooked up to the rig in my spec.

 

[Frick]

@krusha03 Now I'll just have to find some time to tinker with the damn thing.

 

[krusha03]

@krusha03 Now I'll just have to find some time to tinker with the damn thing.

The easiest thing to do would be to just hook it up to a machine with known working Sata III and run the benchmark again. In the end I wouldn't bother with it since it makes little difference in real life

 

[Frick]

So, uh, you know how I was sure I had it in a SATA III port and how the DVD was in the SATA II (and how I actually did double check)? Turns out it was the other way round. Part of my cars license number is DOH and I feel it is very fitting.

I blame work and being tired but that is not correct, but I still stick with it.

 

[krusha03]

So, uh, you know how I was sure I had it in a SATA III port and how the DVD was in the SATA II (and how I actually did double check)? Turns out it was the other way round. Part of my cars license number is DOH and I feel it is very fitting.

I blame work and being tired but that is not correct, but I still stick with it.

And feeling like the PC is faster now?

 

[Frick]

And feeling like the PC is faster now?

ACtually yes, but I'm really weak for placebos.

 

[EarthDog]

I have not read the thread, just scanned through it, but... Run ATTO and see what it says as that is the software most SSD MFG use to list peak speeds... HDTach and the others will not.

 

[Frick]

I have not read the thread, just scanned through it, but... Run ATTO and see what it says as that is the software most SSD MFG use to list peak speeds... HDTach and the others will not.

Loooooooollll it turned out I had it connected to a SATAII port.

 

[EarthDog]

Good, glad it was that easy!

When in doubt with speeds, always check ATTO against it. You would have seen a lot more clearly that it was banging off the SATA2 3Gbps limit.

 

[Jeffredo]

ACtually yes, but I'm really weak for placebos.

I went from an SATA II motherboard with a Phenom II X4 to an Intel SATA III with an i5 and I honestly couldn't tell the difference in Windows boot and program loading. Even SATA II is so much faster than a spindle hard drive.

 

[braydenberger]

A solid-state drive will speed up everything that requires disk access, from boot times and application launches to in-game load screens.

 

[EarthDog]

A solid-state drive will speed up everything that requires disk access, from boot times and application launches to in-game load screens.

O...k...