Slow ssd speed :(

SO takealot swapped my drive out, but new one it just as slow...tried on 3 motherboards, all latest bios and drivers...190mb read/ 80 write .... im sure the speeds are sepose to be better?

I dont know what more to do ..... :(
 
Pada said:
Did you install Windows with on a 1MB aligned partition?

Could you perhaps give it a ATTO benchmark run? http://majorgeeks.com/ATTO_Disk_Benchmark_d6359.html

It looks like quite a few people have complained about the speed of the Agility 3 60GB and apparently ATTO does show 500MB/s read/write kind of speeds with it...
It looks like the speeds you're getting is in line with what the guys got in the reviews: http://compreviews.about.com/od/storage/gr/OCZ-Agility-3-60GB.htm
Click to expand...

Pada, what ur email so i can mail my ss for u. please
 
OK, so your ATTO benchmarks show that the SSD can actually write at 480MB/s and read at 550MB/s when the data can be compressed.

If you want faster read/write speeds, then you should've bought a 128-256GB OCZ Vertex 4 and not a previous generation and small Agility SSD.

Frankly, I'm not sure if you will even notice the difference when using games or applications. Benchmarks are just so synthetic!
 
Last edited:
what bothers me is my friends battlefield 3 maps load faster on normal HDD than my SSD...i bought it due i want my maps to load faster to get in helis before the rest of the players... :(
 
Does your friends have faster PC's than you? eg. Sandy Bridge i5 2500k / Ivy Bridge i5 3570k?

BF3 is pretty RAM & CPU dependent too!

Lastly, I don't know how you can fit Windows + BF3 on that small SSD. I'm basically filling my whole (takes up about 100GB of my) 120GB SSD with Windows, Office and a few games (BF2, BF3, CoD4, CS1.6, War3, TF2)

Did you move your page file and disable hibernation? That should also free up some space on the SSD.
 
We have same ram, he have i5 3.4 and i have phenom II x 4 965 BE at 3.8 . Even if hes pc is faster than mine, map loads is from drive....so the ssd is sepose to overrule hes "faster cpu" than me, it cant make that big diffy..if i had OLD pc yes...but im pretty much up to date with mine

well i have bf3 and arma 2 (for dayz) on it and stil have 12 gig free.
 
re this
Partition alignment

Finally there's partition alignment, but this can only be done with a clean system before you install either Linux or Windows. Partition alignment is critical for SSDs as, being memory-based devices, data is written and read in blocks known as pages. When partitions aren't aligned, the block size of filesystem writes isn't aligned to the block size of the SSD, causing extra overhead as data crosses page boundaries.

Aligning partitions is simply a matter of ensuring the first partition starts on a clean 1MB boundary from the start of the disk, ensuring whatever block size the filesystem uses will align with the block size of the SSD (which can also vary). If you create partitions using Windows 7 on an empty drive, it will start partitions at the 1MB boundary automatically.
Click to expand...


Finally decided to pull the trigger on a Crucial 512GB.
I'm going to reinstall rather than clone.
I want to partition this drive into 2 partitions & I can't seem to track down the answer to this.
Will Win7 stop me from creating partitions that aren't dividable by 4?
Basically i want to partition off a 100GB C:
Will i get thrown choices of size on either side of that 100GB figure so alignment is correct?
 
Last edited:
Maybe i need to reformat my own brain:

I think what you, and some other people, are failing to grasp is that partitions are a creature of mechanical hard drives. On an HDD, a partition had a physical presence. You could open up the drive and (more or less) point to where the partition was located on the physical disk.

An SSD is different. There is no physical analog to the idea of a logical partition. The partition is an abstract entity, separated from physical memory locations by one or more layers of logical pointers. While there's nothing stopping you from creating logical partitions, there's no real point to it. The data from one partition may be physically stored right next to data from another partition. They're separated only by logical mapping.

Likewise, on a HDD, you might crash a system on one partition but be able to rescue information on another, because they have separate logical structures in addition to separate physical locations. That's all out the window in an SSD. If you have a disk failure that causes loss of information in one partition, chances are that you've lost everything on that SSD right along with it. The structures that map physical data locations to logical locations (drive letter: directory tree) have nothing to do with the existence of partitions. As far as the SSD is concerned, a partition (drive letter) is essentially no different from just another directory name.

And while we're on the subject, the size of a partition (say a system partition of 100GB on a 256GB drive) means absolutely nothing. The SSD sees data coming across the wire and writes it to memory. It would write it to that same memory (let's say, just for purposes of illustration) whether the partition in which it's located is 100GB or 200GB. Makes no difference to the SSD. The partition is simply another piece of the hierarchical location of that particular data block. Thus, it makes Not One Bit of difference to the operation of the SSD whether you set your system partition to 80GB, 100GB, 120GB, etc. as long as it's large enough to hold what you want to store there.

So unless you want to put your sensitive information on a separate physical drive, you are wasting your time and effort messing with partitions.
Click to expand...
http://forum.corsair.com/v3/showthread.php?t=110741
 
undesign said:
:erm: information process failure...

/looks lovingly at my one partition SSD :)
Click to expand...

For sure :) - stops giving myself a headache on install & creates one to keeping things organised...I'm sure a plan will unfold!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X