Read speeds dropping dramatically on older files; benchmarks needed to confirm affected SSDs - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

Read speeds dropping dramatically on older files; benchmarks needed to confirm affected SSDs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 12:22 AM - Thread Starter
Windows Wrangler
 
Techie007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,217
Rep: 340 (Unique: 250)
Updated information:
    Early October 15, 2014, Samsung released a program that was supposed to fix the problem on the 840 EVO by updating the its firmware to version EXT0CB6Q and then executing a one-time refresh of all data on it.  However, several months later, people started noticing that the read speeds were slowing down again.
    Finally, on April 23, 2015, Samsung released a new firmware version EXT0DB6Q via Magician, and it appears to greatly improve the read speeds of old data (from <150 MB/s to >350 MB/s) while doing some sort of calibration/rewriting in the background to slowly bring the speeds of old files up to a full 500 MB/s and keep old data fresh.

    For the latest firmware update, please see the Samsung SSD Downloads page.  As of this writing, the latest firmware is available via Magician, a standalone Windows updater, or a bootable updater for Mac and other users.
 

    Recently, I came across this thread here on OCN detailing how as data ages on the Samsung 840 EVO, the SSD's retrieval speed of those old files can drop dramatically, sometimes even to speeds below 50 MB/s on files that are a few months old!
    This problem went undetected for about a year because regular SSD benchmark programs write their own test file (to test write speeds), and then immediately turn around and read that same file to test read speeds.  This means that all the traditional SSD benchmarking programs never see this phenomenon because they are always reading a fresh file.  Since testing for this strange SSD behavior would require a new method of benchmarking, I wrote a new benchmarking program that would specifically test for an age/speed correlation by reading files already on the SSD, and then display its findings graphically.

    If you're interested in testing your SSD, you can download the latest version here: SSDReadSpeedTester2.04.zip.
    The first time you run SSD Read Speed Tester, it may ask for administrative privileges to install a small runtime component (comctl32.ocx).  The program itself is standalone/portable.  If the component is already installed (or you manually install it yourself), the program won't ask for administrative privileges.
    SSD Read Speed Tester saves a PNG picture for upload on this thread (if you're so inclined to share your results with us), and two TSV (tab separated values) files for further analysis for those who want to have the raw data for importing into spreadsheet/graphing software.  Please be advised that one of the TSV files contains the pathname of every file tested.  I am only interested in the picture.


    Thanks to all the OCN members who tested their SSDs with my program and shared the results, I have confirmed that this phenomenon has been found to plague the Samsung 840 EVO SSD, and affect the Samsung 840 (non-EVO) SSD somewhat.  I have collected the results in my next two posts for easy perusal.
 

Techie007 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 12:22 AM - Thread Starter
Windows Wrangler
 
Techie007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,217
Rep: 340 (Unique: 250)
Positive results (SSD faulty, graph generally starts high, but declines with file age):

• Samsung 840 EVO Best before/after results (Click to show)
M125 (250GB unit, imaged from an 840 Pro March 2014; Windows 7 originally installed on the Pro September 2013):

24 MB/s (original performance)


499 MB/s (after MyDefrag)


[email protected] (750GB unit; storage drive for MIDI sampler soundfonts):

32 MB/s (original performance)


392 MB/s (after DiskFresh)


Agent_kenshin (250GB unit, assuming SATA II connection):

43 MB/s (original performance)


264 MB/s (after Samsung performance restoration tool)


RAGEdemon (One drive on a RAID controller; before and after restoring a backup):

61 MB/s (original performance)


517 MB/s (after restoring backup)


Breex243 (250 GB unit):

62 MB/s (original performance)


541 MB/s (after Samsung performance restoration tool)


dasi (250 GB unit, SATA II):

63 MB/s (original performance)


252 MB/s (after Samsung performance restoration tool)


Wihglah:

79 MB/s (original performance)


470 MB/s (after MyDefrag)


tehspaceg:

~82 MB/s (original performance, number from SSD Read Speed Tester 2.00 recalculated)


~415 MB/s (after MyDefrag, number from SSD Read Speed Tester 2.00 recalculated)


JackCY (250 GB unit):

105 MB/s (original performance)


536 MB/s (after Samsung performance restore tool)


Sebi (before/after some sort of rewriting):

110 MB/s (original performance)


466 MB/s (after rewriting the drive)


morta (before and after running DiskFresh + MyDefrag):

117 MB/s (original performance)


435 MB/s (after DiskFresh and MyDefrag)


nicksoph (before and after EaseUS backup restore):

131 MB/s (original performance)


453 MB/s (after restoring backup with EaseUS)


kvad (1TB unit; Windows 8 installed April 2014; before and after defrag):

203 MB/s (original performance)


504 MB/s (after defrag)


Rbby258 (RAIDx4, installed Windows in May 2014; before and after MyDefrag):

MyDefrag, before (/\), after (\/)



kvad (2x750GB units on RAID0; Windows 8 installed April 2014; before and after defrag):

Defrag, before (/\), after (\/)
Average before/after results (Click to show)
KarlX58 (250GB unit connected via SATAII; Windows installed April 2014; before and after MyDefrag):

MyDefrag, before (/\), after (\/)


manfromthemoon (120GB unit on SATA II; Win8.1 installed May 2014; backed up and restored with Aomei):

Backup restore, before (/\), after (\/)


kmet14 (250GB unit on SATAII; 6 months old; before and after MyDefrag):

MyDefrag, before (/\), after (\/)


sakis_the_fraud (128GB unit; before and after DiskFresh):

DiskFresh, before (/\), after (\/)
Average results (Click to show)
mistercoffee1 (installed Windows December 2013): {can't retest}


Sebi (bought in March 2014):


kryshtof (before and after defrag):

Defrag, before (/\), after (\/)


efahl (500GB unit; work disk on home computer):


efahl (250GB unit; office machine):


James4832 (250GB unit, Windows installed March 2014):
Before only results (Click to show)
dasi (250 GB unit connected to a SATA II port):

26 MB/s


chriz74 (250 GB unit):

52 MB/s


Amlet:

47 MB/s


Newfarmy (500 GB unit):

150 MB/s


giggitygoebbels (bought in July 2013):


benjamen50 (250GB unit; Windows installed October 2013):


jgo2020 (128GB unit; cloned from HDD in November 2013):


Amlet (Windows 8 installed February 2014):


euonline (2x500GB units running RAID0):


t0rmi (240GB unit in a laptop; Windows 7 installed August 2014; before and after letting laptop cool):

Hot laptop /\, cool laptop \/
After only results (Click to show)
ramziukas (120GB unit after MyDefrag; RAPID disabled, TRIM enabled):


fashric (256GB unit after Defraggler):


Rewind84 (500GB unit; after DiskFresh):

• Samsung 840 EVO mSATA Results (Click to show)
ha1o2surfer (1TB unit; Windows 8 installed May 2013):

• Samsung 840 (non EVO) Results (Click to show)
M500 (500GB unit):

389 MB/s (original performance)


G4Virus (500GB edition; C:\ Windows and D: storage partitions):




LuckyStarV (120GB unit; Windows 7 or older installed December 2013):



Vaselkov (120GB unit; Windows 7 installed September 2013):



Sisaroth (256GB unit running IDE mode):


Dante003 (250GB unit; Windows 8 installed August 2013):


trparky (connected to SATAII port)


Sean Webster:

Techie007 is offline  
post #3 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 12:22 AM - Thread Starter
Windows Wrangler
 
Techie007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,217
Rep: 340 (Unique: 250)
Negative results (SSD good, graph is more or less flat):

Adata SP920
    394 MB/s (LuckyStarV)
Corsair Force GT 120GB
    380 MB/s (Rbby258)
Crucial C300 128GB
    256 MB/s (Pyr0)
Crucial C300 256GB
    351 MB/s (AEfkha)
Crucial M4 64GB
    296 MB/s (kryshtof)
Crucial M4 128GB
    521 MB/s (fashric)
Crucial M4 256GB
    514 MB/s (error-id10t)
    275 MB/s (djembe, SATA II)
    256 MB/s (Shogon, SATA II)
Intel 320 160GB
    229 MB/s (Agent_kenshin, SATA II)
Intel 330 180GB
    494 MB/s (hojnikb)
Intel 520 SSD 180GB
    273 MB/s (mistercoffee1)
Intel 520 SSD 240GB
    433 MB/s (dakkadakka)
Intel XM-25 V40
    187 MB/s (Fred B)
Intenso 128GB
    262 MB/s (Bilbo1) [keep an eye on it]
Kingston SV300S3 120GB
    464 MB/s (Techie007)
OCZ Agility 3 120GB
    259 MB/s (Sakkura)
OCX Vertex 4 128GB
    359 MB/s (kapilove77)
Plextor M6S 128GB
    392 MB/s (Cubelia)
Samsung 830 128GB
    884 MB/s (charedj, 2xRAID)
    565 MB/s (DeXel)
    394 MB/s (LuckyStarV)
Samsung 830 256GB
    507 MB/s (djembe)
    271 MB/s (Brama, SATA II)
    249 MB/s (Proesterchen, SATA II)
Samsung 840 Pro
    533 MB/s (Shogon)
    530 MB/s (Prophet4NO1)
    265 MB/s (efahl)
Samsung 850 Pro
    526 MB/s (efahl)
    521 MB/s (efahl)
    506 MB/s (Sean Webster)


[this thread post #200]
840 EVO thread post #1241
TechReport news thread post #1

Follow up on this one and this one

Techie007 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 12:12 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
klampf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 12
Rep: 0
The download includes IrfanView.
Is this intentional?
klampf is offline  
post #5 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 12:16 PM - Thread Starter
Windows Wrangler
 
Techie007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,217
Rep: 340 (Unique: 250)
A quick history of the 840 EVO SSD (in progress; if you know about other events with this SSD, I'd be glad to know about them):

  • 2013-07-17: Samsung announces the 840 EVO series SSD. {ref}
  • 2013-09-21: TheBear@overclock.net notices files copying at 80 MB/s on his 120GB EVO, and is assured that this is normal since AS SSD reports good benchmark speeds. {ref}
  • 2014-01-14: TheGrape@hardform.com posts complaining of very slow AS SSD benchmark read speeds of 16 MB/s.  He is rebuffed and the thread dies. {ref}
  • 2014-06-22: hwalter333@geizhals.at gives the EVO a bad review, stating that files that have been on the SSD for 6 months read very slowly, between 3 and 50 MB/s. {ref}
  • 2014-08-05: Aurhinius@overclockers.uk creates a thread asking for confirmation from EVO owners of slow read speeds. {ref}
  • 2014-08-16: gino074@overclock.net creates a revolutionary thread using HD Tach to show that various areas of the EVO read fast and others read slowly.  He notes that it is old files that are most frequently affected by slow read speeds. {ref}
  • 2014-08-19: After 3 days, BrainSplatter posts the first response to gino074's thread. {ref}
  • 2014-09-06: BrainSplatter@overclock.net releases the first version of FileBench. {ref}
  • 2014-09-08: Techie007@overclock.net stumbles upon gino074's thread in the hot threads section and posts. {ref}
  • 2014-09-14: Techie007@overclock.net releases the first version of SSD Read Speed Tester to graphically test for the reported age/speed correlation, and creates a thread on overclock.net for benchmark results. {ref}
  • 2014-09-18: HurnII@overclock.net hypothesizes that the degradation should be proportional to SSD temperature. {ref}
  • 2014-09-19: Allyn Malventano@PC Perspective publishes an article detailing the issue. {ref}
  • 2014-09-19: klampf@computerbase.de creates a thread referencing gino074's overclock.net thread. {ref}
  • 2014-09-19: BrainSplatter@overclock.net discovers that the slow areas of the EVO read even slower when the drive is hot, and faster when the drive is cool. {ref1}{ref2}

Techie007 is offline  
post #6 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 12:26 PM - Thread Starter
Windows Wrangler
 
Techie007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,217
Rep: 340 (Unique: 250)
    Even though my SSD has been rewritten less than 2 months ago, I'll lead off:


SSD model: Kingston SV300S3
SSD capacity: 120 GB
Purpose: Primary OS drive
Last rewritten: <2 months ago (formatted and reinstalled Windows).


 

Techie007 is offline  
post #7 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 12:49 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
hojnikb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Celje
Posts: 600
Rep: 30 (Unique: 21)
From previous thread https://www.overclock.net/t/1507897/samsung-840-evo-read-speed-drops-on-old-written-data-in-the-drive/310#post_22844220

Also got adata s510, crucial m4/v4 and ocz vertex 2, that will get tested as soon as i get the chance.

Just realized. All my ssds are using intel 25nm flash tongue.gif:p:p (except ocz, which is still the better 34nm one:D)

+°´°+,¸¸,+°´°~Moar voltz for moar gigglehertz wink.gif~°´°+,¸¸,+°´°+

Hidden Text Below! (Click to show)Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Death to gunner2.gif Apple, Dell, M$, and many others


I like grouphug.gif hugs biggrin.gif
hojnikb is offline  
post #8 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 03:03 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
am dew1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 176
Rep: 0
Here are my results.

128 GB 840 EVO

I did run a MyDefrag pass this morning however so the results are probably skewed because of that.

am dew1 is offline  
post #9 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 03:26 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: SoCal
Posts: 49
Rep: 22 (Unique: 6)
Three drives benchmarked in the other thread.

840 250
840 Pro 256
840 EVO 500

The Speed/Age results on the EVO are a bit at odds with the Parkdale and FileBench numbers...
efahl is offline  
post #10 of 880 (permalink) Old 09-14-2014, 11:14 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
giggitygoebbels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 71
Rep: 10 (Unique: 7)
Samsung 840 EVO 120GB
Bought July-August last year
Constantly used for YouTube after upgrade(almost nothing else other than 1-2 Photoshop usage),Avast Free and Windows Update Active,only manual file movement is to put website links to desktop.
giggitygoebbels is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off