Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've been using the Samsung SSD Magician to benchmark my Samsung 840 256GB Pro, and the IOPS performance is something like 2/3 of what it's supposed to be.<br><br>
The Sequential Read & Sequential Write speeds are within acceptable parameters (Read is always between 510 and 535 MB/s, and write is between 460 and 510 MB/s).<br><br>
No matter what settings I choose, I get a random read IOPS performance of somewhere in the 60000-68000 range, and a random write in the range of 40000-50000. I've tried I/O sequential 64KB and sequential 128KB, I've tried Random set to 4KB and to 16KB, and I've tried the Test Range at 100MB, 200MB, and 400MB. All different samples. Those are the best numbers I get. I've installed only about 10GB worth of stuff so far (photoshop CS5, and then four or five other small programs).<br><br>
System specs and setup:<br>
Graphics - AMD 5770 1GB<br>
Processor - Intel i7 2600k (running at stock speeds since I just reformatted & figuring things out)<br>
Motherboard - Asus P8P67 Pro Rev B3<br>
RAM - 8GB 4x 2GB 1600MHz DDR3<br>
PSU - 850W Silverstone Strider Silver 80+<br>
OS - Windows 7 64-Bit (TRIM enabled)<br><br>
The SSD is plugged into the SATA 6.0GB/s Intel slot, not in a Marvell slot or a SATA 3.0GB/s slot. The second SATA 6.0GB/s slot is also being used by my 1TB storage hard drive, which is sitting idle. Three of my SATA 3.0GB/s slots are being used: one by a 750GB storage hard drive (also sits idle), and two by disc drives.<br><br>
Any insight? Thanks.
 

·
Old Guy
Joined
·
4,371 Posts
Is the test running with compressed or non compressed data? If it's non compressed it will read somewhat slower than what it's max rated for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/1334122/samsung-840-256gb-pro-iops-why-so-low#post_18742953" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>Devildog83</strong> <a href="/t/1334122/samsung-840-256gb-pro-iops-why-so-low#post_18742953"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif"></a><br><br>
Is the test running with compressed or non compressed data? If it's non compressed it will read somewhat slower than what it's max rated for.</div>
</div>
<br>
I'm not sure. This is Samsung SSD Magician: I would guess that they'd be providing benchmarks from their own software. They don't give the information as to whether or not they use a compressed or uncompressed benchmark (there's no choice when benchmarking so I'm not sure what it is). I had assumed that they would have set up their benchmark to allow for the numbers to match up to the box, but maybe they are doing a compressed benchmark.<br><br>
I guess that leads me to the question: Is the Samsung SSD Magician benchmark doing uncompressed benchmarking, or compressed benchmarking? If it is uncompressed, then that brings me back to my initial confusion.
 

·
Old Guy
Joined
·
4,371 Posts
Honestly I don't know, I just read that some programs run both and that compressed is going to give you the fastest readings because the data can be writen faster.
 

·
Storage Nut
Joined
·
21,109 Posts
post a screenshot of as ssd: <a href="http://www.filehippo.com/download_asssdbenchmark/" target="_blank">http://www.filehippo.com/download_asssdbenchmark/</a>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
I don't pay any attention to what the Magician Software tells me in terms of benching. As Sean says as ssd can maybe tell us what is going on.<br>
I have two 840 pro's in R0 for some testing right now. I have the array broken into two volumes with different stripes to hasten testing along.<br><br><br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1157618/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1157618" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1157618/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL" style="; width: 500px; height: 299px"></a><br><br><br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1157626/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1157626" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1157626/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL" style="; width: 500px; height: 345px"></a><br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1157627/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1157627" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1157627/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL" style="; width: 500px; height: 498px"></a>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I'm running into similar issues and having trouble figuring it out. I installed this drive in a Lenovo T520 laptop and my sequential read/writes are what they should be but the random IOPS are significantly lower. This was a fresh install of windows 7 x64 and tweaked it based on Samsung's recommendations with their magician software. I tested with their new version 4 of magician and version 3.2 with the same result. I've tried several versions of the intel RST drivers along with the microsoft one with little change. I also disabled Microsoft Security Essentials in case it was interfering in any way.<br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1311231/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1311231" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1311231/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL" style="; width: 500px; height: 104px"></a><br>
I thought it might have been a power setting with the cpu so disabled all CPU throttling but that only gave me a tiny performance boost. What am I missing? Is this a limitation of the chipset? Could Lenovo be throttling it somehow? I remember they capped sata2 at 150 on my old T61p laptop but fortunately someone release an uncapped bios.<br>
<a href="http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo/459591-t61-x61-sata-ii-1-5-gb-s-cap-willing-pay-solution-8.html#post6501443" target="_blank">http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo/459591-t61-x61-sata-ii-1-5-gb-s-cap-willing-pay-solution-8.html#post6501443</a><br><br><br>
Lenovo T520<br>
Intel® Core™ i5-2520M (2.50GHz, 3MB L3, 1333MHz FSB)<br>
Intel QM67 Chipset<br>
8GB DDR3<br>
256GB 840 Pro w/ latest DXM04B0Q firmware
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
I am getting this:<br><br>
<a href="http://i48.tinypic.com/2lvxx1d.png" target="_blank">http://i48.tinypic.com/2lvxx1d.png</a>
 

·
Storage Nut
Joined
·
21,109 Posts
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/1334122/samsung-840-256gb-pro-iops-why-so-low/0_50#post_19368774" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>zfrogz</strong> <a href="/t/1334122/samsung-840-256gb-pro-iops-why-so-low/0_50#post_19368774"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif"></a><br><br>
I'm running into similar issues and having trouble figuring it out. I installed this drive in a Lenovo T520 laptop and my sequential read/writes are what they should be but the random IOPS are significantly lower. This was a fresh install of windows 7 x64 and tweaked it based on Samsung's recommendations with their magician software. I tested with their new version 4 of magician and version 3.2 with the same result. I've tried several versions of the intel RST drivers along with the microsoft one with little change. I also disabled Microsoft Security Essentials in case it was interfering in any way.<br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1311231/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1311231" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1311231/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL" style="; width: 500px; height: 104px"></a><br>
I thought it might have been a power setting with the cpu so disabled all CPU throttling but that only gave me a tiny performance boost. What am I missing? Is this a limitation of the chipset? Could Lenovo be throttling it somehow? I remember they capped sata2 at 150 on my old T61p laptop but fortunately someone release an uncapped bios.<br>
<a href="http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo/459591-t61-x61-sata-ii-1-5-gb-s-cap-willing-pay-solution-8.html#post6501443" target="_blank">http://forum.notebookreview.com/lenovo/459591-t61-x61-sata-ii-1-5-gb-s-cap-willing-pay-solution-8.html#post6501443</a><br><br><br>
Lenovo T520<br>
Intel® Core™ i5-2520M (2.50GHz, 3MB L3, 1333MHz FSB)<br>
Intel QM67 Chipset<br>
8GB DDR3<br>
256GB 840 Pro w/ latest DXM04B0Q firmware</div>
</div>
Its the laptop chipset.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Cool. I'm much happier knowing it's out of my control until I upgrade rather than something I'm missing. <img alt="smile.gif" class="bbcode_smiley" src="http://files.overclock.net/images/smilies/smile.gif">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
I have an ASUS P8Z77-V Pro with a Samsung 840 Pro 256 installed on the gray Intel SATA 6gb connection but get nowhere near the speeds the posters in here have reported.<br><br>
System:<br>
i5-3570k @ 4.2Ghz<br>
16GB DDR3 2400<br>
Samsung 840 Pro 256gb with Windows 8 pro 64-bit installed<br>
WD 3Tb caviar green for media<br>
Radeon HD 7950<br><br>
I've used the magician software's built in "maximum performance" and also followed additional suggestions for maximal speed by disabling write caching, ensuring TRIM is enabled, being connected to SATA 6Gb, disabling system restore, Max Performance Power settings in Windows, ensured latest firmware, latest BIOS.<br><br>
I ran three benchmark tests in a row and wasn't even getting past 360 on Sequential Write, about 450's in Read, 60k Random Read, 40k Random Write.<br><br>
Getting real bothered that my drive isn't performing near its advertised speeds even after "optimizing" it per Samsung suggestions. Even after running the benchmark the tool says "Your drive isn't performing at optimal speed. You should configure it for Maximum Performance." Even though I've already done that.<br><br>
Someone please help!
 

·
Storage Nut
Joined
·
21,109 Posts
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/1334122/samsung-840-256gb-pro-iops-why-so-low/0_50#post_19428516" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>nickhimself</strong> <a href="/t/1334122/samsung-840-256gb-pro-iops-why-so-low/0_50#post_19428516"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif"></a><br><br>
I have an ASUS P8Z77-V Pro with a Samsung 840 Pro 256 installed on the gray Intel SATA 6gb connection but get nowhere near the speeds the posters in here have reported.<br><br>
System:<br>
i5-3570k @ 4.2Ghz<br>
16GB DDR3 2400<br>
Samsung 840 Pro 256gb with Windows 8 pro 64-bit installed<br>
WD 3Tb caviar green for media<br>
Radeon HD 7950<br><br>
I've used the magician software's built in "maximum performance" and also followed additional suggestions for maximal speed by disabling write caching, ensuring TRIM is enabled, being connected to SATA 6Gb, disabling system restore, Max Performance Power settings in Windows, ensured latest firmware, latest BIOS.<br><br>
I ran three benchmark tests in a row and wasn't even getting past 360 on Sequential Write, about 450's in Read, 60k Random Read, 40k Random Write.<br><br>
Getting real bothered that my drive isn't performing near its advertised speeds even after "optimizing" it per Samsung suggestions. Even after running the benchmark the tool says "Your drive isn't performing at optimal speed. You should configure it for Maximum Performance." Even though I've already done that.<br><br>
Someone please help!</div>
</div>
show a screenshot of AS SSD.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I am seeing similar IOPS results. I have attached both Samsung Magician and AS SSD screen shots. As well as CPU Z. Is this because I'm on a P67? Sorry, this is my first SSD, switched from a 6yr old 80GBx2 RAID0 set up. Just want to make sure nothing is wrong. Thanks.<br><br><br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397726/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1397726" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397726/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 349px"></a><br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397727/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1397727" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397727/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 349px"></a><br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397728/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1397728" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397728/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 263px"></a><br>
<span huddler_attributes="{"plugin":"attachment","params":{"id":"12406","name":"PCRIG.txt","description":"CPUZ info. ","size":93,"type":"txt"}}" huddler_plugin="attachment">
<a
class="attachment HM-tool loginreq" href="/attachments/12406" title="CPUZ info. "><span class="file txt">PCRIG.txt <span class="details">93k .txt file</span></span>
</a></span>
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I've seen benchmarks all over the board for this drive on different systems. The most important thing, it seems, is having the drive connected to a 6Gb/s port and on AHCI.<br><br>
Here are my results with AS-SSD:<br><br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397813/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1397813" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397813/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 349px"></a><br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397816/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1397816" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1397816/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 349px"></a><br><br>
I can bump those 4K random read/writes up by disabling C1e and c-states in my BIOS because apparently AS-SSD does not ramp up the CPU when doing the benchmarks. If I disable CPU power saving features, my 4K Random Read goes up about 10-20% and my 4K Random Write nearly doubles. The rest of the values stay pretty much the same, so I've left CPU power saving on because there is no noticeable difference in actual performance.<br><br>
I'm running an Ivy Bridge i5 on Windows 8.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,506 Posts
I would try running AS-SSD with Prime95 running a single thread in the background. This sshouldrule oout the CPU as a cause...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
<a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1498285/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1498285" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1498285/width/500/height/1000/flags/LL" style="; width: 500px; height: 355px"></a><br><br>
That's the comparison screenshot after I disabled SATA power management and c1e state on the CPU.<br><br>
I have an ASRock z77 Extreme4 w/ Core i5 3570K.<br><br>
In the BIOS under Advanced for the Storage section there is an option for SATA Aggressive Power Management or something like that, disable it. I am not sure if the c1e state helped by being disabled in the CPU section but I will test that later today to confirm.<br><br>
So for anyone that might be worried about performance make sure to have these two functions disabled, I think the more important one is the SATA power management.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,506 Posts
Those numbers are a huge improvement! Glad you figured out the problem, and thanks for sharing the solution!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Hi,<br>
i managed to disable LPM through regedit, <a class="bbcode_url" href="http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Solid-State-Drives-SSD/Solution-C300-Disk-Freeze-ups-in-Windows-7-solved-for-me/td-p/38766" target="_blank">http://forum.crucial.com/t5/Solid-State-Drives-SSD/Solution-C300-Disk-Freeze-ups-in-Windows-7-solved-for-me/td-p/38766</a>, I also tried to disable C1E of curiosity, because C1E only impacts processor behaviour, and i got a slight improvement in IOPS, but nothing close to the DXM04B0Q Firmware :<br><a class="H-lightbox-open" href="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1503353/"><img alt="" class="lightbox-enabled" data-id="1503353" data-type="61" src="http://www.overclock.net/content/type/61/id/1503353/width/350/height/700/flags/LL" style="; width: 350px; height: 238px"></a><br>
Green = DXM04B0Q Firmware<br>
light blue = DXM05B0Q Firmware right after the update<br>
Blue = DXM05B0Q after disabling LPM and (if it matters in any way) C1E<br><br>
Samsung, if you want to keep f*cking up people's SSD's, at least implement a downgrade tool or procedure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Strange... Maybe it was a bad flash. Try to disable all CPU C states not just C1e. If you can run CPU-z to see what happens with voltage when you run the benchmark. It should bump up the vcore slowly, or at least cause a slight spike.<br><br>
Do you have any options under BIOS for your storage ports, anything with power management? On my ASRock z77 extreme4 under Advanced -> Storage there was an option for SATA Aggressive Power Link Management, I disabled it, which I think did the most to help. I think all z77 boards might have this option in their BIOS.<br><br>
Not sure why yours went to crap after flash... RMA?
 

·
r/madlads
Joined
·
8,705 Posts
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/1334122/samsung-840-256gb-pro-iops-why-so-low/10#post_20148900" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>o2Xav</strong> <a href="/t/1334122/samsung-840-256gb-pro-iops-why-so-low/10#post_20148900"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif"></a><br><br>
Hi,<br>
Samsung, if you want to keep f*cking up people's SSD's, at least implement a downgrade tool or procedure.</div>
</div>
I only heard of my issues with Samsung RMA ... Not this. Wow. I thought at least being the largest A-Z IT mass manufacturer they should at least give out drivers that didn't f up IOPS performance
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top