# Slow SSD Performance



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 8, 2011)

So - today, I got a little curious with my SSD so I decided to run a few benchmarks.







For some reason it seems to be stuck in SATA I mode despite my board supporting SATA II.

All my current hard drives support SATA II the only thing that comes to mind is that im using a SATA DVD-RW which only supports SATA I transferates.

Ive done what a few people did and installed intels rapid storage drivers but the results are still the same.

Could the Sata DVD-Rw be forcing the system to run the hard drives at SATA I Speeds?

if not what else could be the cause of the slow speeds?

Just thought id add that the Drive is an OCZ Vertex 2E 2.5" with quotes R&W speeds of 285mb/s and 275mb/s on sata II but im not getting the same speeds


----------



## freaksavior (Feb 8, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> So - today, I got a little curious with my SSD so I decided to run a few benchmarks.
> 
> http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n210/FinalFreedomEclipse/CrystalSSD.jpg
> 
> ...



Sorry I have nothing more insightful to say than did you try what you already asked yourself?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 8, 2011)

freaksavior said:


> Sorry I have nothing more insightful to say than did you try what you already asked yourself?



I unplugged everything but the SSD and speeds are still in Sata I mode


----------



## freaksavior (Feb 9, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> I unplugged everything but the SSD and speeds are still in Sata I mode



Do you have the newest firmware?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 9, 2011)

yep - it is the latest firmware. 1.27 IMO i think its the mobo starting to give up the ghost. thats all it is


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 9, 2011)

Are you running AHCI?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 9, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Are you running AHCI?



yep.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 9, 2011)

Sata 1,2,3,4,5?


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 9, 2011)

set Crystal Disk to 0-Fill and see what you get


----------



## JATownes (Feb 9, 2011)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> set Crystal Disk to 0-Fill and see what you get



I did not think you should use 0-fill for a SSD...I thought it was VERY bad for its longevity.  I could be wrong though.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 9, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Sata 1,2,3,4,5?



Im running AHCI for all my hard drives


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 9, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> Im running AHCI for all my hard drives



That could be your problem. Try running AHCI only for your SSD and SATA for the rest.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 9, 2011)

JATownes said:


> I did not think you should use 0-fill for a SSD...I thought it was VERY bad for its longevity.  I could be wrong though.



people on the OCZ forums said thats what your suppose to use or use ATTO program


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 9, 2011)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> people on the OCZ forums said thats what your suppose to use or use ATTO program



thank f**k for that!






Scores look much much better now. but i was really bricking it. thought id have to hit up ebay for a secondhand P5Q


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 9, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> thank f**k for that!
> 
> http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n210/FinalFreedomEclipse/ATTO.jpg
> 
> Scores look much much better now. but i was really bricking it. thought id have to hit up ebay for a secondhand P5Q



haha np

good to see its working on rated speeds


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 9, 2011)

but why would Crystaldisk give such bad scores?

---

And MM, I dont get the choice in the BIOS which drive to run AHCI on - its either IDE, RAID or AHCI on all of them.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 9, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> but why would Crystaldisk give such bad scores?
> 
> ---
> 
> And MM, I dont get the choice in the BIOS which drive to run AHCI on - its either IDE, RAID or AHCI on all of them.



did you run CrystalDisk with 0-Fill?? also Crystal Disk is not very good to run actually. if your going to run it run it sparingly (VERY RARELY)

Crystal Disk is basing the score off a different file system with 1-Fill. which is probalby what you have ti set to. with 0 fill its running off a more i dont know what to call it.... normal file system??


----------



## BraveSoul (Feb 9, 2011)

does it metter if set to 500mb vs 1000mb  and 5 vs 1 runs?





_______________________




antec1200 filter mod


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 9, 2011)

BraveSoul said:


> does it metter if set to 500mb vs 1000mb  and 5 vs 1 runs?
> http://img.techpowerup.org/110208/SSD bench.png
> 
> _______________________
> ...



not really sure on that one? why dont you experiment with that for us and post back


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 9, 2011)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> did you run CrystalDisk with 0-Fill?? also Crystal Disk is not very good to run actually. if your going to run it run it sparingly (VERY RARELY)
> 
> Crystal Disk is basing the score off a different file system with 1-Fill. which is probalby what you have ti set to. with 0 fill its running off a more i dont know what to call it.... normal file system??



no i didnt - someone said that it might be dangerous and the stress of thinking my system was 'locked' in Sata I mode really didnt help my nerves. and i have had enough dealing with RMAs recently and i dont want to add to that.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 9, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> no i didnt - someone said that it might be dangerous and the stress of thinking my system was 'locked' in Sata I mode really didnt help my nerves. and i have had enough dealing with RMAs recently and i dont want to add to that.



How is your system locked in Sata I mode? you have Sata II motherboard dont you with updated bios??

Yes CrystalDisk is a dangerous program to run frequently but if you do it like once to check to make sure its running right then your okay just dont run it ALL THE TIME! it rights critical data to the SSD which is why it can be dangerous


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 9, 2011)

yeah - but crystaldisk remember? Sata 1 is 150mb/s so i thought it was 'stuck' in that mode or something. ive even flashed my bios twice just to make sure that wasnt the problem. I was in a panic. i tested with crystal disk a fair few times just to make sure it wasnt a bad run but every time i saw 146mb/s.

its sata II but i thought it was f**ked up and running in Sata 1 mode. not that it matters anymore as ATTO have proved it wrong. I think ive run crystaldisk enough times for one day lol


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 9, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> yeah - but crystaldisk remember? Sata 1 is 150mb/s so i thought it was 'stuck' in that mode or something. ive even flashed my bios twice just to make sure that wasnt the problem. I was in a panic. i tested with crystal disk a fair few times just to make sure it wasnt a bad run but every time i saw 146mb/s.
> 
> its sata II but i thought it was f**ked up and running in Sata 1 mode. not that it matters anymore as ATTO have proved it wrong. I think ive run crystaldisk enough times for one day lol



alright man!


----------



## BraveSoul (Feb 9, 2011)

nvidiaintelftw said:


> not really sure on that one? why dont you experiment with that for us and post back


let me be guinea pig ,, looks like it does metter results r diff if using 1000mb vs 500mb




_______________________




antec1200 filter mod


----------



## Molignar (Feb 22, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> So - today, I got a little curious with my SSD so I decided to run a few benchmarks.
> 
> http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n210/FinalFreedomEclipse/CrystalSSD.jpg
> 
> ...



Not sure if your affected by this or not but.....

OCZ Technology Group Official Statement – Driving down the cost of SSDs

As the industry transitions to the 2Xnm process, OCZ is notably the first to market with this
technology that aggressively reduces the costs of our consumer‐grade SSDs. Most of our
customers are aware that as the NAND flash technology process nodes are shrunk, the price of
NAND comes down substantially. OCZ continues to focus on delivering the highest performance
and highest reliability drives available at a lower price point…paving the way for SSDs to
become more accessible to the complete range of consumers and to take the place of
traditional mechanical hard drives over the next few years.

Due to this natural transition to next generation NAND flash components, certain 2Xnm‐based
SSD configurations may see a slight difference in the IDEMA (International Disk Drive and
Equipment Materials Association) capacity, particularly lower density drives, due to the higher
64 Gbit die density of 2Xnm flash solutions. This is due to the need to reserve additional space
for the drives’ sophisticated performance and reliability features which provide real world
benefits and are not offered by many other manufacturers. These features include RAID‐like
data protection and recovery in the event of flash block malfunction, as well as advanced wearleveling
to enhance the SSD’s endurance and lifespan. Due to the use of higher density chips,
the quantity of blocks reserved for this functionality doubled as we reserve a single plane of
flash for additional redundancy.

Many users familiar with SSD technology understand that over‐provisioning flash is designed to
increase, not only the life of the SSD, but the performance of the SSDs; however, OCZ is
sensitive to issues particularly related to RAID arrays where capacity alignment becomes critical
for optimal functionality. Even the smallest variance in size can create issues. In order to help
resolve issues such as this and to clarify the situation we are disclosing (for vendor ordering
purposes) the part number significance for our SSD capacity configurations. While we cannot
guarantee (primarily due to price variance) that all of these parts are available at retailers, we
as a company will extend our efforts to make these parts available throughout our Global
channel. In addition, we’d like to point out to our customers that these products have always
remained in production and are readily available directly from OCZ.

We should note that this only effects smaller capacity drives with the “E” series of firmware.
Non “E” drives have no capacity variance and higher capacity drives also have no variance.

For those customers that have already purchased an “E” part and wish to move to a 32 Gbit die
based drive solution, OCZ will offer a program in which customers can trade in their “E” drive
and receive a credit towards the more expensive 32 Gbit die‐based drives. Customers only need
to pay the difference in the raw NAND price and OCZ will ship the replacement drive once the
original “E” drive is received. If you are interested in an exchange please contact an OCZ
customer service representative and we will be happy to assist you.


They've been dealing with angry customers since last week. Weird, I sent a PM to a mod last week about this and still haven't seen anything posted about it anywhere. Basically if you got a 25nm based drive instead of a 34nm you'll get less performance and capacity. You won't get the advertised speeds of the 34nm Vertex2 originals. Basically if you own a Vertex2 that came with Firmware 1.24 or newer when you got it, you got the lesser performing drive which they fully admit they hosed everyone on by not saying there was a difference. Anyways, here's the full link.....

http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showthread.php?84821-New-update-on-the-25nm-OCZ-SSD-drives


----------



## Wrigleyvillain (Feb 22, 2011)

Yeah the interface of CDM is nice and easily readable but other than that it's not so great apparently...


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

Molignar said:


> Not sure if your affected by this or not but.....
> 
> OCZ Technology Group Official Statement – Driving down the cost of SSDs
> 
> ...



not sure if this applies to me as my part number is not on the list but I will hit them up anyway


----------



## francis511 (Feb 23, 2011)

Mine does the same. 150 on crystalmark and 250 on atto.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

francis511 said:


> Mine does the same. 150 on crystalmark and 250 on atto.



Only 250?? Ive checked with OCZ reps - and my drive ISNT affected by the 'space' issue


----------



## francis511 (Feb 23, 2011)

250 or so.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

bleh - my speeds still look a little slow - you are using Sata III so I suppose mine are about right...sorta


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 23, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> bleh - my speeds still look a little slow - you are using Sata III so I suppose mine are about right...sorta



I have the same drive as you and am acheiving around the same as francis511 on Sata2


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

Yep - my pc is really showing its age.....



NdMk2o1o said:


> I have the same drive as you and am acheiving around the same as francis511 on Sata2



are you sure that its the VTX2E ???


----------



## Undead46 (Feb 23, 2011)

Make a support tick at OCZ and provide your serial number and firmware version, they'll be able to tell you if your drive is affected.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

Undead46 said:


> Make a support tick at OCZ and provide your serial number and firmware version, they'll be able to tell you if your drive is affected.



no need  ive already been on their forums and asked about it. I think its just my setup in general


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 23, 2011)

Ah, no I am using the Vortex 2 not 2e, btw what is the difference?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Ah, no I am using the Vortex 2 not 2e, btw what is the difference?



No idea - I think they did say that the 2E takes a small speed hit


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 23, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> No idea - I think they did say that the 2E takes a small speed hit



Are they the newer 25nm nand chips?


----------



## RejZoR (Feb 23, 2011)

Probably. Ppl complained about 25nm being worse, yet they didn't mark that anywhere. That "E" in the end probably marks 25nm process just like Corsair uses "-A" appended to the regular name.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

looks like it is but i could be wrong


----------



## jsfitz54 (Feb 23, 2011)

OCZ...mmmm.....not even a kiss first?


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 23, 2011)

RejZoR said:


> Probably. Ppl complained about 25nm being worse, yet they didn't mark that anywhere. That "E" in the end probably marks 25nm process just like Corsair uses "-A" appended to the regular name.



I am thinking that is probably the case, from what I have seen, they have fewer write cycles compared to 34nm, slightly slower (which would explain the atto benches) and slightly less useable space

Freedom, whats the formatted capacity of your 90gb drive, will check mine when I get home tonight.



jsfitz54 said:


> OCZ...mmmm.....not even a kiss first?



I have no idea what this means.......  lol


----------



## jsfitz54 (Feb 23, 2011)

I have no idea what this means.......  lol[/QUOTE]

See PM.


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

errrrrr about 83Gb formated (90gb drive) I already spoke to a rep on the OCZ website as my drive wasnt listed and he says its fine. their gonna release a tool that users can use to see if their drives are 34nm or 25nm sometime this week (or the next) If my drive is indeed 25nm I might file support ticket.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 23, 2011)

TBH I think thats about the size of mine, will be able to tell later. 

Sorry a bit OT but it just annoys me this whole fiasco with the newer 25nm nand drives, I mean no one would of complained had they been called something different or had something to denote they were infact 25nm and had OCZ come out beforehand and said, they are cheaper(ish) but they are ever so slightly slower and have slightly less useable space, but they are cheaper... then you have the option, 25nm or not. 

I was thinking that the "e" denoted 25nm though if your drive isn't on the list then that would suggest otherwise, so chances are the 2e drives are a mixture of 34nm and 25nm, spin the wheel and take your chances :shadedshu


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

I will definitely be onto them if my SSD is 25nm. Unfortunately i dont have a spare Sata II pc lying around otherwise I would have tested it in that first. even if they refuse to give me a trade up if i find its a 25nm, I'l just send it back to Ebuyer and saying i not happy with the product due to the drive not living up to its 'rated' speeds.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 23, 2011)

I assume you have it running ahci mode, and disabled things like superfetch, moved your page file to a hdd etc?


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 23, 2011)

yep.

Could be that i just need a fresh install of W7. but i cant be arsed


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 23, 2011)

FreedomEclipse said:


> yep.
> 
> Could be that i just need a fresh install of W7. but i cant be arsed



Yea mine got a bit sluggish a while back, though am blaming myself that time as I faffed about with the SSD and ended up changing it to a dynamic disk, to change it back I had to install Win7 on my HDD as you can't change it from a dynamic disk if it is the OS drive  though been running fine now for a couple of weeks. On boot when the 4 colors merge together and form the windows flag it goes into my desktop, doesn't even float about a few times like it was doing last time, lightning quick


----------



## francis511 (Feb 24, 2011)

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ocz-vertex-2-25nm-ssd,review-32121.html


----------



## Jan Kyster (Feb 25, 2011)

francis511 said:


> http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/ocz-vertex-2-25nm-ssd,review-32121.html


I'm confused... 

Still holding back from getting one 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 but doesn't that article suggest that 35nm is a "better" choice than 25nm??


----------



## NdMk2o1o (Feb 25, 2011)

Jan Kyster said:


> I'm confused...
> 
> Still holding back from getting one http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z15/subject_rod/smilies/rolleyes.gif but doesn't that article suggest that 35nm is a "better" choice than 25nm??



Yes. 

Though I would hold off, Vertex 3 have just been anounced and the speeds have doubled, the price isn't quite as cheap as vertex 2 though it's not too bad in comparison.


----------

